4.2 Article

Population genetics of the endangered limpet Patella ferruginea (Gastropoda: Patellidae):: taxonomic, conservation and evolutionary considerations

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0469.2005.00348.x

关键词

Patella ferruginea; P. caerulea; rouxi; lamarcki; conservation; bottleneck

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The limpet Patella ferruginea is the most endangered marine invertebrate in the western Mediterranean rocky shores, whereas Patella caerulea is the most common Mediterranean limpet. From Pleistocene to historic age, P. ferruginea was distributed around the whole Mediterranean basin, since the shells of this species are a characteristic feature of Palaeolithic and Neolithic deposits in this area. However, its Mediterranean range has progressively contracted to a few restricted areas. The ancient origin of the species (18 Ma) and the present geographical isolation among relic populations could have led to a great genetic difference among populations, taking into account the supposedly low dispersal ability of the species. However, we have observed a few genetic differences among populations and a 'star phylogeny' of COI haplotypes from the 41 individuals of P. ferruginea analysed; a similar pattern has also been observed for the seven individuals of P. caerulea studied. Genetic evidences show a possible bottleneck event on late Pleistocene that affected the two species. The results have an important implication on the future management of this endangered species. Additionally, two different morphological types of P. ferruginea have been described by Payraudeau in 1826: lamarcki and rouxi forms. Clear morphological differences occur between these two types and some authors pointed out the hypothesis about the existence of two different species. The results of the present study conclude that the two different forms of P. ferruginea are ecotypes, rather than different species or subspecies, and intermediate steps are an ecological range instead of hybridization events among different species.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据