4.2 Article

Parallel divergence of sympatric genetic and body size forms of Arctic charr, Salvelinus alpinus, from two Scottish lakes

期刊

BIOLOGICAL JOURNAL OF THE LINNEAN SOCIETY
卷 95, 期 4, 页码 748-757

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.2008.01066.x

关键词

evolution; phenotypic plasticity; polymorphism

资金

  1. EU [CT96 1981]
  2. NERC [NE/D008883/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  3. Natural Environment Research Council [NE/D008883/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

F-ST and R-ST estimates for Arctic charr from six microsatelite markers collected from two neighbouring Scottish lakes, Loch Maree and Loch Stack, confirm the presence of two distinct genetic groupings representing separate populations within each lake. In both lakes, there was also a clear body size dimorphism, with large and small body size forms that segregated according to genetic grouping. There was evidence of only subtle foraging ecology differences between morphs, with the small body size morph in both lakes being more generalist in its foraging in the summer (consuming mostly plankton but also some macrobenthos) than the large body size morph, which specialized on planktonic prey. Trophic morphology (head and mouth shape) did not differ significantly between morphs (although the small sample size for Maree makes this a preliminary finding). Cluster analysis of the microsatelite data and the presence of private alleles showed that morphologically similar forms in different lakes were not genetically similar, as would be expected under a multiple invasion hypothesis. Thus, the data do not support a hypothesis of a dual invasion of both lakes by two common ancestors but instead suggest an independent origin of the two forms in each lake. Thus parallel sympatric divergence as a result of common selection pressures in both lakes is the most parsimonious explanation of the evolutionary origin of these polymorphisms. (C) 2008 The Linnean Society of London, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2008, 95, 748-757.

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