4.6 Article

Can hybridization cause local extinction: a case for demographic swamping of the Australian native Senecio pinnatifolius by the invasive Senecio madagascariensis?

期刊

NEW PHYTOLOGIST
卷 176, 期 4, 页码 902-912

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2007.02217.x

关键词

amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP); demographic swamping; hybrid viability; invasive species; Senecio; triploid

向作者/读者索取更多资源

center dot Hybridization between native and invasive species can have several outcomes, including enhanced weediness in hybrid progeny, evolution of new hybrid lineages and decline of hybridizing species. Whether there is a decline of hybridizing species largely depends on the relative frequencies of parental taxa and the viability of hybrid progeny. center dot Here, the individual- and population-level consequences of hybridization between the Australian native Senecio pinnatifolius and the exotic Senecio madagascariensis were investigated with amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) markers, and this information was used to estimate the annual loss of viable seeds to hybridization. center dot A high frequency (range 8.3-75.6%) of hybrids was detected in open pollinated seeds of both species, but mature hybrids were absent from sympatric populations. A hybridization advantage was observed for S. madagascariensis, where significantly more progeny than expected were sired based on proportional representation of the two species in sympatric populations. Calculations indicated that S. pinnatifolius would produce less viable seed than S. madagascariensis, if hybridization was frequency dependent and S. madagascariensis reached a frequency of between 10 and 60%. center dot For this native-exotic species pair, prezygotic isolating barriers are weak, but low hybrid viability maintains a strong postzygotic barrier to introgression. As a result of asymmetric hybridization, S. pinnatifolius would appear to be under threat if S. madagascariensis increases numerically in areas of contact.

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

4.6
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