3.9 Article

GRADUAL LOSS OF GENETIC DIVERSITY OF Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. POPULATIONS IN THE INVADED RANGE OF CENTRAL SERBIA

期刊

GENETIKA-BELGRADE
卷 46, 期 1, 页码 255-268

出版社

SERBIAN GENETICS SOC
DOI: 10.2298/GENSR1401255K

关键词

Ambrosia artemisiifolia; Central Serbia; genetic diversity and structure; microsatellites

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Science and Tehnological Development of the Republic of Serbia [173002]
  2. Secretariat for Science and Tehnological Development, Province of Vojvodina [114-457-2173/2011-01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

As an invasive allergenic weed, Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. causes serious public health and economic problems in invaded ranges of Europe. Over the last two decades, while expanding toward southern parts of Serbia, this common ragweed has become a very troublesome plant species in the whole country. Considering the importance of genetic studies in understanding of invasive species, our main objectives in this study were to analyze the genetic diversity and genetic structure of Ambrosia artemisiifolia populations from Central Serbia, a relatively recently invaded region. Comparing values of genetic measures obtained by microsatellite analyses, a number of differences were detected in genetic diversity between sampled populations. Allelic richness-r (ranged from 5.42 to 7.80), the mean number of alleles per locus-N-A (5.8-8.4) and the mean number of rare alleles per locus-N-R (2.8-5.8) have quite similar ranges across populations. We observed greater genetic variability in populations from the northern part of investigated area than in southern populations. Based on pairwise Fst values, AMOVA results and PCo Analysis, moderate differentiation among population was detected, while the STRUCTURE analysis clearly separated SR-Kru and SR-Les. Data obtained for analyses of differentiation and gradual losses of genetic diversity of sampled populations provides useful information about invasion dynamics of common ragweed in recently invaded region.

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

3.9
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