| Literature DB >> 17406681 |
Caroline Costedoat1, Nicolas Pech, Rémi Chappaz, André Gilles.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Interspecific hybridization is widespread, occurring in a taxonomically diverse array of species. The Cyprinidae family, which displays more than 30% hybridization, is a good candidate for studies of processes underlying isolation and speciation, such as genetic exchange between previously isolated lineages. This is particularly relevant in the case of recent hybridization between an invasive species, Chondrostoma nasus nasus (from Eastern Europe), and C. toxostoma toxostoma (a threatened species endemic to southern France), in which bidirectional introgressive hybridization has been demonstrated. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPALEntities:
Mesh:
Year: 2007 PMID: 17406681 PMCID: PMC1831490 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000357
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1IDENTIFICATION CODE.
Some examples of genomic combinations based on the alleles for each of the five molecular markers (1 mitochondrial gene and 4 nuclear introns).
OBSERVED AND EXPECTED EFFECTIVE SIZE OF EACH GENOMIC COMBINATIONS PRESENT IN THE HYBRID ZONE
| 2001 | 2002 | BUECH | MANOSQUE | PERTUIS | CAVAILLON | |||||||
| Combi. | Obs. | Exp. | Obs. | Exp. | Obs. | Exp. | Obs. | Exp. | Obs. | Exp. | Obs. | Exp. |
| H5 |
| 0.019 |
| 0.059 |
| 1.075 |
| 1.386e-04 |
| 3.507e-08 |
| 35.822 |
| H2i2T | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ||||||
| H2i3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 0 |
| 7.067e-04 | 0 | |||||
| H2iH2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| H2iHT | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| 4.132e-04 | 0 | |||||
| H2iT2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ||||||
| H2iTi | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| H2TH2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 3.775e-06 | 0 | |||||
| H3i2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 3.406e-05 | 0 | |||||
| H3iH |
| 0.069 | 2 | 5 |
| 1.144e-03 | 0 |
| 9.215 | |||
| H3iT | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| 4.057e-04 | 0 | |||||
| H3T2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| H3TH | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| 2.362e-03 | 0 | 0 | |||||
| H4i |
| 0.109 |
| 0.264 | 5 |
| 1.184e-03 |
| 1.671e-06 | 0 | ||
| H4T |
| 0.156 |
| 0.292 |
| 2.034 |
| 2.531e-03 |
| 1.991e-05 | 3 | |
| Hi2H2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1.486e-05 | 0 | |||||
| Hi2Hi | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| Hi2HT | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| Hi3H | 4 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||||||
| Hi3T | 10 | 8 | 5 | 1 |
| 1.719e-12 | 0 | |||||
| Hi4 | 10 | 21 | 20 |
| 7.232e-01 | 1 | 0 | |||||
| HiH2i | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 3.414e-05 | 0 | |||||
| HiH2T | 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| HiH3 | 0 |
| 0.209 | 1 |
| 1.162e-03 | 0 |
| 11.703 | |||
| HiHi2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| HiHiH | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 1.149e-05 | 0 | |||||
| HiHiT | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ||||||
| HiTHi | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| HiTi2 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| HiTiT |
| 9.466 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | |||||
| HT3i | 1 |
| 8.496 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | |||||
| HT4 | 5 | 6 | 1 | 10 |
| 23.203 | 0 | |||||
| HTH2T |
| 0.645 | 0 | 7 | 1.553 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||
| HTH3 |
| 0.079 | 0 | 0 |
| 2.436e-03 | 0 | 0 | ||||
| HTHiH | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| HTHiT | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| HTHTH | 0 | 3 | 0 |
| 4.153e-02 | 0 | 0 | |||||
| HTHTi | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| HTi2T | 2 |
| 11.557 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |||||
| HTi3 | 4 |
| 10.468 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |||||
| HTiT2 |
| 8.645 |
| 10.397 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ||||
| HTiTi | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| T5 |
| 14.620 |
| 14.636 |
| 0.533 |
| 58.440 |
| 149.684 |
| 2.337e-07 |
| T2HT2 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 2.101e-05 | |||||
| T2i2T |
| 15.889 |
| 18.034 | 0 |
| 12.844 | 1 | 0 | |||
| T2i3 |
| 11.151 |
| 16.334 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | ||||
| T2iT2 |
| 14.466 |
| 16.224 | 3 |
| 26.516 |
| 28.854 | 0 | ||
| T3H2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| T3Hi | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| T3HT |
| 4.421 | 0 |
| 0.816 | 3 | 0 | 0 | ||||
| T3iT |
| 16.080 |
| 16.268 | 1 |
| 28.308 |
| 29.385 |
| 3.635e-06 | |
| T4H | 4 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| 2.696e-05 | |||||
| T4i |
| 10.260 | 9 |
| 0.775 | 28 | 3 | 0 | ||||
| TH4 |
| 0.032 |
| 0.093 | 1 |
| 5.495e-04 | 0 | 0 | |||
| THi3 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| THiHi | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| THT3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| THTHT | 0 | 4 | 0 |
| 1.950e-01 | 0 | 0 | |||||
| THTiT | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| Ti2T2 |
| 14.211 |
| 18.158 | 1 |
| 12.649 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Ti3T |
| 15.631 |
| 20.650 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 0 | ||||
| Ti4 |
| 10.969 |
| 18.704 |
| 10.044 | 5 | 0 | 0 | |||
| TiH3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| 4.621e-06 | 0 | |||||
| TiT2i |
| 10.093 |
| 15.180 | 0 |
| 13.045 | 0 | 0 | |||
| TiT3 | 16 |
| 16.759 |
| 1.220 |
| 27.878 |
| 29.315 | 0 | ||
| TiTHT | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | ||||||
| TiTiT |
| 15.818 |
| 18.628 | 0 |
| 13.504 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Total | 509 | 733 | 413 | 397 | 327 | 105 | ||||||
We indicated only the expected effective when the difference observed-expected (under Hypothesis of Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium) was significant. Separately for each samling year and for each sampling station. Obs.: Observed value; Exp.: Expected value; Bold: overrepresented combinations; italic: underrepresented combinations.
DISTRIBUTION OF THE OR TOXOSTOMA MTDNA MODALITY.
| Parents | hybrids | hy over rep. | hy under rep. | hy expected | ||||||||||||||
| mtDNA | Eff. | Clas. | Eff. | Fischer | Clas. | Eff. | Fischer | Clas. | Fischer | Eff. | Fischer | Clas. | Fischer | Eff. | Fischer | Clas. | Fischer | |
|
| N | 251 | 1 |
| **p<10−10 |
|
| **p<10−10 |
| p = 0.40400 | 17 | p = 0.53000 | 7 | **p = 0.00002 |
| **p<10−10 |
| p = 0.24400 |
| T |
| 1 | 126 | 24 | 42 | 2 |
|
| 37 | 11 | ||||||||
|
| N | 134 | 1 |
| **p<10−10 |
|
| *p = 0.02100 | 2 | p = 0.28000 | 0 | 0 |
| **p<10−10 |
| p = 0.1788 | ||
| T |
| 1 | 34 | 12 | 20 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 9 | ||||||||
|
| N | 26 | 1 | 52 | **p<10−10 |
|
| **p<10−10 |
| p = 0.12600 | 0 | p = 0.20700 | 0 | *p = 0.03090 | 23 | **p<10−10 |
| p = 0.59300 |
| T |
| 1 |
| 18 | 9 | 2 |
|
|
| 11 | ||||||||
|
| N | 4 | 1 |
| **p<10−10 |
|
| **p<10−10 |
| p = 0.13400 | 0 | p = 0.95800 | 0 | p = 0.11900 |
| **p<10−10 |
| p = 0.38100 |
| T |
| 1 | 10 | 8 | 1 | 1 |
|
| 7 | 5 | ||||||||
|
| N |
| 1 | 5 | **p = 0.00035 | 3 | 0 | **p = 0.00001 | 0 | p = 0.23800 |
| p = 0.92600 |
| p = 0.57100 |
| p = 0.73900 |
| p = 0.35700 |
| T | 7 | 1 |
| 3 |
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||||
|
| N | 82 | 1 |
| **p<10−10 |
|
| **p = 0.00001 |
| p = 0.65400 | 1 | p = 0.13200 | 1 | *p = 0.02300 |
| **p<10−10 |
| p = 0.22700 |
| T |
| 1 | 84 | 17 | 40 | 3 |
|
| 32 | 8 | ||||||||
|
| N | 169 | 1 |
| **p<10−10 |
|
| **p<10−10 |
| p = 0.53000 | 1 | *p = 0.01710 | 1 | *p = 0.00328 |
| **p<10−10 |
| p = 0.12400 |
| T |
| 1 | 42 | 17 | 4 | 1 |
|
| 20 | 7 | ||||||||
Detailed of the “heritage of the rare” phenomenon. “Parents”: correspond to the H5 and T5, “Hybrids” : correspond to all the hybrids. Then the three last columns detailed the hybrids combination (i.e. overrepresented; underrepresented and in expected proportion). N: C.n. nasus; T: C. t.toxostoma; Eff.: effective size; N.Clas.: number of genomic classes; Fischer: results of the exact Fischer test calculated first with the effective size; then with the number of class (respective references are in grey).
Figure 2VISUALIZATION OF THE VARIANCE FOR MORPHOLOGY.
Discriminant analysis based on meristic characters (x-axis) as a function of genetic class (y-axis). -1 = underrepresented combinations; 0 = combinations present in the expected proportions; 99 = overrepresented combinations other than T5, H5,T4i, Hi4 and H4T, which are represented separately (see the text for more detail). A) Meristic data set; B) Plastic data set on the global data set.
Figure 3CORRELATION BETWEEN MORPHOLOGY AND GENE DILUTION.
Correlation between morphology (meristic at the top and plastic at the bottom) and the degree of introgression (percentage of genes belonging to each of the two species) or dilution.
Figure 4DEFORMATION GRIDS.
Deformation grids for various “mean specimen” comparisons (based on the 21 landmarks). These diagrams are schematic representations of the morphology encountered in allopatric/parapatric zones or in hybrid zones. The points indicate the main deformations observed on the corresponding grid.
Figure 5COEFFICIENT OF CONDITION AND CONFIDENCE SURFACES.
Confidence surfaces for mean K-size (a) and mean K-weight (b) plots, based on non-parametric bootstrap (1000 replicates). The circles correspond to 95% of bootstrapped values. H and T correspond to C. n. nasus and C. t. toxostoma, respectively, in the reference populations. The other classes are those of the hybrid zone (T5; H5; -1 = underrepresented hybrid combinations; 0 = hybrid combinations found in the expected proportions; 99 = overrepresented hybrid combinations; T4i = the only hybrid combination for which sufficient specimens were obtained for comparison alone, without pooling). The variance of K is very significantly different (Bartlett B = 63.7; p = 10−10) between classes.
Figure 6GENOMIC EVOLUTION THROUGH THE HYBRID ZONE.
Global summary of the dynamics of the hybrid zone and main variable interactions (chi-square test and log-linear model) with respect to the various sampling years and stations (see the text for more detail). The percentages of the different categories are shown—from T5 in red to H5 in green, and “hybrids” in yellow—separately for each station and each sampling year.
ASYMMETRICAL INTROGRESSION IN ANIMAL KINGDOM.
| Genus | Common name | Ref. | Hybrids mtDNA | Author's conclusion |
|
| ||||
|
| Frog |
|
| Females of |
|
| Frog |
| Both | Both field observations and studies of mating preference indicate that the primary hybridizations that produce |
|
| ||||
|
| Warbler |
| Both | The rapid pace of asymmetrical introgression may be the result of initial invasion of chrysoptera populations by pioneering female pinus and/or an unknown competitive advantage of pinus females and their daughters over chrysoptera females. |
|
| Parasitic jaeger |
|
| Past introgressive hybridization |
|
| ||||
|
| Mussel |
| Both | Predominant mtDNA flow from |
|
| ||||
|
| Charr and trout |
|
| Combination of both historical demographic conditions and selection for mtDNA introgression, rather than pure stochastic processes, as a more plausible mechanism which could have produced the present- day geographical distribution observed for introgressed brook char in eastern Quebec. |
|
|
|
|
| Although |
|
| Sunfish |
| Both | The data support the idea that hybridizations preferentially take place between parental species differing greatly in abundance. Other crosses with asymmetrical results: |
|
| Black bass |
| Both (but…) | Predominance of |
|
| Shiner |
| Both (but…) | The proportion depending on the abundance of the parental species. The rarer species, whichever it is at a particular locality tends to exhibit a higher proportion of introgressed alleles. This pattern may be due to local ecological effects or frequency-dependent introgression. |
|
| Tilapia (Cichlids) |
|
| Unidirectional introgression could also result from such demographic disequilibrium, where female parents are from the rare species. Fixation of the west mtDNA lineage into the western populations of |
|
| ||||
|
| Butterfly |
| Both (but…) | Directionality of the crosses? The barrier to gene flow is most probably a result of divergence in mate preferences, warning colour and ecology without hybrid inviability or sterility. |
|
| Criquets |
| G. pennsylvanicus | Prezygotic barriers (the hybrids from the reciprocal cross are non viable) but authors brang up (but could not test) a more general scenario where continuous input of females of one species into populations of a second species can also lead to apparent differential introgression. |
|
| Fruit flies |
|
| Phylogeny is partially consistent with the courtship behavioral hypothesis which states that females from derived populations will mate preferentially with males from ancestral populations, while the converse is not true. Such founder events imply the establishment of new populations by small numbers of flies-in the extreme case, perhaps a single gravid female. |
|
| ||||
|
| Mouse |
|
| A single |
|
|
|
|
| The females of derived species might be less discriminating than those of ancestral species (referenced in Wirtz 1999) |
|
|
| Our observation differs from previous observations of mtDNA introgression in Sweden and Iberia, and provides further support for a reticulated mode of introgression within the genus Lepus. | ||
|
| Chipmunks |
|
| Sexual isolation. Convergence or incomplete sorting of ancestral polymorphisms cannot be dismissed with these data. |
Modified from Wirtz [21] and Avise [26]. List of some hybrid species, the mitochondrial DNA of which has been compared with that of the two parental species. This table includes only studies in which at least five hybrids were genotyped (the probability of sampling five individuals with the same type of mtDNA in a population with equal proportions of the two types of mtDNA is 0.064, two-tailed binomial test).
Figure 7LIFE HISTORY TRAITS EVOLUTION THROUGH THE HYBRID ZONE.
Global summary of changes in ecological and morphological traits in the hybrid zone with respect to the reference populations (see the text for more detail). Arrows indicate the overall trend for overall changes in snout orientation, “?” indicates that we could not strictly determine the diet of the Chondrostoma specimens in the hybrid zone, * indicates a significant difference, the other tests could not be done because the sample was too small, but we extrapolated a trend. “ΣD12” indicates the sum of degree-days above 12°C for each station (mean established for an 8-year data set) Chappaz (personal communication).
Figure 8MORPHOLOGY AND GENOME DILUTION
. The graphs show the distribution of individuals for each genome dilution class (x-axis) as a function of i) their probability based on numbers of specimens; y-axis (first graph) ii) their probability based on numbers of combinations; y-axis (second graph). The color gradient (observed values) extends from red (T5) to green (H5). The intermediate morphologies and genomic combinations are shown in yellow-orange, with theoretical values shown in gray (see the text for more detail). The fish morphologies shown are a simplistic representation of the morphological gradient (not all intermediate morphologies are represented).
Figure 9GEOGRAPHICAL AREA STUDIED.
Allopatric zone: Garonne (C. t. toxostoma); Flet (C. n. nasus); parapatric zones: Doubs (C. t. toxostoma); Allier (C. n. nasus) and hybrid zone: the River Durance and the four sampling stations: Buech, Manosque, Pertuis and Cavaillon.