| Literature DB >> 20305822 |
Eric Lombaert1, Thomas Guillemaud, Jean-Marie Cornuet, Thibaut Malausa, Benoît Facon, Arnaud Estoup.
Abstract
Recent studies of the routes of worldwide introductions of alien organisms suggest that many widespread invasions could have stemmed not from the native range, but from a particularly successful invasive population, which serves as the source of colonists for remote new territories. We call here this phenomenon the invasive bridgehead effect. Evaluating the likelihood of such a scenario is heuristically challenging. We solved this problem by using approximate Bayesian computation methods to quantitatively compare complex invasion scenarios based on the analysis of population genetics (microsatellite variation) and historical (first observation dates) data. We applied this approach to the Harlequin ladybird Harmonia axyridis (HA), a coccinellid native to Asia that was repeatedly introduced as a biocontrol agent without becoming established for decades. We show that the recent burst of worldwide invasions of HA followed a bridgehead scenario, in which an invasive population in eastern North America acted as the source of the colonists that invaded the European, South American and African continents, with some admixture with a biocontrol strain in Europe. This demonstration of a mechanism of invasion via a bridgehead has important implications both for invasion theory (i.e., a single evolutionary shift in the bridgehead population versus multiple changes in case of introduced populations becoming invasive independently) and for ongoing efforts to manage invasions by alien organisms (i.e., heightened vigilance against invasive bridgeheads).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20305822 PMCID: PMC2840033 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009743
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Worldwide routes of invasion of Harmonia axyridis.
Most likely scenario of invasions into eastern North America (ENA), western North America (WNA), South America (SA), Europe (EU) and Africa (AF) by Harmonia axyridis, deduced from analyses based on approximate Bayesian computation. For each outbreak, the arrow indicates the most likely invasion pathway and the associated posterior probability value (P), with 95% confidence intervals in brackets. Years of first observation of invasive populations are indicated. Initially collected from the native area in 1982, the European biocontrol strain (Ebc; blue arrow) was used for biocontrol efforts in Europe and South America. Introductions to North America from the native area (green arrows) may have involved releases for biocontrol efforts.
Figure 2Posterior distributions of the genetic admixture rate in Europe (left panel) and the bottleneck severity for the five outbreaks (right panel) of Harmonia axyridis.
The best estimates of admixture and bottleneck severity occur where the posterior probability density function peaks. Left panel: admixture in Europe involves the European biocontrol strain at a rate ar and the eastern North American population at a rate 1-ar. Y-axis: probability density of the genetic admixture ar in Europe. The dotted line is the prior distribution of admixture rate. Right panel: bottleneck severity was computed as the ratio between the duration (in number of generations) of the bottleneck following introduction and the effective number of individuals during this period [28], [29]. Y-axis: probability density of bottleneck severity. Continuous lines in red, blue, maroon, green and orange are the posterior distributions of the European, eastern North American, western North American, South African and South American outbreaks, respectively. The dotted line is the prior distribution of bottleneck severity. It ranges from zero (complete absence of bottleneck) to 2.5 (strong bottleneck; i.e. 2 effective individuals during 5 generations). Posterior distributions support bottleneck severity values considerably lower than those of the prior, except for South America.
Confidence in scenario selection obtained from the ABC analyses.
| Invaded area (ABC analysis) | Number of competing scenarios | Selected scenario | Type I error | Type II error Mean (min – max) |
| Eastern North America (Analysis 1) | 3 | Introduction from the native area | 0.12 | 0.080 (0.03–0.13) |
| Western North America (Analysis 2) | 6 | Introduction from the native area | 0.16 | 0.030 (0.00–0.12) |
| Europe (Analysis 3) | 10 | Admixture between eastern North America and European biocontrol | 0.16 | 0.010 (0.00–0.04) |
| South America (Analysis 4) | 10 | Introduction from eastern North America | 0.03 | 0.013 (0.00–0.06) |
| Africa (Analysis 5) | 21 | Introduction from eastern North America | 0.12 | 0.006 (0.00–0.06) |