| Literature DB >> 23517600 |
A Rieux1, T Lenormand, J Carlier, L de Lapeyre de Bellaire, V Ravigné.
Abstract
Dispersal is a key parameter of adaptation, invasion and persistence. Yet standard population genetics inference methods hardly distinguish it from drift and many species cannot be studied by direct mark-recapture methods. Here, we introduce a method using rates of change in cline shapes for neutral markers to estimate contemporary dispersal. We apply it to the devastating banana pest Mycosphaerella fijiensis, a wind-dispersed fungus for which a secondary contact zone had previously been detected using landscape genetics tools. By tracking the spatio-temporal frequency change of 15 microsatellite markers, we find that σ, the standard deviation of parent-offspring dispersal distances, is 1.2 km/generation(1/2) . The analysis is further shown robust to a large range of dispersal kernels. We conclude that combining landscape genetics approaches to detect breaks in allelic frequencies with analyses of changes in neutral genetic clines offers a powerful way to obtain ecologically relevant estimates of dispersal in many species.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23517600 PMCID: PMC4165305 DOI: 10.1111/ele.12090
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ecol Lett ISSN: 1461-023X Impact factor: 9.492
Figure 1Sample site locations along the transect in South-West Cameroon. The arrow indicates the best-fit axis θ as inferred using the neutral cline approach.
Figure 4Influence of kernel on σ estimation. (a) Construction of dispersal distributions Δ using four different kernel families displaying identical variance (σ2, in degree2/generation) but different kurtosis (γ). μ, α, ε and β are kernel parameters (Appendix S9 for equations). (b) Simulated clines obtained from Δ0, Δ4, Δ11. Clines are shown every 25 generations from T = 0 to 175 generations after initial contact. (c) Temporal dynamics of σ estimate from simulated data sets. Left panel: mixture of Binomial distributions. Right panel: other dispersal kernels. Horizontal black solid line indicates the expected value (σ = 1175 m/generation1/2), and horizontal dashed lines its associated support limits.
Figure 2Spatial genetic structure of Mycosphaerella fijiensis populations over the study area. The maps either indicate the posterior probability of belonging to cluster 1 (geneland – upper panels) or to the first parental population (tess – lower panels) at both T1 and T2 sampling dates. Black dots represent sampled sites and x- and y-axes correspond to geographical coordinates.
Figure 3Change in neutral genetic clines for six of the 15 microsatellites considered between the two sampling dates. From top to bottom and left to right, the loci represented are MfSSR-407, 434, 425, 430, 401 and 324. Allelic frequencies at T1 (black) and T2 (grey) are plotted against distance along the main axis of the cline. Distances are given in km, 0 being the southernmost site. Dots represent sampling sites, dot size being proportional to the number of individuals sampled. Curves show the fitted clines (scaled Logit shapes), with their centres highlighted through dashed vertical lines.
Testing for an initial cline pattern in 15 microsatellites
| MfSSR | 407 | 425 | 405 | 322 | 324 | 413 | 434 | 340 | 401 | 430 | 362 | 417 | 428 | 203 | 350 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LL | −84.42 | −46.74 | −87.17 | −83.71 | −74.65 | −85.89 | −83.46 | −82.19 | −38.45 | −16.41 | −16.62 | −88.39 | −91.55 | −75.26 | −36.14 |
| θ | 1.871 | 1.878 | 1.869 | 1.870 | 1.870 | 1.875 | 1.881 | 1.873 | x | x | x | x | x | x | x |
| 20.06 | 20.08 | 19.87 | 21.07 | 20.09 | 21.02 | 19.94 | 19.99 | x | x | x | x | x | x | x | |
| 68.33 | 140.19 | 11.20 | 25.73 | 17.25 | 35.72 | 38.97 | 22.92 | 0.10 | 0.03 | 0.07 | 0.09 | 0.12 | 0.02 | 0.06 | |
| 0.13 | 0.62 | 0.00 | 0.08 | 0.02 | 0.16 | 0.17 | 0.00 | 0.67 | 0.99 | 0.96 | 0.45 | 0.46 | 0.12 | 0.85 | |
| 0.59 | 0.94 | 0.95 | 0.64 | 0.98 | 0.69 | 0.78 | 0.70 | 0.01 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.05 | 0.00 | 0.10 | 0.04 | |
| 0.64 | 0.98 | 0.95 | 0.67 | 0.98 | 0.74 | 0.82 | 0.70 | 0.67 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.47 | 0.46 | 0.21 | 0.85 | |
| Slope | 8.79 | 12.62 | 2.67 | 3.77 | 4.16 | 5.24 | 6.29 | 3.99 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Width (km) | 6.44 | 3.14 | 39.30 | 17.10 | 25.51 | 12.32 | 11.29 | 19.20 | x | x | x | x | x | x | x |
| LL0 Worse model (k = 1) | −95.54 | −59.02 | −93.36 | −92.43 | −84.69 | −94.48 | −96.29 | −91.61 | −38.46 | −18.13 | −18.13 | −88.95 | −93.19 | −76.76 | −37.14 |
| Dev: −2LL (LL0–LL | 0.02 | 3.46 | 3.04 | 1.11 | 3.29 | 3.01 | 2.00 |
Clines were fitted using scaled Logit function (Equation in Appendix S6).
Denotes inferred parameters: cline centre (c), cline slope-related parameter (b), lower asymptotic frequency (h1), allelic frequency step between the two populations (h) and cline angle (θ).
Holds for a posteriori computed parameters. These are h2, the higher asymptotic frequency , cline slopes and for non-flat clines, cline widths (4/b, in km). LL is log likelihood. For each locus, slope significance was tested using likelihood ratio tests against a null model assuming homogeneous allele frequency over the study area. Deviance (Dev) is given with significant values (5% level) highlighted in bold × indicates situations in which parameters could not be computed (see text for details).
Testing cline coincidence, similarity in cline vanishing rates between loci and isotropy. A. Compared models. Parameters constrained and type of constraint operated are highlighted in bold. σ is the standard deviation of parent–offspring axial dispersal distances, b a cline slope parameter, h1 lower asymptotic frequency, h the step in allelic frequency between the two populations, θ cline angle, c cline centre, and δ centre shift between T1 and T2. B. Model comparison on the whole dataset (both samplings and 15 loci). LL is log likelihood and k the number of parameters. QAIC corrects Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) for overdispersed frequency data and the best model is highlighted in bold
| A | |
|---|---|
| Model | Parameters constrained |
| A | θT1≠θT2/ |
| B | |
| C | |
| D | |
| E | |
| F | |
| G | |
| H | |
| I | |