Literature DB >> 23970074

Fast evolutionary genetic differentiation during experimental colonizations.

Josiane Santos1, Marta Pascual, Pedro Simões, Inês Fragata, Michael R Rose, Margarida Matos.   

Abstract

Founder effects during colonization of a novel environment are expected to change the genetic composition of populations, leading to differentiation between the colonizer population and its source population. Another expected outcome is differentiation among populations derived from repeated independent colonizations starting from the same source. We have previously detected significant founder effects affecting rate of laboratory adaptation among Drosophila subobscura laboratory populations derived from the wild. We also showed that during the first generations in the laboratory, considerable genetic differentiation occurs between foundations. The present study deepens that analysis, taking into account the natural sampling hierarchy of six foundations, derived from different locations, different years and from two samples in one of the years. We show that striking stochastic effects occur in the first two generations of laboratory culture, effects that produce immediate differentiation between foundations, independent of the source of origin and despite similarity among all founders. This divergence is probably due to powerful genetic sampling effects during the first few generations of culture in the novel laboratory environment, as a result of a significant drop in Ne. Changes in demography as well as high variance in reproductive success in the novel environment may contribute to the low values of Ne. This study shows that estimates of genetic differentiation between natural populations may be accurate when based on the initial samples collected in the wild, though considerable genetic differentiation may occur in the very first generations of evolution in a new, confined environment. Rapid and significant evolutionary changes can thus occur during the early generations of a founding event, both in the wild and under domestication, effects of interest for both scientific and conservation purposes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23970074     DOI: 10.1007/s12041-013-0239-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Genet        ISSN: 0022-1333            Impact factor:   1.166


  38 in total

1.  An evolutionary no man's land.

Authors: 
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 17.712

2.  Microsatellite variation in colonizing and palearctic populations of Drosophila subobscura.

Authors:  M Pascual; C F Aquadro; V Soto; L Serra
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 16.240

3.  A direct experimental test of founder-flush effects on the evolutionary potential for assortative mating.

Authors:  J L Regan; L M Meffert; E H Bryant
Journal:  J Evol Biol       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 2.411

4.  The Effect of an Experimental Bottleneck upon Quantitative Genetic Variation in the Housefly.

Authors:  E H Bryant; S A McCommas; L M Combs
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1986-12       Impact factor: 4.562

5.  G(ST) is still a useful measure of genetic differentiation - a comment on Jost's D.

Authors:  Nils Ryman; Olof Leimar
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 6.185

6.  Surfing during population expansions promotes genetic revolutions and structuration.

Authors:  Laurent Excoffier; Nicolas Ray
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2008-05-24       Impact factor: 17.712

Review 7.  History, chance and adaptation during biological invasion: separating stochastic phenotypic evolution from response to selection.

Authors:  Stephen R Keller; Douglas R Taylor
Journal:  Ecol Lett       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 9.492

8.  Measuring population differentiation using GST or D? A simulation study with microsatellite DNA markers under a finite island model and nonequilibrium conditions.

Authors:  Liang Leng; D E-Xing Zhang
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2011-05-09       Impact factor: 6.185

9.  The analysis of quantitative variation in natural populations with isofemale strains.

Authors:  A Hoffmann; P Parsons
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 4.297

10.  Laboratory selection experiments using Drosophila: what do they really tell us?

Authors: 
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 17.712

View more
  4 in total

1.  Analyses of locomotion, wing morphology, and microbiome in Drosophila nigrosparsa after recovery from antibiotics.

Authors:  Simon O Weiland; Matsapume Detcharoen; Birgit C Schlick-Steiner; Florian M Steiner
Journal:  Microbiologyopen       Date:  2022-06       Impact factor: 3.904

2.  Identifying consistent allele frequency differences in studies of stratified populations.

Authors:  R Axel W Wiberg; Oscar E Gaggiotti; Michael B Morrissey; Michael G Ritchie
Journal:  Methods Ecol Evol       Date:  2017-06-15       Impact factor: 7.781

3.  History, chance and selection during phenotypic and genomic experimental evolution: replaying the tape of life at different levels.

Authors:  Margarida Matos; Pedro Simões; Marta A Santos; Sofia G Seabra; Gonçalo S Faria; Filipa Vala; Josiane Santos; Inês Fragata
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2015-02-25       Impact factor: 4.599

4.  Wolbachia affect behavior and possibly reproductive compatibility but not thermoresistance, fecundity, and morphology in a novel transinfected host, Drosophila nigrosparsa.

Authors:  Matsapume Detcharoen; Wolfgang Arthofer; Francis M Jiggins; Florian M Steiner; Birgit C Schlick-Steiner
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2020-04-12       Impact factor: 2.912

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.