| Literature DB >> 24683457 |
Jennafer A P Hamlin1, Michael L Arnold1.
Abstract
Identifying processes that promote or limit gene flow can help define the ecological and evolutionary history of a species. Furthermore, defining those factors that make up "species boundaries" can provide a definition of the independent evolutionary trajectories of related taxa. For many species, the historic processes that account for their distribution of genetic variation remain unresolved. In this study, we examine the geographic distribution of genetic diversity for two species of Louisiana Irises, Iris brevicaulis and Iris fulva. Specifically, we asked how populations are structured and if population structure coincides with potential barriers to gene flow. We also asked whether there is evidence of hybridization between these two species outside Louisiana hybrid zones. We used a genotyping-by-sequencing approach and sampled a large number of single nucleotide polymorphisms across these species' genomes. Two different population assignment methods were used to resolve population structure in I. brevicaulis; however, there was considerably less population structure in I. fulva. We used a species tree approach to infer phylogenies both within and between populations and species. For I. brevicaulis, the geography of the collection locality was reflected in the phylogeny. The I. fulva phylogeny reflected much less structure than detected for I. brevicaulis. Lastly, combining both species into a phylogenetic analysis resolved two of six populations of I. brevicaulis that shared alleles with I. fulva. Taken together, our results suggest major differences in the level and pattern of connectivity among populations of these two Louisiana Iris species.Entities:
Keywords: Genotyping-by-sequencing; introgression; population genetics; southeastern US; species tree
Year: 2014 PMID: 24683457 PMCID: PMC3967900 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.964
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ecol Evol ISSN: 2045-7758 Impact factor: 2.912
Figure 1Range distribution maps for both Iris brevicaulis (light gray) and Iris fulva (dark gray). Iris fulva distribution is overlaid on I. brevicaulis distribution. Sympatric populations have only been found in Louisiana. Black dots are Iris brevicaulis and black triangles are I. fulva collection localities, respectively, from which individuals were sequenced. Abbreviations of states are shown, which corresponds to population names. The Mississippi River is outlined in blue.
Collection information for (a) Iris brevicaulis populations; (b) Iris fulva populations.
| State | Id | Longitude | Latitude | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (a) | ||||
| Alabama | AL | −86.239 | 31.920 | 8 |
| Arkansas | AR | −91.499 | 34.854 | 8 |
| Illinois | IL | −89.113 | 38.926 | 8 |
| Louisiana | LA | −92.051 | 30.519 | 8 |
| Ohio | OH | −82.551 | 41.361 | 8 |
| Texas | TX | −96.201 | 30.568 | 8 |
| (b) | ||||
| Arkansas | AR | −91.952 | 34.235 | 8 |
| Illinois | IL | −89.396 | 37.443 | 8 |
| Kentucky | KY | −89.274 | 36.539 | 8 |
| Louisiana | LA | −90.819 | 29.877 | 7 |
| Mississippi | MS | −90.910 | 33.791 | 8 |
| Missouri | MO | −90.196 | 36.973 | 8 |
Pairwise FST values for (a) Iris brevicaulis populations; (b) Iris fulva populations.
| IB_AL | IB_AR | IB_IL | IB_LA | IB_OH | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (a) | |||||
| IB_AL | – | ||||
| IB_AR | 0.53 | – | |||
| IB_IL | 0.56 | 0.19 | – | ||
| IB_LA | 0.2 | 0.51 | 0.54 | – | |
| IB_OH | 0.57 | 0.25 | 0.15 | 0.55 | – |
| IB_TX | 0.56 | 0.27 | 0.35 | 0.52 | 0.38 |
Here, abbreviations are based on the state where populations are collected. AL, Alabama; AR, Arkansas; IL, Illinois; KY, Kentucky; LA, Louisiana; MS, Mississippi; MO, Missouri; OH, Ohio; TX, Texas.
Figure 2Plots of posterior probabilities of assignment of each individual into its associated cluster based on the STRUCTURE analysis. The results are grouped by collection localities for each individual. Each vertical bar represents a different individual from one of twelve populations. (A) Iris brevicaulis plot of posterior probabilities of group assignments where K = 2. (B) Iris fulva plot of posterior probabilities of group assignment where K = 2. (C) Iris brevicaulis and I. fulva species plot of posterior probabilities of group assignments generated where K = 2.
Figure 3Samples are assigned to their genetic cluster by discriminant analysis of principle components (PCs). The bar graph inset displays the eigenvalues of the five principal components in relative magnitude and illustrates the variation explained by the five PCs. The 67% inertia ellipses are drawn for each cluster representing the variance of both PCs. (A) Principle component scatter plot for Iris brevicaulis. (B) Principle component scatter plot for I. fulva.
Figure 4Species tree inferred using SNAPP with independent biallelic markers. Proportion of posterior support given at each node and nodes with support = 95% or higher have no label, but have a black circle (A) Iris brevicaulis populations (B) Iris fulva populations (C) I. fulva and I. brevicaulis populations.