| Literature DB >> 25019953 |
Luz Valeria Oppliger1, Peter von Dassow2, Sarah Bouchemousse3, Marine Robuchon4, Myriam Valero3, Juan A Correa5, Stéphane Mauger3, Christophe Destombe3.
Abstract
Adaptation to marginal habitats at species range-limits has often been associated with parthenogenetic reproduction in terrestrial animals and plants. Laboratory observations have shown that brown algae exhibit a high propensity for parthenogenesis by various mechanisms. The kelp Laminaria digitata is an important component of the ecosystem in Northern European rocky intertidal habitats. We studied four L. digitata populations for the effects of marginality on genetic diversity and sexual reproduction. Two populations were marginal: One (Locquirec, in Northern Brittany) was well within the geographic range, but was genetically isolated from other populations by large stretches of sandy beaches. Another population was at the range limits of the species (Quiberon, in Southern Brittany) and was exposed to much higher seasonal temperature changes. Microsatellite analyses confirmed that these populations showed decreased genetic and allelic diversity, consistent with marginality and genetic isolation. Sporophytes from both marginal populations showed greatly diminished spore-production compared to central populations, but only the southern-limit population (Quiberon) showed a high propensity for producing unreduced (2N) spores. Unreduced 2N spores formed phenotypically normal gametophytes with nuclear area consistent with ≥2N DNA contents, and microsatellite studies suggested these were produced at least in part by automixis. However, despite this being the dominant path of spore production in Quiberon sporophyte individuals, the genetic evidence indicated the population was maintained mostly by sexual reproduction. Thus, although spore production and development showed the expected tendency of geographical parthenogenesis in marginal populations, this appeared to be a consequence of maladaptation, rather than an adaptation to, life in a marginal habitat.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25019953 PMCID: PMC4096927 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0102518
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Studied sites of Laminaria digitata in Brittany, France.
Geographic information and summary statistics of the sampled populations.
| Region | Site | GPS position | Population type | N | He | Na | AR |
| R |
|
| Porz Mellec | 48°41′11″N 3°37′06″W | Marginal | 19 | 0.518±0.066 | 3.71±0.47 | 3.71±0.47 | –0.019±0.045 | 1.00 |
| Beg Douar | 48°41′12″N 3°36′47″W | Marginal | 31 | 0.519±0.052 | 4.14±0.55 | 3.82±0.44 | 0.033±0.035 | 1.00 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||
|
| Ar Pourven | 48°42′44″N 3°57′30″W | Central | 49 | 0.614±0.070 | 6.14±1.71 | 5.31±1.41 | 0.013±0.030 | 1.00 |
| Sieck | 48°42′40″N 4°03′37″W | Central | 41 | 0.629±0.070 | 7.14±1.74 | 6.03±1.31 | –0.019±0.029 | 1.00 | |
| Duons | 48°43′41″N 3°55′32″W | Central | 45 | 0.611±0.076 | 6.57±1.38 | 5.29±1.02 | 0.068±0.041 | 1.00 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||
|
| St Laurent | 48°31′11″N 4°46′45″W | Central | 27 | 0.676±0.046 | 7.00±1.20 | 6.44±1.03 | –0.011±0.025 | 1.00 |
| Le Conquet | 48°19′48″N 4°46′25″W | Central | 27 | 0.671±0.061 | 6.71±1.80 | 6.22±1.57 | 0.067±0.048 | 1.00 | |
| Molène | 48°23′49″N 4°56′01″W | Central | 20 | 0.695±0.043 | 6.43±1.15 | 6.35±1.14 | 0.085±0.054 | 1.00 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||
|
| Pointe ConguelSouth | 47°28′09″N 3°05′40″W | Marginal | 41 | 0.495±0.072 | 4.29±0.94 | 3.87±0.77 | 0.071±0.047 | 0.95 |
| Pointe deConguel North | 47°28′12″N 3°05′29″W | Marginal | 49 | 0.555±0.058 | 5.43±0.90 | 4.42±0.68 | 0.049±0.029 | 1.00 | |
| Belle-Ile | 47°19′41″N 3°07′27″W | Marginal | 47 | 0.474±0.067 | 4.29±0.61 | 3.72±0.44 | 0.027±0.045 | 0.98 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N is the number of individuals sampled, He is the unbiased genetic diversity [41], Na is the number of alleles, AR is the allelic richness based on the smallest sample size (19 diploid individuals), Fis is the departure from random meeting [43] and R is the genotypic diversity ((G−1/N−1, where G is the number of distinct genotypes, [44]). He, Na, AR and Fis have been calculated using FSTAT [42]; values by population are mean ± standard error over loci and values by region are mean ± standard error over populations.
These sites have already been analyzed in Valero et al. 2011 [35] (Sieck = NB3, Porspoder = NB1 and Porz Mellec = NB4); values might slightly differ because of different sub-sampling in the two analysis.
These sites have already been analyzed in Couceiro et al. 2013 [36] (Le Conquet = MPA2 and Molène = MPA1); values might slightly differ because of different sub-sampling in the two analysis.
Figure 2Seasonal temperature variation at Roscoff and Quiberon.
A) Seasonal sea surface temperature (SST) determined from satellite (mean seasonal temperature, averaged over all 12 years). B) Direct measurements from data loggers.
Figure 3Spore release (number of spores per µL) by sporophytes of the four populations of L. digitata.
Flow cytometry results in the studied populations.
| Population | N | 2N | N & 2N | not scorable | Total |
| Roscoff | 31/33 | 1/33 | 1/33 | 3 | 36 |
| Porspoder | 23/23 | 0/23 | 0/23 | 0 | 23 |
| Quiberon | 3/30 | 10/30 | 17/30 | 8 | 38 |
| Locquirec | 14/14 | 0/14 | 0/14 | 24 | 38 |
N: number of progenies displaying haploid profiles of DNA content. 2N: number of progenies displaying diploid profiles of DNA content. N & 2N: number of progenies displaying haploid and diploid profiles of DNA content.
Figure 4Example flow cytometric analysis of spore ploidy, showing histograms of Sybr Green I fluorescence (DNA content).
Grey lines show a representative Quiberon sporophyte and black lines show a representative Porspoder sporophyte. In both cases the thick lines represent spores, and thin lines represent the internal standard (Emiliania huxleyi cells) added to the same sample during staining.
Sex ratio in nine progenies of Quiberon.
| Progeny | Total gametophytes in the progeny | Sex ratio |
| 1 | 117 | 0.56 |
| 2 | 64 |
|
| 3 | 15 |
|
| 4 | 5 | 0.80 |
| 5 | 115 | 0.51 |
| 6 | 29 | 0.38 |
| 7 | 59 | 0.56 |
| 8 | 131 |
|
| 9 | 40 | 0.47 |
Bold numbers represent deviated sex ratios according to the binomial law.
Figure 5Gametophytes dyed with DNA stain.
A) Female gametophyte from Quiberon. B) Female gametophyte from Roscoff.
Figure 6Nuclear area of gametophytes from central and marginal (Quiberon) populations.