| Literature DB >> 31387238 |
Juan Carlos Illera1, Miguel Arenas2,3, Carlos A López-Sánchez4, José Ramón Obeso5, Paola Laiolo5.
Abstract
The location of the high mountains of southern Europe has been crucial in the phylogeography of most European species, but how extrinsic (topography of sky islands) and intrinsic features (dispersal dynamics) have interacted to shape the genetic structure in alpine restricted species is still poorly known. Here we investigated the mechanisms explaining the colonisation of Cantabrian sky islands in an endemic flightless grasshopper. We scrutinised the maternal genetic variability and haplotype structure, and we evaluated the fitting of two migration models to understand the extant genetic structure in these populations: Long-distance dispersal (LDD) and gradual distance dispersal (GDD). We found that GDD fits the real data better than the LDD model, with an onset of the expansion matching postglacial expansions after the retreat of the ice sheets. Our findings suggest a scenario with small carrying capacity, migration rates, and population growth rates, being compatible with a slow dispersal process. The gradual expansion process along the Cantabrian sky islands found here seems to be conditioned by the suitability of habitats and the presence of alpine corridors. Our findings shed light on our understanding about how organisms which have adapted to live in alpine habitats with limited dispersal abilities have faced new and suitable environmental conditions.Entities:
Keywords: Cantabrian Mountains; Chorthippus cazurroi; coalescent simulations; flightless grasshopper; incipient diversification; migration models; sky islands
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31387238 PMCID: PMC6724060 DOI: 10.3390/genes10080590
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genes (Basel) ISSN: 2073-4425 Impact factor: 4.096
Figure 1Distribution of Chorthippus cazurroi along the sky islands of the Cantabrian Mountains. Localities with individuals sampled for this study are depicted with green dots.
Sampled localities, with their acronyms and sample size, analysed in this study (see Figure 1 for a visualisation of their geographic distribution). “Group” indicates the assignation of localities into groups according to their geographic distribution (Figure S1).
| Locality | Acronym | Sample size | Group | Massif |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cantu l’Osu | COsu | 20 | 1 | Central |
| Campigüeños | Cam | 11 | 2 | Western |
| Llambria | Lla | 11 | 2 | Western |
| Tiatordos | Tia | 16 | 2 | Western |
| Maciédome | Mac | 18 | 2 | Western |
| Peña Ten | Ten | 15 | 3 | Western |
| Pileñes | Pil | 10 | 3 | Western |
| Cantu Cabroneru | CC | 15 | 4 | Central |
| Traviesos | Tra | 15 | 5 | Central |
| Cotalba | Cot | 15 | 5 | Central |
| Vega Ario | Va | 15 | 5 | Central |
| Vega Huerta | Vh | 16 | 5 | Central |
| Vegarredonda | VR | 17 | 5 | Central |
| Tiros Navarros | NV | 25 | 6 | Eastern |
| Peña Castil | PC | 16 | 6 | Eastern |
| Liordes | Lio | 6 | 6 | Eastern |
| Urriellu | U | 19 | 6 | Eastern |
| Camburero | Camb | 3 | 6 | Eastern |
| Morra Lechugales | MoHie | 19 | 7 | Eastern |
| Andara | A | 15 | 7 | Eastern |
| Casetón Andara | Ba | 15 | 7 | Eastern |
| Rasa | Ras | 15 | 7 | Eastern |
Figure 2Illustrative example of spatially-explicit computer simulations performed with SPLATCHE3 under the gradual distance dispersal (GDD) model. The landscape corresponds to a grid of demes with size 0.1 km2 where populations can only live in demes above 1400 m. Demes that cannot be colonised are shown in blue, empty demes (uncolonised) are shown in white, and colonised demes are shown in green. The presented snapshots were collected every 50 generations and mimic the colonisation of the area after the last glacial period (LGM). Mountain and grasshopper icons depict increasing geographical distribution and numbers over time.
Fitting of the GDD and long-distance dispersal (LDD) migration models with the real data using four approximate Bayesian computation (ABC) approaches. The GDD migration model was the best fitting model (probabilities above 0.85 under any applied estimation approach). The ABC estimation approaches are as follow: Pr, Pritchard’s rejection approach; Rrej: rejection approach implemented in the abc library of R; Rreg, multiple regression approach implemented in the abc library of R; Rnn, neuralnet method rejection approach implemented in the abc library of R.
| Model | GDD | LDD | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Pr | Rrej | Rreg | Rnn | Pr | Rrej | Rreg | Rnn |
|
| 0.97 | 0.87 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.03 | 0.13 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
Estimates of population genetic parameters from the real data under the best fitting migration model and considering the most accurate ABC approach to estimate each parameter. The estimations were performed with the rejection (Rrej), regression (Rreg) and neuralnet (Rnn) approaches implemented in the abc library of R [57]. The estimates (mode, mean or median) with the higher accuracy (see Figure S3) are shown in bold.
| Parameter | ABC Approach | Mode | Mean | Median | 90% HPDI 1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time of the onset of the expansion 2 | Rejection |
| 17,547 | 17,558 | 15,256–19,775 |
| Ancestral population size | Neuralnet | 662 |
| 649 | 540–706 |
| Population growth rate | Regression |
| 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.27–0.29 |
| Migration rate | Rejection | 0.07 | 0.14 |
| 0.06–0.27 |
| Carrying capacity | Rejection | 122 |
| 154 | 105–313 |
| Mutation rate | Rejection |
| 4.78 × 10−6 | 4.66 × 10−6 | 5.15 ×10−7–9.43 × 10−6 |
1 90% HPDI indicates the 90% highest posterior density interval. 2 Times shown in years and generations (generation time is 1 year).