| Literature DB >> 33324430 |
Francisco J Jiménez-López1, Pedro L Ortiz1, María Talavera1, Montserrat Arista1.
Abstract
Flower color polymorphism, an infrequent but phylogenetically widespread condition in plants, is captivating because it can only be maintained under a few selective regimes but also because it can drive intra-morph assortative mating and promote speciation. Lysimachia arvensis is a polymorphic species with red or blue flowered morphs. In polymorphic populations, which are mostly Mediterranean, pollinators prefer blue-flowered plants to the red ones, and abiotic factors also favors blue-flowered plants. We hypothesize that the red morph is maintained in Mediterranean areas due to its selfing capacity. We assessed inbreeding depression in both color morphs in two Mediterranean populations and genetic diversity was studied via SSR microsatellites in 20 natural populations. Results showed that only 44-47% of selfed progeny of the red plants reached reproduction while about 72-91% of blue morph progeny did it. Between-morph genetic differentiation was high and the red morph had a lower genetic diversity and a higher inbreeding coefficient, mainly in the Mediterranean. Results suggest that selfing maintaining the red morph in Mediterranean areas despite its inbreeding depression. In addition, genetic differentiation between morphs suggests a low gene flow between them, suggesting reproductive isolation.Entities:
Keywords: Anagallis; flower color polymorphism; gene flow; inbreeding depression; phenology; selfing; speciation
Year: 2020 PMID: 33324430 PMCID: PMC7725749 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2020.563110
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Plant Sci ISSN: 1664-462X Impact factor: 5.753
Results of GLMM used to test for the effects of treatment (selfing/outcrossing), color morph (blue/red) and site (Sevilla/Dos Hermanas) on different traits measured in Lysimachia arvensis.
| Seed production of mother plants | Site (S) | 1 | 473 | 0.000 | 0.989 |
| Treatment (T) | 1 | 473 | 1.304 | 0.254 | |
| Color (C) | 1 | 473 | 48.347 | ||
| T x C | 1 | 473 | 26.362 | ||
| S x T x C | 3 | 473 | 0.414 | 0.743 | |
| Family | 15 | 0.596 | 0.551 | ||
| Seed germination | Site (S) | 1 | 3036 | 0.010 | 0.921 |
| Treatment (T) | 1 | 3036 | 0.032 | 0.859 | |
| Color (C) | 1 | 3036 | 12.379 | ||
| T x C | 1 | 3036 | 0.122 | 0.727 | |
| S x T x C | 3 | 3036 | 2.186 | 0.088 | |
| Family | 15 | 1.959 | |||
| Viability of non-germinated seeds | Site (S) | 1 | 576 | 0.013 | 0.910 |
| Treatment (T) | 1 | 576 | 84.912 | ||
| Color (C) | 1 | 576 | 0.088 | 0.767 | |
| T x C | 1 | 576 | 0.219 | 0.640 | |
| S x T x C | 3 | 576 | 0.277 | 0.842 | |
| Family | 15 | 2.174 | 0.030 | ||
| Seedling survival | Site (S) | 1 | 1179 | 0.005 | 0.944 |
| Treatment (T) | 1 | 1179 | 0.008 | 0.929 | |
| Color (C) | 1 | 1179 | 14.506 | ||
| T × C | 1 | 1179 | 1.848 | 0.174 | |
| S × T × C | 3 | 1179 | 2.600 | 0.051 | |
| Family | 15 | 1.051 | 0.293 | ||
| Seed production of progeny | Site (S) | 1 | 308 | 0.008 | 0.928 |
| Treatment (T) | 1 | 308 | 52.709 | ||
| Color (C) | 1 | 308 | 1.181 | 0.278 | |
| T × C | 1 | 308 | 4.199 | ||
| S × T × C | 3 | 308 | 1.367 | 0.253 | |
| Family | 15 | 1.092 | 0.275 |
FIGURE 1Differences in whole-life fitness components between outcrossed (white bars) and selfed (dark bars) progeny from the blue and red plants of Lysimachia arvensis in the Mediterranean. Note that seeds/fruit by mother plants are derived from hand self- and cross-pollination, while seeds/fruit of the progeny come from free pollination of plants resulting from selfing and outcrossing (see section “Materials and Methods”). Means ± SE are shown. In each graph, asterisks indicate significant differences between selfing and outcrossing values for each color morph. ***p < 0.001, ns. Not significant.
Estimates of inbreeding depression for plants of the two color morphs of Lysimachia arvensis in two natural sites.
| Wo | 13.37 (11.72, 15.72) | 20.51 (19.48, 21.15) | 84.25 (80.47, 87.33) | 88.50 (85.01, 92.00) | 43.93 (34.46, 53.87) | 34.02 (29.80, 37.86) | 22.67 (19.67, 25.07) | 22.19 (19.25, 26.00) | 0.41 (0.38, 0.45) | 1.00 (0.99, 1.00) |
| Ws | 21.65 (20.49, 22.63) | 22.07 (20.59, 24.52) | 31.25 (20.67, 40.07) | 56.75 (44.74, 68.67) | 64.41 (52.17, 77.24) | 28.86 (16.41, 43.18) | 21.37 (17.13, 25.09) | 14.88 (12.60, 16.67) | 0.37 (0.24, 0.49) | 0.44 (0.31, 0.60) |
| δ | −0.38 (−0.47, −0.22) | −0.06 (−0.26, 0.04) | 0.62 (0.51, 0.80) | 0.35 (0.17, 0.51) | −0.32 (−0.39, −0.29) | 0.20 (−0.21, 0.51) | 0.05 (−0.14, 0.37) | 0.32 (0.19, 0.41) | 0.09 (−0.16, 0.59) | 0.56 (0.32, 0.70) |
| Wo | 12.99 (11.86, 14.87) | 21.50 (20.53, 22.66) | 80.00 (76.01, 83.33) | 90.00 (89.00, 91.33) | 62.48 (60.62, 63.91) | 48.61 (38.92, 54.33) | 25.07 (21.67, 27.68) | 20.01 (18.67, 20.91) | 0.63 (0.53, 0.77) | 1.00 (0.99, 1.00) |
| Ws | 20.60 (18.54, 22.52) | 22.53 (20.77, 24.43) | 61.50 (59.59, 63.67) | 55.25 (52.00, 58.87) | 44.22 (36.84, 52.43) | 39.24 (27.74, 52.06) | 20.55 (19.35, 21.71) | 15.22 (13.23, 17.09) | 0.44 (0.37, 0.49) | 0.47 (0.39, 0.55) |
| δ | −0.36 (−0.48, −0.12) | −0.04 (−0.08, 0.34) | 0.30 (0.23, 0.39) | 0.52 (0.33, 0.77) | 0.29 (0.14, 0.40) | 0.18 (−0.36, 0.52) | 0.16 (0.09, 0.30) | 0.23 (0.01, 0.38) | 0.28 (0.11, 0.42) | 0.53 (0.43, 0.61) |
Results of Kaplan–Meier log rank estimate test for both germination and flowering distributions.
| Site | 32.162 | 1 | |
| Treatment | 43.85 | 1 | |
| Color | 52.688 | 1 | |
| Treatment vs. Color | 102.046 | 3 | |
| Site | 35.008 | 1 | |
| Treatment | 192.238 | 1 | |
| Color | 111.760 | 1 | |
| Treatment vs. Color | 384.114 | 3 |
FIGURE 2Curves for cumulative germination proportion and cumulative flowering proportion (1 minus the Kaplan–Meier curve) of Lysimachia arvensis. Curves by population, treatment (selfing versus outcrossing) and morph (blue versus red) are shown. There was significant effect of these factors on both germination and flowering. The interaction morph by treatment was also significant.
FIGURE 3(A) Principal coordinates analysis (PCoA) based on Nei and Li distances at the individual level. (B) DK curve for detecting the number of K groups that best fits the data (Evanno et al., 2005). (C) Structure at populations level for Bayesian Analysis conducted with STRUCTURE with optimal value, K = 2; blue-flowered plants (white bars) and red-flowered plants (black bars).
FIGURE 4Barplots of gene parameters (mean values and standard error) for blue and red morphs of Lysimachia arvensis at nine SSR loci in Mediterranean and non-Mediterranean populations. Within each plot, dataset with the same letter are statistically similar. In all cases, Gis showed deviations from the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (p < 0.05).
Results of analyses of molecular variance (AMOVA) for nine SSR loci and for different groupings of populations.
| Blue vs. Red | Among groups | 1 | 628.363 | 5.99817 | 57.19221 | FSC: 0.66957 | *** |
| Among populations within groups | 29 | 608.400 | 3.00610 | 28.66296 | FST: 0.85855 | *** | |
| Within populations | 172 | 255.158 | 1.48347 | 14.14483 | FCT: 0.57192 | *** | |
| Mediterranean vs. Non-Mediterranean | Among groups | 1 | 66.654 | 0.29612 | 3.81415 | FSC: 0.80135 | *** |
| Among populations within groups | 29 | 1170.109 | 5.98413 | 77.07807 | FST: 0.80892 | *** | |
| Within populations | 172 | 255.158 | 1.48347 | 19.10777 | FCT: 0.03814 | * | |
| Blue Mediterranean vs. Red Mediterranean | Among groups | 1 | 516.094 | 6.45105 | 59.59842 | FSC: 0.63192 | *** |
| Among populations within groups | 20 | 414.295 | 2.76347 | 25.53052 | FST: 0.85129 | *** | |
| Within populations | 121 | 209.258 | 1.60967 | 14.87107 | FCT: 0.59598 | *** | |
| Blue Non-Mediterranean vs. Red Non-Mediterranean | Among groups | 1 | 116.934 | 4.64348 | 52.37656 | FSC: 0.74116 | *** |
| Among populations within groups | 7 | 122.786 | 3.12923 | 35.29645 | FST: 0.87673 | *** | |
| Within populations | 51 | 45.900 | 1.09286 | 12.32698 | FCT: 0.52377 | *** |