硬边、软边和物种范围的演变:坎伯兰高原蝾螈的基因组分析

IF 3.4 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY
Emily F. Watts, Brian P. Waldron, Shawn R. Kuchta
{"title":"硬边、软边和物种范围的演变:坎伯兰高原蝾螈的基因组分析","authors":"Emily F. Watts,&nbsp;Brian P. Waldron,&nbsp;Shawn R. Kuchta","doi":"10.1111/jbi.14962","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>Gene flow from central to edge populations is thought to limit population growth at range edges by constraining local adaptation. In this study, we explore the thesis that range edges can differ in their dynamics and be either ‘hard’ (e.g. a river) or ‘soft’ (e.g. ecological gradients). We hypothesize that soft edge populations will have smaller effective population sizes than central populations and that gene flow will be greater from the centre to the edge than vice versa. Conversely, we hypothesize that hard edge populations should have similar effective population sizes to central populations and that gene flow will be equal between the two.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Location</h3>\n \n <p>Kentucky, West Virginia, and Virginia, USA.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Taxon</h3>\n \n <p>\n <i>Plethodon kentucki</i> (Caudata: Plethodontidae).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We evaluated landscape suitability using an ecological niche model, then we compared gene flow and effective population sizes between edge and central populations and quantified gene flow between populations. Finally, we characterized landscape genetic variation, testing for isolation by distance and isolation by environment.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>We found continuously decreasing habitat quality along soft edges, with hard edges more variable. Additionally, we found that soft edges had lower effective population sizes than central populations and that gene flow was greater from the centre of the range to the soft edges than the reverse. In hard edges, by contrast, we found effective population sizes in edge populations were similar to central populations, with relatively equal gene flow in both directions.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Main Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Understanding why species have range limits is central to investigations of the structure of biodiversity, yet the evolutionary dynamics of range edges remain poorly understood. We show that within a single species with a small range, the evolutionary dynamics operating at range boundaries may depend on the nature of the boundary.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15299,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Biogeography","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jbi.14962","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hard edges, soft edges, and species range evolution: A genomic analysis of the Cumberland Plateau salamander\",\"authors\":\"Emily F. Watts,&nbsp;Brian P. Waldron,&nbsp;Shawn R. Kuchta\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jbi.14962\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Aim</h3>\\n \\n <p>Gene flow from central to edge populations is thought to limit population growth at range edges by constraining local adaptation. In this study, we explore the thesis that range edges can differ in their dynamics and be either ‘hard’ (e.g. a river) or ‘soft’ (e.g. ecological gradients). We hypothesize that soft edge populations will have smaller effective population sizes than central populations and that gene flow will be greater from the centre to the edge than vice versa. Conversely, we hypothesize that hard edge populations should have similar effective population sizes to central populations and that gene flow will be equal between the two.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Location</h3>\\n \\n <p>Kentucky, West Virginia, and Virginia, USA.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Taxon</h3>\\n \\n <p>\\n <i>Plethodon kentucki</i> (Caudata: Plethodontidae).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We evaluated landscape suitability using an ecological niche model, then we compared gene flow and effective population sizes between edge and central populations and quantified gene flow between populations. Finally, we characterized landscape genetic variation, testing for isolation by distance and isolation by environment.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>We found continuously decreasing habitat quality along soft edges, with hard edges more variable. Additionally, we found that soft edges had lower effective population sizes than central populations and that gene flow was greater from the centre of the range to the soft edges than the reverse. In hard edges, by contrast, we found effective population sizes in edge populations were similar to central populations, with relatively equal gene flow in both directions.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Main Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>Understanding why species have range limits is central to investigations of the structure of biodiversity, yet the evolutionary dynamics of range edges remain poorly understood. We show that within a single species with a small range, the evolutionary dynamics operating at range boundaries may depend on the nature of the boundary.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15299,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Biogeography\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jbi.14962\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Biogeography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jbi.14962\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Biogeography","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jbi.14962","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

基因从中心种群流向边缘种群被认为是通过限制当地适应性来限制分布区边缘的种群增长。在这项研究中,我们探讨了这样一个论点:种群分布区的边缘在动态上可能有所不同,可能是 "硬 "的(如河流),也可能是 "软 "的(如生态梯度)。我们假设,软边缘种群的有效种群规模将小于中心种群,基因从中心流向边缘的程度将大于从边缘流向中心的程度。美国肯塔基州、西弗吉尼亚州和弗吉尼亚州,Plethodon kentucki (Caudata: Plethodontidae)。我们利用生态位模型评估了景观适宜性,然后比较了边缘种群和中心种群之间的基因流和有效种群大小,并量化了种群之间的基因流。最后,我们描述了景观遗传变异的特征,测试了距离隔离和环境隔离。我们发现软边缘的栖息地质量持续下降,而硬边缘的变化更大。此外,我们还发现,软边缘的有效种群规模低于中心种群,而且从分布区中心到软边缘的基因流动大于反向流动。相比之下,在硬边缘,我们发现边缘种群的有效种群大小与中心种群相似,两个方向的基因流动相对相等。了解物种为什么会有分布范围限制是研究生物多样性结构的核心,但对分布范围边缘的进化动态仍然知之甚少。我们的研究表明,在一个小范围的单一物种中,范围边界的进化动态可能取决于边界的性质。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Hard edges, soft edges, and species range evolution: A genomic analysis of the Cumberland Plateau salamander

Hard edges, soft edges, and species range evolution: A genomic analysis of the Cumberland Plateau salamander

Aim

Gene flow from central to edge populations is thought to limit population growth at range edges by constraining local adaptation. In this study, we explore the thesis that range edges can differ in their dynamics and be either ‘hard’ (e.g. a river) or ‘soft’ (e.g. ecological gradients). We hypothesize that soft edge populations will have smaller effective population sizes than central populations and that gene flow will be greater from the centre to the edge than vice versa. Conversely, we hypothesize that hard edge populations should have similar effective population sizes to central populations and that gene flow will be equal between the two.

Location

Kentucky, West Virginia, and Virginia, USA.

Taxon

Plethodon kentucki (Caudata: Plethodontidae).

Methods

We evaluated landscape suitability using an ecological niche model, then we compared gene flow and effective population sizes between edge and central populations and quantified gene flow between populations. Finally, we characterized landscape genetic variation, testing for isolation by distance and isolation by environment.

Results

We found continuously decreasing habitat quality along soft edges, with hard edges more variable. Additionally, we found that soft edges had lower effective population sizes than central populations and that gene flow was greater from the centre of the range to the soft edges than the reverse. In hard edges, by contrast, we found effective population sizes in edge populations were similar to central populations, with relatively equal gene flow in both directions.

Main Conclusions

Understanding why species have range limits is central to investigations of the structure of biodiversity, yet the evolutionary dynamics of range edges remain poorly understood. We show that within a single species with a small range, the evolutionary dynamics operating at range boundaries may depend on the nature of the boundary.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Biogeography
Journal of Biogeography 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
5.10%
发文量
203
审稿时长
2.2 months
期刊介绍: Papers dealing with all aspects of spatial, ecological and historical biogeography are considered for publication in Journal of Biogeography. The mission of the journal is to contribute to the growth and societal relevance of the discipline of biogeography through its role in the dissemination of biogeographical research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信