4.0 Article

Effective population sizes of eastern oyster Crassostrea virginica (Gmelin) populations in Delaware Bay, USA

期刊

JOURNAL OF MARINE RESEARCH
卷 70, 期 2-3, 页码 357-379

出版社

SEARS FOUNDATION MARINE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1357/002224012802851977

关键词

-

资金

  1. NSF Ecology of Infectious Diseases (EID) Grant [OCE06-22672]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Effective population size (N-e) is an important concept in population genetics as it dictates the rate of genetic change caused by drift. N-e estimates for many marine populations are small relative to the census population size. Small N-e in a large population may indicate high reproductive variance or sweepstakes reproductive success (SRS). The eastern oyster (Crassostrea virginica) may be prone to SRS due to its high fecundity and high larval mortality. To examine if SRS occurs in the eastern oyster, we studied N-e and genetic variation of oyster populations in Delaware Bay. Adult and spat oysters were collected from five locations in different years and genotyped with seven microsatellite markers. Slight genetic differences were revealed by Fst statistics between the adult populations and spat recruits, while the adult populations are spatially homogeneous and temporally stable. Comparisons of genetic diversity and relatedness among adult and spat samples failed to provide convincing evidence for strong SRS. N-e estimates obtained with five different methods were variable, small and often without upper confidence limits. For single sample collections, N-e estimates for spat (140-440) were consistently smaller than that for adults (589-2,779). Analysis of pooled adult samples across all sites suggests that N-e for the whole bay may be very large, as indicated by the large point estimates and the lack of upper confidence limits. These results suggest that N-e may be small for a given spat fall, but the entire adult population may have large N-e and is temporally stable as it is the accumulation of many spat falls per year over many years.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据