4.7 Article

Genetic population structure, fitness variation and the importance of population history in remnant populations of the endangered plant Silene chlorantha (Willd.) Ehrh. (Caryophyllaceae)

期刊

PLANT BIOLOGY
卷 13, 期 4, 页码 667-677

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1438-8677.2010.00418.x

关键词

AFLP; fitness; population genetic structure; population history

资金

  1. Deutsche Bundesstiftung Umwelt (DBU)
  2. Heidehofstiftung

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Habitat fragmentation can lead to a decline of genetic diversity, a potential risk for the survival of natural populations. Fragmented populations can become highly differentiated due to reduced gene flow and genetic drift. A decline in number of individuals can result in lower reproductive fitness due to inbreeding effects. We investigated genetic variation within and between 11 populations of the rare and endangered plant Silene chlorantha in northeastern Germany to support conservation strategies. Genetic diversity was evaluated using AFLP techniques and the results were correlated to fitness traits. Fitness evaluation in nature and in a common garden approach was conducted. Our analysis revealed population differentiation was high and within population genetic diversity was intermediate. A clear population structure was supported by a Bayesian approach, AMOVA and neighbour-joining analysis. No correlation between genetic and geographic distance was found. Our results indicate that patterns of population differentiation were mainly caused by temporal and/or spatial isolation and genetic drift. The fitness evaluation revealed that pollinator limitation and habitat quality seem, at present, to be more important to reproductive fitness than genetic diversity by itself. Populations of S. chlorantha with low genetic diversity have the potential to increase in individual number if habitat conditions improve. This was detected in a single large population in the investigation area, which was formerly affected by bottleneck effects.

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

4.7
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