4.6 Article

Mixing of porpoise ecotypes in southwestern UK waters revealed by genetic profiling

期刊

ROYAL SOCIETY OPEN SCIENCE
卷 4, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rsos.160992

关键词

ecotype specialization; molecular ecology; continuous population; dispersal; climate change; admixture

资金

  1. Department for Environment
  2. Food and Rural Affairs (Defra)
  3. Devolved Governments of Scotland and Wales
  4. Natural Environment Research Council (NERC)
  5. University of Cambridge [NER/S/A/2001/06405]
  6. AGAPE program (University of Leeds, UK) [MEST-CT-2004-504318]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Contact zones between ecotypes are windows for understanding how species may react to climate changes. Here, we analysed the fine-scale genetic and morphological variation in harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) around the UK by genotyping 591 stranded animals at nine microsatellite loci. The data were integrated with a prior study to map at high resolution the contact zone between two previously identified ecotypes meeting in the northern Bay of Biscay. Clustering and spatial analyses revealed that UK porpoises are derived from two genetic pools with porpoises from the southwestern UK being genetically differentiated, and having larger body sizes compared to those of other UK areas. Southwestern UK porpoises showed admixed ancestry between southern and northern ecotypes with a contact zone extending from the northern Bay of Biscay to the Celtic Sea and Channel. Around the UK, ancestry blends from one genetic group to the other along a southwest-northeast axis, correlating with body size variation, consistent with previously reported morphological differences between the two ecotypes. We also detected isolation by distance among juveniles but not in adults, suggesting that stranded juveniles display reduced intergenerational dispersal. The fine-scale structure of this admixture zone raises the question of how it will respond to future climate change and provides a reference point for further study.

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

4.6
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