4.5 Article

GENE FLOW FROM FOREIGN PROVENANCES INTO LOCAL PLANT POPULATIONS: FITNESS CONSEQUENCES AND IMPLICATIONS FOR BIODIVERSITY RESTORATION

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BOTANY
卷 97, 期 1, 页码 94-100

出版社

BOTANICAL SOC AMER INC
DOI: 10.3732/ajb.0900103

关键词

intraspecific hybridization; large-scale transplantation; local adaptation; outbreeding depression; Plantaginaceae; Plantago lanceolata

资金

  1. Swiss Federal Office for Education and Science [01.0086]
  2. European Community [EVK2-CT-2001-00123]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Long-distance transplantation of seed material as done in restoration programs has raised concerns about the risks associated with the introduction of maladapted genotypes that may hybridize with neighboring native conspecifics and decrease local population fitness (outbreeding depression). We studied the consequences of gene flow from foreign provenances into local populations in the common grassland species Plantago lanceolata (Plantaginaceae). Three generations of intraspecific hybrids (F(1), F(2), and backcross to the local plants) were produced by controlled crossings between local plants and plants from geographically or environmentally distant populations. Their performance was compared to that of within-population crosses in a field experiment. Early growth in some interpopulation hybrids was significantly reduced, and this decrease in performance was higher in progeny of crosses with the local population from a different habitat than with geographically distant populations. At the end of the growing season, most fitness-related traits of the interpopulation hybrids were close to the average of their parents. Crosses with low-performing foreign parents therefore resulted in reduced fitness of the hybrids compared to the local plants and dilution of local adaptation. We conclude that the introduction of maladapted populations from distant or ecologically distinct environments might, at least temporarily, decrease the fitness of neighboring local plants.

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

4.5
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