4.5 Article

RELATING HYBRID ADVANTAGE AND GENOME REPLACEMENT IN UNISEXUAL SALAMANDERS

期刊

EVOLUTION
卷 66, 期 5, 页码 1387-1397

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2011.01523.x

关键词

Ambystoma; gynogenesis; hybridogenesis; introgression; selection; vertebrate

资金

  1. National Science Foundation
  2. Switzer Environmental Fellowship Program
  3. Direct For Biological Sciences
  4. Div Of Biological Infrastructure [1129139] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  5. Div Of Biological Infrastructure
  6. Direct For Biological Sciences [1129046] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Unisexual vertebrates are model systems for understanding the evolution of sex. Many predominantly clonal lineages allow occasional genetic recombination, which may be sufficient to avoid the accumulation of deleterious mutations and parasites. Introgression of paternal DNA into an all-female lineage represents a one-way flow of genetic material. Over many generations, this could result in complete replacement of the unisexual genomes by those of the donor species. The process of genome replacement may be counteracted by contemporary dispersal or by positive selection on hybrid nuclear genomes in ecotones. I present a conceptual model that relates nuclear genome replacement, positive selection on hybrids and biogeography in unisexual systems. I execute an individual-based simulation of the fate of hybrid genotypes in contact with a single host species. I parameterize these models for unisexual salamanders in the Ambystoma genus, for which the frequency of genome replacement has been a source of ongoing debate. I find that, if genome replacement occurs at a rate greater than 1/10,000 in Ambystoma, then there must be compensating positive selection in order to maintain observed levels of hybrid nuclei. Future researchers studying unisexual systems may use this framework as a guide to evaluating the hybrid superiority hypothesis.

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