12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Hybridisation between two cyprinid fishes in a novel habitat: genetics, morphology and life-history traits

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The potential role hybridisation in adaptive radiation and the evolution of new lineages has received much recent attention. Hybridisation between roach ( Rutilus rutilus L.) and bream ( Abramis brama L.) is well documented throughout Europe, however hybrids in Ireland occur at an unprecedented frequency, often exceeding that of both parental species. Utilising an integrated approach, which incorporates geometric morphometrics, life history and molecular genetic analyses we identify the levels and processes of hybridisation present, while also determining the direction of hybridisation, through the analysis of mitochondrial DNA.

          Results

          The presence of F2 hybrids was found to be unlikely from the studied populations, although significant levels of backcrossing, involving both parental taxa was observed in some lakes. Hybridisation represents a viable conduit for introgression of genes between roach and bream. The vast majority of hybrids in all populations studied exhibited bream mitochondrial DNA, indicating that bream are maternal in the majority of crosses.

          Conclusions

          The success of roach × bream hybrids in Ireland is not due to a successful self reproducing lineage. The potential causes of widespread hybridisation between both species, along with the considerations regarding the role of hybridisation in evolution and conservation, are also discussed.

          Related collections

          Most cited references50

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Comparative methods for the analysis of continuous variables: geometric interpretations.

          This study is concerned with statistical methods used for the analysis of comparative data (in which observations are not expected to be independent because they are sampled across phylogenetically related species). The phylogenetically independent contrasts (PIC), phylogenetic generalized least-squares (PGLS), and phylogenetic autocorrelation (PA) methods are compared. Although the independent contrasts are not orthogonal, they are independent if the data conform to the Brownian motion model of evolution on which they are based. It is shown that uncentered correlations and regressions through the origin using the PIC method are identical to those obtained using PGLS with an intercept included in the model. The PIC method is a special case of PGLS. Corrected standard errors are given for estimates of the ancestral states based on the PGLS approach. The treatment of trees with hard polytomies is discussed and is shown to be an algorithmic rather than a statistical problem. Some of the relationships among the methods are shown graphically using the multivariate space in which variables are represented as vectors with respect to OTUs used as coordinate axes. The maximum-likelihood estimate of the autoregressive parameter, p, has not been computed correctly in previous studies (an appendix with MATLAB code provides a corrected algorithm). The importance of the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of the connection matrix, W, for the distribution of p is discussed. The PA method is shown to have several problems that limit its usefulness in comparative studies. Although the PA method is a generalized least-squares procedure, it cannot be made equivalent to the PGLS method using a phylogenetic model.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Are natural hybrids fit or unfit relative to their parents?

            The process of natural hybridization may produce genotypes that establish new evolutionary lineages. However, many authors have concluded that natural hybridization is of little evolutionary importance because hybrids, in general, are unfit relative to their progenitors. Deciding between these alternative conclusions requires that fitness be measured for hybrid classes and parental species. Recent analyses have found that hybrids are not uniformly unfit, but rather are genotypic classes that possess lower, equivalent or higher levels of fitness relative to their parental taxa. Copyright © 1995. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Facultative mate choice drives adaptive hybridization.

              Mating with another species (hybridization) is often maladaptive. Consequently, females typically avoid heterospecifics as mates. Contrary to these expectations, female spadefoot toads were more likely to choose heterospecific males when exposed to environmental conditions that favor hybridization. Indeed, those females with phenotypic characteristics for which hybridization is most favorable were most likely to switch from choosing conspecifics to heterospecifics. Moreover, environmentally dependent mate choice has evolved only in populations and species that risk engaging in, and can potentially benefit from, hybridization. Thus, when the benefits of mate choice vary, females may radically alter their mate selection in response to their own phenotype and their environment, even to the point of choosing males of other species.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Evol Biol
                BMC Evolutionary Biology
                BioMed Central
                1471-2148
                2010
                8 June 2010
                : 10
                : 169
                Affiliations
                [1 ]UCD School of Biology and Environmental Science, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
                [2 ]Laboratory of Experimental Ecology and Aquaculture, Department of Biology, University of Rome 'Tor Vergata', Via della Ricerca Scientifica s.n.c, 00133 Rome, Italy
                [3 ]Central Fisheries Board, Swords Business Campus, Swords, Co. Dublin, Ireland
                Article
                1471-2148-10-169
                10.1186/1471-2148-10-169
                2896959
                20529364
                2ef49d49-c4bb-468a-9825-8e2c8f1b8124
                Copyright ©2010 Hayden et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 24 July 2009
                : 8 June 2010
                Categories
                Research article

                Evolutionary Biology
                Evolutionary Biology

                Comments

                Comment on this article