10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Evaluating genomic signatures of “the large X-effect” during complex speciation

      1
      Molecular Ecology
      Wiley

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      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

          The ubiquity of the "two rules of speciation"-Haldane's rule and the large X-effect-implies a general, special role for sex chromosomes in the evolution of intrinsic postzygotic reproductive isolation. The recent proliferation of genome-scale analyses has revealed two further general observations: (a) complex speciation involving some form of gene flow is not uncommon, and (b) sex chromosomes in male- and in female-heterogametic taxa tend to show elevated differentiation relative to autosomes. Together, these observations are consistent with speciation histories in which population genetic differentiation at autosomal loci is reduced by gene flow while natural selection against hybrid incompatibilities renders sex chromosomes relatively refractory to gene flow. Here, I summarize multilocus population genetic and population genomic evidence for greater differentiation on the X (or Z) vs. the autosomes and consider the possible causes. I review common population genetic circumstances involving no selection and/or no interspecific gene flow that are nevertheless expected to elevate differentiation on sex chromosomes relative to autosomes. I then review theory for why large X-effects exist for hybrid incompatibilities and, more generally, for loci mediating local adaptation. The observed levels of sex chromosome vs. autosomal differentiation, in many cases, appear consistent with simple explanations requiring neither large X-effects nor gene flow. Discerning signatures of large X-effects during complex speciation will therefore require analyses that go beyond chromosome-scale summaries of population genetic differentiation, explicitly test for differential introgression, and/or integrate experimental genetic data.

          Related collections

          Most cited references55

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

          Testing for ancient admixture between closely related populations.

          One enduring question in evolutionary biology is the extent of archaic admixture in the genomes of present-day populations. In this paper, we present a test for ancient admixture that exploits the asymmetry in the frequencies of the two nonconcordant gene trees in a three-population tree. This test was first applied to detect interbreeding between Neandertals and modern humans. We derive the analytic expectation of a test statistic, called the D statistic, which is sensitive to asymmetry under alternative demographic scenarios. We show that the D statistic is insensitive to some demographic assumptions such as ancestral population sizes and requires only the assumption that the ancestral populations were randomly mating. An important aspect of D statistics is that they can be used to detect archaic admixture even when no archaic sample is available. We explore the effect of sequencing error on the false-positive rate of the test for admixture, and we show how to estimate the proportion of archaic ancestry in the genomes of present-day populations. We also investigate a model of subdivision in ancestral populations that can result in D statistics that indicate recent admixture.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Chromosome inversions, local adaptation and speciation.

            We study the evolution of inversions that capture locally adapted alleles when two populations are exchanging migrants or hybridizing. By suppressing recombination between the loci, a new inversion can spread. Neither drift nor coadaptation between the alleles (epistasis) is needed, so this local adaptation mechanism may apply to a broader range of genetic and demographic situations than alternative hypotheses that have been widely discussed. The mechanism can explain many features observed in inversion systems. It will drive an inversion to high frequency if there is no countervailing force, which could explain fixed differences observed between populations and species. An inversion can be stabilized at an intermediate frequency if it also happens to capture one or more deleterious recessive mutations, which could explain polymorphisms that are common in some species. This polymorphism can cycle in frequency with the changing selective advantage of the locally favored alleles. The mechanism can establish underdominant inversions that decrease heterokaryotype fitness by several percent if the cause of fitness loss is structural, while if the cause is genic there is no limit to the strength of underdominance that can result. The mechanism is expected to cause loci responsible for adaptive species-specific differences to map to inversions, as seen in recent QTL studies. We discuss data that support the hypothesis, review other mechanisms for inversion evolution, and suggest possible tests.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Divergent selection and heterogeneous genomic divergence.

              Levels of genetic differentiation between populations can be highly variable across the genome, with divergent selection contributing to such heterogeneous genomic divergence. For example, loci under divergent selection and those tightly physically linked to them may exhibit stronger differentiation than neutral regions with weak or no linkage to such loci. Divergent selection can also increase genome-wide neutral differentiation by reducing gene flow (e.g. by causing ecological speciation), thus promoting divergence via the stochastic effects of genetic drift. These consequences of divergent selection are being reported in recently accumulating studies that identify: (i) 'outlier loci' with higher levels of divergence than expected under neutrality, and (ii) a positive association between the degree of adaptive phenotypic divergence and levels of molecular genetic differentiation across population pairs ['isolation by adaptation' (IBA)]. The latter pattern arises because as adaptive divergence increases, gene flow is reduced (thereby promoting drift) and genetic hitchhiking increased. Here, we review and integrate these previously disconnected concepts and literatures. We find that studies generally report 5-10% of loci to be outliers. These selected regions were often dispersed across the genome, commonly exhibited replicated divergence across different population pairs, and could sometimes be associated with specific ecological variables. IBA was not infrequently observed, even at neutral loci putatively unlinked to those under divergent selection. Overall, we conclude that divergent selection makes diverse contributions to heterogeneous genomic divergence. Nonetheless, the number, size, and distribution of genomic regions affected by selection varied substantially among studies, leading us to discuss the potential role of divergent selection in the growth of regions of differentiation (i.e. genomic islands of divergence), a topic in need of future investigation.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Molecular Ecology
                Mol Ecol
                Wiley
                09621083
                October 2018
                October 2018
                July 16 2018
                : 27
                : 19
                : 3822-3830
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Biology; University of Rochester; Rochester New York
                Article
                10.1111/mec.14777
                6705125
                29940087
                507e0034-da3e-41ba-aeae-cca43e340619
                © 2018

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article