Cargando…
A review on Q (ST) – F (ST) comparisons of seed plants: Insights for conservation
Increased access to genome‐wide data provides new opportunities for plant conservation. However, information on neutral genetic diversity in a small number of marker loci can still be valuable because genomic data are not available to most rare plant species. In the hope of bridging the gap between...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10049885/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37006890 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.9926 |
_version_ | 1785014555976400896 |
---|---|
author | Chung, Mi Yoon Merilä, Juha Kim, Yuseob Mao, Kangshan López‐Pujol, Jordi Chung, Myong Gi |
author_facet | Chung, Mi Yoon Merilä, Juha Kim, Yuseob Mao, Kangshan López‐Pujol, Jordi Chung, Myong Gi |
author_sort | Chung, Mi Yoon |
collection | PubMed |
description | Increased access to genome‐wide data provides new opportunities for plant conservation. However, information on neutral genetic diversity in a small number of marker loci can still be valuable because genomic data are not available to most rare plant species. In the hope of bridging the gap between conservation science and practice, we outline how conservation practitioners can more efficiently employ population genetic information in plant conservation. We first review the current knowledge about neutral genetic variation (NGV) and adaptive genetic variation (AGV) in seed plants, regarding both within‐population and among‐population components. We then introduce the estimates of among‐population genetic differentiation in quantitative traits (Q (ST)) and neutral markers (F (ST)) to plant biology and summarize conservation applications derived from Q (ST)–F (ST) comparisons, particularly on how to capture most AGV and NGV on both in‐situ and ex‐situ programs. Based on a review of published studies, we found that, on average, two and four populations would be needed for woody perennials (n = 18) to capture 99% of NGV and AGV, respectively, whereas four populations would be needed in case of herbaceous perennials (n = 14). On average, Q (ST) is about 3.6, 1.5, and 1.1 times greater than F (ST) in woody plants, annuals, and herbaceous perennials, respectively. Hence, conservation and management policies or suggestions based solely on inference on F (ST) could be misleading, particularly in woody species. To maximize the preservation of the maximum levels of both AGV and NGV, we suggest using maximum Q (ST) rather than average Q (ST). We recommend conservation managers and practitioners consider this when formulating further conservation and restoration plans for plant species, particularly woody species. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10049885 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-100498852023-03-30 A review on Q (ST) – F (ST) comparisons of seed plants: Insights for conservation Chung, Mi Yoon Merilä, Juha Kim, Yuseob Mao, Kangshan López‐Pujol, Jordi Chung, Myong Gi Ecol Evol Review Articles Increased access to genome‐wide data provides new opportunities for plant conservation. However, information on neutral genetic diversity in a small number of marker loci can still be valuable because genomic data are not available to most rare plant species. In the hope of bridging the gap between conservation science and practice, we outline how conservation practitioners can more efficiently employ population genetic information in plant conservation. We first review the current knowledge about neutral genetic variation (NGV) and adaptive genetic variation (AGV) in seed plants, regarding both within‐population and among‐population components. We then introduce the estimates of among‐population genetic differentiation in quantitative traits (Q (ST)) and neutral markers (F (ST)) to plant biology and summarize conservation applications derived from Q (ST)–F (ST) comparisons, particularly on how to capture most AGV and NGV on both in‐situ and ex‐situ programs. Based on a review of published studies, we found that, on average, two and four populations would be needed for woody perennials (n = 18) to capture 99% of NGV and AGV, respectively, whereas four populations would be needed in case of herbaceous perennials (n = 14). On average, Q (ST) is about 3.6, 1.5, and 1.1 times greater than F (ST) in woody plants, annuals, and herbaceous perennials, respectively. Hence, conservation and management policies or suggestions based solely on inference on F (ST) could be misleading, particularly in woody species. To maximize the preservation of the maximum levels of both AGV and NGV, we suggest using maximum Q (ST) rather than average Q (ST). We recommend conservation managers and practitioners consider this when formulating further conservation and restoration plans for plant species, particularly woody species. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023-03-28 /pmc/articles/PMC10049885/ /pubmed/37006890 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.9926 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Review Articles Chung, Mi Yoon Merilä, Juha Kim, Yuseob Mao, Kangshan López‐Pujol, Jordi Chung, Myong Gi A review on Q (ST) – F (ST) comparisons of seed plants: Insights for conservation |
title | A review on
Q
(ST)
–
F
(ST)
comparisons of seed plants: Insights for conservation |
title_full | A review on
Q
(ST)
–
F
(ST)
comparisons of seed plants: Insights for conservation |
title_fullStr | A review on
Q
(ST)
–
F
(ST)
comparisons of seed plants: Insights for conservation |
title_full_unstemmed | A review on
Q
(ST)
–
F
(ST)
comparisons of seed plants: Insights for conservation |
title_short | A review on
Q
(ST)
–
F
(ST)
comparisons of seed plants: Insights for conservation |
title_sort | review on
q
(st)
–
f
(st)
comparisons of seed plants: insights for conservation |
topic | Review Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10049885/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37006890 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.9926 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chungmiyoon areviewonqstfstcomparisonsofseedplantsinsightsforconservation AT merilajuha areviewonqstfstcomparisonsofseedplantsinsightsforconservation AT kimyuseob areviewonqstfstcomparisonsofseedplantsinsightsforconservation AT maokangshan areviewonqstfstcomparisonsofseedplantsinsightsforconservation AT lopezpujoljordi areviewonqstfstcomparisonsofseedplantsinsightsforconservation AT chungmyonggi areviewonqstfstcomparisonsofseedplantsinsightsforconservation AT chungmiyoon reviewonqstfstcomparisonsofseedplantsinsightsforconservation AT merilajuha reviewonqstfstcomparisonsofseedplantsinsightsforconservation AT kimyuseob reviewonqstfstcomparisonsofseedplantsinsightsforconservation AT maokangshan reviewonqstfstcomparisonsofseedplantsinsightsforconservation AT lopezpujoljordi reviewonqstfstcomparisonsofseedplantsinsightsforconservation AT chungmyonggi reviewonqstfstcomparisonsofseedplantsinsightsforconservation |