Cargando…

Phylogenomic analysis does not support a classic but controversial hypothesis of progenitor‐derivative origins for the serpentine endemic Clarkia franciscana

Budding speciation involves isolation of marginal populations at the periphery of a species range and is thought to be a prominent mode of speciation in organisms with low dispersal and/or strong local adaptation among populations. Budding speciation is typically evidenced by abutting, asymmetric ra...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sianta, Shelley A., Kay, Kathleen M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9322428/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35403214
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/evo.14484
_version_ 1784756301424754688
author Sianta, Shelley A.
Kay, Kathleen M.
author_facet Sianta, Shelley A.
Kay, Kathleen M.
author_sort Sianta, Shelley A.
collection PubMed
description Budding speciation involves isolation of marginal populations at the periphery of a species range and is thought to be a prominent mode of speciation in organisms with low dispersal and/or strong local adaptation among populations. Budding speciation is typically evidenced by abutting, asymmetric ranges of ecologically divergent sister species and low genetic diversity in putative budded species. Yet these indirect patterns may be unreliable, instead caused by postspeciation processes such as range or demographic shifts. Nested phylogenetic relationships provide the most conclusive evidence of budding speciation. A putative case of budding speciation in the serpentine endemic Clarkia franciscana and two closely related widespread congeners was studied by Harlan Lewis, Peter Raven, Leslie Gottlieb, and others over a 20‐year period, yet the origin of C. franciscana remains controversial. Here, we reinvestigate this system with phylogenomic analyses to determine whether C. franciscana is a recently derived budded species, phylogenetically nested within one of the other two putative progenitor species. In contrast to the hypothesized pattern of relatedness among the three Clarkia species, we find no evidence for recent budding speciation. Instead, the data suggest the three species diverged simultaneously. We urge caution in using contemporary range patterns to infer geographic modes of speciation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9322428
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93224282022-07-30 Phylogenomic analysis does not support a classic but controversial hypothesis of progenitor‐derivative origins for the serpentine endemic Clarkia franciscana Sianta, Shelley A. Kay, Kathleen M. Evolution Original Articles Budding speciation involves isolation of marginal populations at the periphery of a species range and is thought to be a prominent mode of speciation in organisms with low dispersal and/or strong local adaptation among populations. Budding speciation is typically evidenced by abutting, asymmetric ranges of ecologically divergent sister species and low genetic diversity in putative budded species. Yet these indirect patterns may be unreliable, instead caused by postspeciation processes such as range or demographic shifts. Nested phylogenetic relationships provide the most conclusive evidence of budding speciation. A putative case of budding speciation in the serpentine endemic Clarkia franciscana and two closely related widespread congeners was studied by Harlan Lewis, Peter Raven, Leslie Gottlieb, and others over a 20‐year period, yet the origin of C. franciscana remains controversial. Here, we reinvestigate this system with phylogenomic analyses to determine whether C. franciscana is a recently derived budded species, phylogenetically nested within one of the other two putative progenitor species. In contrast to the hypothesized pattern of relatedness among the three Clarkia species, we find no evidence for recent budding speciation. Instead, the data suggest the three species diverged simultaneously. We urge caution in using contemporary range patterns to infer geographic modes of speciation. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-04-20 2022-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9322428/ /pubmed/35403214 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/evo.14484 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Evolution published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The Society for the Study of Evolution. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Sianta, Shelley A.
Kay, Kathleen M.
Phylogenomic analysis does not support a classic but controversial hypothesis of progenitor‐derivative origins for the serpentine endemic Clarkia franciscana
title Phylogenomic analysis does not support a classic but controversial hypothesis of progenitor‐derivative origins for the serpentine endemic Clarkia franciscana
title_full Phylogenomic analysis does not support a classic but controversial hypothesis of progenitor‐derivative origins for the serpentine endemic Clarkia franciscana
title_fullStr Phylogenomic analysis does not support a classic but controversial hypothesis of progenitor‐derivative origins for the serpentine endemic Clarkia franciscana
title_full_unstemmed Phylogenomic analysis does not support a classic but controversial hypothesis of progenitor‐derivative origins for the serpentine endemic Clarkia franciscana
title_short Phylogenomic analysis does not support a classic but controversial hypothesis of progenitor‐derivative origins for the serpentine endemic Clarkia franciscana
title_sort phylogenomic analysis does not support a classic but controversial hypothesis of progenitor‐derivative origins for the serpentine endemic clarkia franciscana
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9322428/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35403214
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/evo.14484
work_keys_str_mv AT siantashelleya phylogenomicanalysisdoesnotsupportaclassicbutcontroversialhypothesisofprogenitorderivativeoriginsfortheserpentineendemicclarkiafranciscana
AT kaykathleenm phylogenomicanalysisdoesnotsupportaclassicbutcontroversialhypothesisofprogenitorderivativeoriginsfortheserpentineendemicclarkiafranciscana