A cytonuclear incompatibility causes anther sterility in Mimulus hybrids

Evolution

Volumn 60, Issue 7, 2006, Pages 1372-1381

  Fishman, Lila ^a   Willis, John H ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA   (United States)

^b DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

CMS; Cytoplasmic male sterility; Hybrid incompatibility; Mimulus; Postzygotic reproductive isolation; QTL mapping

Indexed keywords

CYTOPLASMIC INCOMPATIBILITY; FLOWER; GENETIC ANALYSIS; HERMAPHRODITE; HYBRID; REPRODUCTIVE ISOLATION; STERILITY;

MIMULUS GUTTATUS; MIMULUS NASUTUS;

ARTICLE; CELL NUCLEUS; CHROMOSOME MAP; CROSS BREEDING; EVOLUTION; FERTILITY; FLOWER; GENETICS; HYBRIDIZATION; MIMULUS; PHENOTYPE; PHYSIOLOGY; PLANT CHROMOSOME; QUANTITATIVE TRAIT LOCUS; SPECIES DIFFERENCE;

CELL NUCLEUS; CHROMOSOME MAPPING; CHROMOSOMES, PLANT; CROSSES, GENETIC; EVOLUTION; FERTILITY; FLOWERS; HYBRIDIZATION, GENETIC; MIMULUS; PHENOTYPE; QUANTITATIVE TRAIT LOCI; SPECIES SPECIFICITY;

EID: 33748199639     PISSN: 00143820     EISSN: 15585646     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1554/05-708.1     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Bailey, M. F., L. F. Delph, and C. M. Lively. 2003. Modeling gynodioecy: novel scenarios for maintaining polymorphism. Am. Nat. 161:762-766.
2. Barr, C. M. 2004. Hybridization and regional sex ratios in Nemophila menziesii. J. Evol. Biol. 17:786-794.
3. Bateson, W. 1909. Heredity and variation in modern lights. Pp. 85-101 in A. C. Steward, ed. Darwin and modern science. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, U.K.
4. Budar, F., P. Touzet, and R. De Paepe. 2003. The nucleo-mitochondrial conflict in cytoplasmic male sterilities revisited. Genetica 117:3-16.
5. Charlesworth, D. 1981. A further study of the problem of the maintenance of females in gynodioecious species. Heredity 46:27-39.
6. _. 2002. What maintains male sterility factors in plant populations? Heredity 89:408-409.
7. Charlesworth, D., and B. Charlesworth. 1978. A model for the evolution of dioecy and gynodioecy. Am. Nat. 112:975-997.
8. Charlesworth, D., and V. Laporte. 1998. The male sterility polymorphism of Silene vulgaris: analysis of genetic data from two populations and comparison with Thymus vulgaris. Genetics 150:1267-1282.
9. Darwin, C. R. 1877. The different forms of flowers on plants of the same species. Murray, London.
10. Diaz, A., and M. R. Macnair. 1999. Pollen tube competition as a mechanism of prezygotic reproductive isolation between Mimulus nasutus and its presumed progenitor M. guttatus. New Phytol. 144:471-478.
11. Dobzhansky, T. 1937. Genetics and the origin of species. Columbia Univ. Press, New York.
12. Dudle, D. A., P. Mutikainen, and L. F. Delph. 2001. Genetics of sex determination in the gynodioecious species Lobelia siphilitica: evidence from two populations. Heredity 86:265-276.
13. Edmands, S., and R. S. Burton. 1999. Cytochrome C oxidase activity in interpopulation hybrids of a marine copepod: A test for nuclear-nuclear or nuclear-cytoplasmic coadaptation. Evolution 53:1972-1978.
14. Fenster, C. B., and D. E. Carr. 1997. Genetics of sex allocation in Mimulus (Scrophulariaceae). J. Evol. Biol. 10:641-661.
15. Fishman, L., and J. H. Willis. 2001. Evidence for Dobzhansky-Muller incompatibilities contributing to the sterility of hybrids between Mimulus guttatus and M. nasutus. Evolution 55:1932-1942.
16. Fishman, L., A. Kelly, E. Morgan, and J. H. Willis. 2001. A genetic map in the Mimulus guttatus species complex reveals transmission ratio distortion due to heterospecific interactions. Genetics 159:1701-1716.
17. Fishman, L., A. J. Kelly, and J. H. Willis. 2002. Minor quantitative trait loci underlie floral traits associated with mating system divergence in Mimulus. Evolution 56:2138-2155.
18. Frank, S. A. 1989. The evolutionary dynamics of cytoplasmic male sterility. Am. Nat. 133:345-376.
19. _. 1991. Divergence of meiotic drive-suppression systems as an explanation for sex biased hybrid sterility and inviability. Evolution 45:262-267.
20. Gavrilets, S. 2003. Models of speciation: what have we learned in 40 years? Evolution 57:2197-2215.
21. Hanson, M. R., and S. Bentolila. 2004. Interactions of mitochondrial and nuclear genes that affect male gametophyte development. Plant Cell 16:s154-s169.
22. Henikoff, S., K. Ahmad, and H. S. Malik. 2001. The centromere paradox: stable inheritance with rapidly evolving DNA. Science 293:1098-1102.
23. Hurst, G. D. D., and M. Schilthuizen. 1997. Selfish genetic elements and speciation. Heredity 80:2-8.
24. Hurst, L. D., and A. Pomiankowski. 1991. Causes of sex ratio bias may account for unisexual sterility in hybrids: a new explanation for Haldane's rule and related phenomena. Genetics 128:841-858.
25. Kaul, M. L. H. 1988. Male sterility in higher plants. Springer, Berlin.
26. Koelewijn, H. P., and J. M. M. Van Damme. 1995. Genetics of male sterility in gynodioecious Plantago coronopus. II. Nuclear genetic variation. Genetics 139:1759-1775.
27. Lander, E. S., P. Green, J. Abrahamson, A. Barlow, M. Daly, S. Lincoln, and L. Newburg. 1987. MAPMAKER: an interactive computer package for constructing primary genetic linkage maps of experimental and natural populations. Genomics 1:174-181.
28. Laser, K. D., and N. R. Lersten. 1972. Anatomy and cytology of microsporogenesis in cytoplasmic male sterile angiosperms. Bot. Rev. 38:425-454.
29. Levin, D. A. 2003. The cytoplasmic factor in plant speciation. Syst. Bot. 28:5-11.
30. Lewis, D. 1941. Male sterility in natural populations of hermaphrodite plants. New. Phytol. 40:56-63.
31. Lloyd, D. G. 1974. Theoretical sex ratios in dioecious and gynodioecious angiosperms. Heredity 32:11-31.
32. Martin, N. H. 2003. Flower size preferences of honeybee (Apis mellifera) foraging on Mimulus guttatus. Evol. Ecol. Res. 6:777-782.
33. Martin, N. H. 2004. Evolution, genetics, and maintenance of reproductive isolation in Mimulus guttatus and M. nasutus. Ph.D. diss. Duke University, Durham, NC.
34. McCauley, D. E. 1997. The relative contributions of seed and pollen movement to the local genetic structure of Silene alba. J. Hered. 88:257-263.
35. McCauley, D. E., and D. R. Taylor. 1997. Local population structure and sex ratio: evolution in gynodioecious plants. Am. Nat. 150:406-419.
36. Muller, H. J. 1942. Isolating mechanisms, evolution and temperature. Biol. Symp. 6:71-125.
37. Orr, H. A. 1995. The population genetics of speciation: the evolution of hybrid incompatibilities. Genetics 139:1805-1813.
38. _. 2005. The genetic basis of reproductive isolation: insights from Drosophila. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 102:6522-6526.
39. Orr, H. A., and S. Irving. 2005. Segregation distortion in hybrids between Bogota and USA subspecies of Drosophila pseudoobscura. Genetics 169:671-682.
40. Orr, H. A., and D. C. Presgraves. 2000. Speciation by postzygotic isolation: forces, genes, and molecules. Bioessays 22:1085-1094.
41. Presgraves, D. C., L. Balagopalan, S. M. Abmayr, and H. A. Orr. 2003. Adaptive evolution drives divergence of a hybrid inviability gene between two species of Drosophila. Nature 423:715-719.
42. Rand, D. M., R. A. Haney, and A. D. Fry. 2004. Cytonuclear coevolution: the genomics of cooperation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19:645-653.
43. Ritland, K. 1991. A genetic approach to measuring pollen discounting in natural plant populations. Am. Nat. 138:1049-1057.
44. Ritland, C., and K. Ritland. 1989. Variation of sex allocation among eight taxa of the Mimulus guttatus complex (Scrophulariaceae). Am. J. Bot. 76:1731-1739.
45. Sackton, T. B., R. A. Haney, and D. M. Rand. 2003. Cytonuclear coadaptation in Drosophila: disruption of cytochrome c oxidase activity in backcross genotypes. Evolution 57:2315-2325.
46. Saur, N., M. S. Jacobs, and M. J. Wade. 2003. A synthetic review of the theory of gynodioecy. Am. Nat. 161:837-851.
47. Schnable, P. S., and R. P. Wise. 1998. The molecular basis of cytoplasmic male sterility and fertility restoration. Trends Plant Sci. 3:176-180.
48. Sun, S., C. T. Ting, and C. I. Wu. 2004. The normal function of a speciation gene, Odysseus, and its hybrid sterility effect. Science 305:81-83.
49. Sweigart, A. L., and J. H. Willis. 2003. Patterns of nucleotide diversity are affected by mating system and asymmetric introgression in two species of Mimulus. Evolution 57:2490-2506.
50. Sweigart, A. L., L. Fishman, and J. H. Willis. 2006. A simple genetic incompatibility causes hybrid male sterility in Mimulus. Genetics 172:2465-2479.
51. Tao, Y., D. L. Hartl, and C. C. Laurie. 2001. Sex-ratio segregation distortion associated with reproductive isolation in Drosophila. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 98:13183-13188.
52. Taylor, D. R., M. S. Olson, and D. E. McCauley. 2001. A quantitative genetic analysis of nuclear-cytoplasmic male sterility in structured populations of Silene vulgaris. Genetics 158:833-841.
53. Tiffin, P., M. S. Olson, and L. C. Moyle. 2001. Asymmetrical crossing barriers in angiosperms. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B 26:861-867.
54. Turelli, M., and H. A. Orr. 2000. Dominance, epistasis and the genetics of postzygotic isolation. Genetics 154:1663-1679.
55. Vickery, R. K., Jr. 1978. Case studies in the evolution of species complexes in Mimulus. Evol. Biol. 11:405-507.
56. Wang, S., C. J. Basten, and Z. -B. Zeng. 2005. Windows QTL cartographer 2.5. Deptartment of Statistics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.
57. Willett, C. S., and R. S. Burton. 2001. Viability of Cytochrome c genotypes depends on cytoplasmic backgrounds in Tigriopus californicus. Evolution 55:1592-1599.
58. Willis, J. H. 1993. Partial self-fertilization and inbreeding depression in two populations of Mimulus guttatus. Heredity 71:145-154.
59. _. 1999. The role of genes of large effect in inbreeding depression in Mimulus guttatus. Evolution 53:1678-1691.
60. Wittbrodt, J., D. Adam, B. Malitschek, W. Maueler, F. Raulf, A. Telling, S. M. Robertson, and M. Schartl. 1989. Novel putative receptor tyrosine kinase encoded by the melanoma-inducing Tu locus in Xiphophorus. Nature 341:415-421.
61. Zeh, J. A., and D. W. Zeh. 2005. Maternal inheritance, sexual conflict, and the maladapted male. Trends Genet. 21:281-286.