Genetic variability predicts common frog (Rana temporaria) size at metamorphosis in the wild

Heredity

Volumn 99, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 41-46

  Lesbarreres D ^a,d   Schmeller, D S ^b,d   Primmer, C R ^c   Merila J ^d  

^a LAURENTIAN UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b HELMHOLTZ CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH UFZ   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TURKU   (Finland)

^d UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

Author keywords

Heterozygosity; Maternal effects; Microsatellites; Offspring fitness; Rana temporaria

Indexed keywords

AGE; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; FITNESS; FROG; GENETIC VARIATION; HETEROZYGOSITY; MATERNAL EFFECT; METAMORPHOSIS; PREDICTION; SELECTION; SIZE; WILD POPULATION;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BODY SIZE; ENVIRONMENT; FROG; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GENETICS; GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT AND AGING; HETEROZYGOTE; HISTOLOGY; METAMORPHOSIS;

ANIMALS; BODY SIZE; ENVIRONMENT; HETEROZYGOTE; METAMORPHOSIS, BIOLOGICAL; RANA TEMPORARIA; VARIATION (GENETICS);

AMPHIBIA; ANURA; RANA TEMPORARIA;

EID: 34347357528     PISSN: 0018067X     EISSN: 13652540     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/sj.hdy.6800961     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Allendorf FW, Leary RF (1986). Heterozygosity and fitness in natural populations of animals. In: Soule ME (ed). Conservation Biology. Sinauer: Sunderland, MA. pp 57-76.
2. Altwegg R, Reyer HU (2003). Patterns of natural selection on size at metamorphosis in water frogs. Evolution 57: 872-882.
3. Balloux F, Amos W, Coulson T (2004). Does heterozygosity estimate inbreeding in real populations? Mol Ecol 13: 3021-3031.
4. Berlin S, Merilä J, Ellegren H (2000). Isolation and characterization of polymorphic microsatellite loci in the common frog, Rana temporaria. Mol Ecol 9: 1938-1939.
5. Berven KA, Gill DE (1983). Interpreting geographical variation in life-history traits. Am Zool 23: 85-97.
6. Crnokrak P, Roff DA (1999). Inbreeding depression in the wild. Heredity 83: 260-270.
7. Da Silva A, Luikart G, Yoccoz NG, Cohas A, Allainé D (2006). Genetic diversity-fitness correlation revealed by microsatellite analyses in European alpine marmots (Marmota marmota). Cons Gen 7: 371-382.
8. Danzmann RG, Ferguson MM, Allendorf FW (1989). Genetic variability and components of fitness in hatchery strains of rainbow trout. J Fish Biol 35: 313-319.
9. David P (1998). Heterozygosity-fitness correlations: new perspectives on old problems. Heredity 80: 531-537.
10. Duchesne P, Godbout M-H, Bernatchez L (2002). PAPA package for the analysis of parental allocation: a computer program for simulated and real parental allocation. Mol Ecol Notes 2: 191-193.
11. Fog K, Schmedes A, de Lasson DR (1997). Nordens Padder Og Krybdyr. GEC Gad: Copenhagen.
12. Gasc JP, Cabela A, Crnobrnja-Isailovic J (1997). Atlas of Amphibians and Reptiles in Europe. Societas Europaea Herpetologica and Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle IEGB/SPN: Paris.
13. Gibbons MM, McCarthy TK (1986). The reproductive output of frogs Rana temporaria (L.) with particular reference to body size and age. J Zool 209: 579-593.
14. Haapanen A (1982). Breeding of the common frog Rana temporaria L. Ann Zool Fenn 19: 75-79.
15. Hansson B, Westerberg L (2002). On the correlation between heterozygosity and fitness in natural populations. Mol Ecol 11: 2467-2474.
16. Järvinen A (1987). Basic climatological data on the Kilpisjärvi area, NW Finnish Lapland. Kilpisjärvi Notes 10: 1-16.
17. Kaplan RH (1998). Maternal effects, developmental plasticity, and life history evolution: an amphibian model. In: Mousseau TA, Fox CW (eds). Maternal Effects as Adaptions. Oxford University Press: New York. pp 178-201.
18. Koskela P (1973). Duration of the larval stage, growth and migration in Rana temporaria L. in two ponds in northern Finland in relation to environmental factors. Ann Zool Fenn 10: 414-418.
19. Laugen AT, Laurila A, Räsänen K, Merilä J (2003). Latitudinal countergradient variation in the common frog Rana temporaria developmental rates - evidence for local adaptation. J Evol Biol 16: 996-1005.
20. Laugen TA, Laurila A, Merilä J (2002). Maternal and genetic contributions to geographical variation in Rana temporaria larval life histories. Biol J Linnean Soc 76: 61-70.
21. Laurila A, Karttunen S, Merilä J (2002). Adaptive phenotypic plasticity and genetics of larval life histories in two Rana temporaria populations. Evolution 56: 617-627.
22. Lesbarrères D, Primmer CR, Laurila A, Merilä J (2005). Environmental and population dependency of genetic variability-fitness correlations in Rana temporaria. Mol Ecol 14: 311-323.
23. Loman J (2002). Temperature, genetic and hydroperiod effects on metamorphosis of brown frogs Rana arvalis and R. temporaria in the field. J Zool 258: 115-129.
24. Markert JA, Grant PR, Grant BR, Keller LF, Coombs JL, Petren K (2004). Neutral locus heterozygosity, inbreeding, and survival in Darwin's ground finches (Geospiza fortis and G. scandens). Heredity 92: 306-315.
25. McAlpine S (1993). Genetic heterozygosity and reproductive success in the green treefrog, Hyla cinerea. Heredity 70: 553-558.
26. Merilä J, Laurila A, Lindgren B (2004). Variation in the degree and costs of adaptive phenotypic plasticity among Rana temporaria populations. J Evol Biol 17: 1132-1140.
27. Merilä J, Laurila A, Timenes Laugen A, Räsänen K, Pahkala M (2000). Plasticity in age and size at metamorphosis in Rana temporaria - comparison of high and low latitude populations. Ecography 23: 457-465.
28. Merilä J, Sheldon BC (1999). Genetic architecture of fitness and nonfitness traits: empirical patterns and development of ideas. Heredity 83: 103-109.
29. Miaud C, Guyétant R, Elmberg J (1999). Variations in life-history traits in the common frog Rana temporaria Amphibia: Anura: a literature review and new data from the French Alps. J Zool 249: 61-73.
30. Miaud C, Merilä J (2001). Local adaptation or environmental induction? Causes of population differentiation in alpine amphibians. Biota 2: 31-50.
31. Mitton JB (1997). Selection in Natural Populations. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK.
32. Mitton JB, Schuster WSF, Cothran EG, De Fries JC (1993). Correlation between the individual heterozygosity of parents and their offspring. Heredity 71: 59-63.
33. Mousseau TA, Fox CW (1998). The adaptive significance of maternal effects. Trends Ecol Evol 13: 403-407.
34. Pakkasmaa S, Merilä J, O'Hara RB (2003). Genetic and maternal effect influences on viability of common frog tadpoles under different environmental conditions. Heredity 91: 117-124.
35. Palo J, O'Hara RB, Laugen AT, Laurila A, Primmer CR, Merilä J (2003). Latitudinal divergence of common frog Rana temporaria life history traits by natural selection: evidence from a comparison of molecular and quantitative genetic data. Mol Ecol 12: 1963-1978.
36. Pearman PB, Garner TWJ (2005). Susceptibility of Italian agile frog populations to an emerging strain of Ranavirus parallels population genetic diversity. Ecol Lett 8: 401-408.
37. Pidancier N, Gauthier P, Miquel C, Pompanon F (2002). Polymorphic microsatellite DNA loci identified in the common frog Rana temporaria, Amphibia, Ranidae. Mol Ecol Notes 2: 304-305.
38. R Development Core Team (2003). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria.
39. Räsänen K, Laurila A, Merilä J (2005). Maternal investment in egg size: environment- and population-specific effects on offspring performance. Oecologia 142: 546-553.
40. Richter SC, Young JE, Johnson GN, Seigel RA (2003). Stochastic variation in reproductive success of a rare frog, Rana sevosa: implications for conservation and for monitoring amphibian populations. Biol Conserv 111: 171-177.
41. Roff DA (1992). The Evolution of Life Histories. Chapman & Hall: New York, NY, USA.
42. Roff DA (1997). Evolutionary Quantitative Genetics. Chapman & Hall: NY, USA.
43. Rowe G, Beebee TJC (2001a). Fitness and microsatellite diversity estimates were not correlated in two outbred anuran populations. Heredity 87: 558-565.
44. Rowe G, Beebee TJC (2001b). Polymerase chain reaction primers for microsatellite loci in the common frog Rana temporaria. Mol Ecol Notes 10: 6-7.
45. Rowe G, Beebee TJC (2003). Population on the verge of a mutational meltdown? Fitness costs of genetic load for an amphibian in the wild. Evolution 57: 177-181.
46. Rowe G, Beebee TJC, Burke T (1999). Microsatellite heterozygosity, fitness and demography in natterjack toads Bufo calamita. Anim Conserv 2: 85-92.
47. Ryser J (1989). Weight loss, reproductive output, and the cost of reproduction in the common frog, Rana temporaria. Oecologia 78: 264-268.
48. Slate J, David P, Dodds KG, Veenvliet BA, Glass BC, Broad TE et al. (2004). Understanding the relationship between the inbreeding coefficient and multilocus heterozygosity: theoretical expectations and empirical data. Heredity 93: 255-265.
49. Slate J, Kruuk LEB, Marshall TC, Pemberton JM, Clutton-Brock TH (2000). Inbreeding depression influences lifetime breeding success in a wild population of red deer (Cervus elaphus). Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 267: 1657-1662.
50. Smith DC (1987). Adult recruitment in chorus frogs: effects of size and date at metamorphosis. Ecology 68: 344-350.
51. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1995). Biometry the Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research. Freeman WH and Co: NY, USA.
52. Tsitrone A, Rousset F, David P (2001). Heterosis, marker mutational processes and population inbreeding history. Genetics 159: 1845-1859.
53. van Oosterhout C, Hutchinson WF, Wills DPM, Shipley PF (2004). MICRO-CHECKER: software for identifying and correcting genotyping errors in microsatellite data. Mol Ecol Notes 4: 535-538.
54. Vos CC, Antonisse-De Jong AG, Goedhart PW, Smulders MJM (2001). Genetic similarity as a measure for connectivity between fragmented populations of the moor frog Rana arvalis. Heredity 86: 598-608.
55. Wells KD (1977). The courtship of frogs. In: Taylor DH, Guttman SI (eds). The Reproduction Biology of Amphibians. Plenum Press: NY, USA. pp 233-262.