Molecular, morphological, and ecological niche differentiation of sympatric sister oak species, Quercus virginiana and Q. geminata (Fagaceae)

American Journal of Botany

Volumn 96, Issue 9, 2009, Pages 1690-1702

  Cavender Bares, Jeannine ^a   Pahlich, Annette ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

Fagaceae; Florida; Flowering time; Habitat differentiation; Morphological variation; Nuclear microsatellites; Q. virginiana; Quercus geminata

Indexed keywords

ANCESTRY; ASSORTATIVE MATING; BAYESIAN ANALYSIS; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; COEXISTENCE; DISPERSION; DIVERGENCE; FLOWERING; GENE FLOW; GENETIC MARKER; HYBRIDIZATION; LEAF MORPHOLOGY; MOLECULAR ANALYSIS; NICHE; SOIL MOISTURE; SYMPATRY;

FLORIDA [UNITED STATES]; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

FAGACEAE; QUERCUS; QUERCUS GEMINATA; QUERCUS VIRGINIANA;

EID: 70349685262     PISSN: 00029122     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3732/ajb.0800315     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. Anderson, E. 1949. Hybridization of the habitat. Evolution 2: 1-9. Bacilieri, R., A. Ducousso, R. J. Petit, and A. Kremer. 1996. Mating system and asymmetric hybridization in a mixed stand of European oaks. Evolution 50: 900-908.
2. Balloux, F., and N. Lugon-Moulin.2002. Theestimationofpopulation differentiation with microsatellite markers. Molecular Ecology 11: 155-165.
3. Barreneche, T., M. Casasoli, K. Russell, A. Akkak, H. Meddour, C. Plomion, F. Villani, and A. Kremer. 2004. Comparative map- ping between Quercus and Castanea using simple sequence repeats (SSRs). Theoretical and Applied Genetics 108: 558-566.
4. Bonnet, E., and Y. V. D. Peer. 2002. Zt: A software tool for simple and partial Mantel tests. Journal of Statistical Software 7: 1-12.
5. Burger, W. 1975. The species concept in Quercus. Taxon 24: 45-50. Camus, A. 1936-1954.Les Chênes. Monographie du genre Quercus. Lechevalier, Paris, France.
6. Cavender-Bares, J., D. D. Ackerly, D. A. Baum, and F. A. Bazzaz. 2004b. Phylogenetic overdispersion in Floridian oak communities. American Naturalist 163: 823-843.
7. Cavender-Bares, J., and N. M. Holbrook. 2001. Hydraulic properties and freezing-induced cavitation in sympatric evergreen and decidu- ous oaks with, contrasting habitats. Plant, Cell & Environment 24: 1243-1256.
8. Cavender-Bares, J., K. Kitajima, and F. A. Bazzaz.2004a. Multipletrait associations in relation to habitat differentiation among 17 Floridian oak species. Ecological Monographs 74: 635-662.
9. Cavender-Bares, J., K. Kozak, P. Fine, and S. Kembel. 2009. Themerg- ing of community ecology and phylogenetic biology. Ecology Letters 12: 693-715.
10. Chapotin, S. M., N. M. Holbrook, S. R. Morse, and M. V. Gutierrez. 2003. Water relations of tropical dry forest flowers: Pathways for water entry and the role of extracellular polysaccharides. Plant, Cell & Environment 26: 623-630.
11. Chen, E., and J. F. Gerber. 1990. Climate. In R. L. Myers and J. J. Ewel [eds.], Ecosystems of Florida, 11 - 34. University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida, USA.
12. Clark, R. M., G. Schweikert, C. Toomajian, S. Ossowski, G. Zeller, P. Shinn, N. Warthmann, et al. 2007. Common sequence poly- morphisms shaping genetic diversity in Arabidopsis thaliana. Science 317: 338-342.
13. Coart, E., V. Lamote, M. De Loose, E. Van Bockstaele, P. Lootens,and I. Roldán-Ruíz. 2002. AFLP markers demonstrate local ge- netic differentiation between two indigenous oak species Quercus robur L. and Quercus petraea (Matt.) Liebl in Flemish populations.Theoretical and Applied Genetics 105: 431-439.
14. Coyne, J. A. 1994. Ernst Mayr and the origin of species. Evolution 48: 19-30.
15. Coyne, J. A., and H. A. Orr. 2004. Speciation. Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA.
16. Craft, K. J., and M. V. Ashley. 2006. Population differentiation among three species of white oak in northeastern Illinois. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 36: 206-215.
17. Craft, K. J., M. V. Ashley, and W. D. Koenig.2002. Limitedhybridiza- tion between Quercus lobata and Quercus douglasii (Fagaceae) in a mixed stand in central coastal California. American Journal of Botany 89: 1792-1798.
18. Cristofolini, G., and S. Crema. 2005. A morphometric study of the Quercus crenata species complex (Fagaceae). Botanica Helvetica 115: 155-167.
19. Dumolin-Lapegue, S., M.-H. Pemonge, and R. J. Petit. 1998. Association between chloroplast and mitochondrial lineages in oaks. Molecular Biology and Evolution 15: 1321-1331.
20. Excoffier, L., G. Laval, and S. Schneider. 2005. Arlequin ver. 3.0: An integrated software package for population genetics data analysis. Evolutionary Bioinformatics Online 1: 47-50.
21. Gilman, E. F., and D. G. Watson. 1994. Quercus virginiana: Southern live oak. USDA, U.S. Forest Service. (This document is adapted from Fact Sheet ST-564, a series of the Environmental Horticulture Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. Publication date: October 1994.)
22. Gomory, D., and J. Schmidtova.2007. Extentofnucleargenomesharing among white oak species (Quercus L. subgen. Lepidobalanus (Endl.) Oerst.) in Slovakia estimated by allozymes. Plant Systematics and Evolution 266: 253-264.
23. González-Rodríguez, A., D. M. Arias, and K. Oyama. 2004a. Genetic variation and differentiation of populations within the Quercus affi- nis-Q. laurina (Fagaceae) complex analyzed with RAPD markers. Canadian Journal of Botany 91: 401-409.
24. González-Rodríguez, A., D. M. Arias, S. Valencia, and K. Oyama. 2004b. Morphological and RAPD analysis of hybridization between Quercus affinis and Q. laurina (Fagaceae), two Mexican red oaks. American Journal of Botany 91: 401-409.
25. Grant, B. R., and P. R. Grant. 2008. Fission and fusion of Darwin's finches populations. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B, Biological Sciences 363: 2821-2829.
26. Grant, P. R., and B. R. Grant. 2006. Evolution of character displace- ment in Darwin' s finches. Science 313: 224-226.
27. Hardy, O. J., N. Charbonnel, H. Freville, and M. Heuertz. 2003. Microsatellite allele sizes: A simple test to assess their signifi- cance on genetic differentiation. Genetics 163: 1467-1482.
28. Hendry, A. P., and T. Day. 2005. Population structure attributable to re- productive time: Isolation by time and adaptation by time. Molecular Ecology 14: 901-916.
29. Ishida, T. A., K. Hattori, H. Sato, and M. T. Kimura. 2003. Differentiation and hybridization between Quercus crispula and Q. dentata (Fagaceae): Insights from morphological traits, ampli- fied fragment length polymorphism markers, and leafminer composi- tion. American Journal of Botany 90: 769-776.
30. Kampfer, S., C. Lexer, J. Gl össl, and H. Steinkellner. 1998. Characterization of (GA)n microsatellite loci from Quercus robur. Hereditas 129: 183-186.
31. Kurz, H., and R. K. Godfrey. 1962. Trees of northern Florida. University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
32. Levins, R. 1968. Evolution in changing environments. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
33. Lexer, C., A. Kremer, and R. J. Petit. 2006. Shared alleles in sympat- ric oaks: Recurrent gene flow is a more parsimonious explanation than ancestral polymorphism. Molecular Ecology 15: 2007-2012.
34. Manos, P. S., J. J. Doyle, and K. C. Nixon. 1999. Phylogeny, biogeography, and processes of molecular differentiation in Quercus subge- nus Quercus (Fagaceae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 12: 333-349.
35. Menges, E. S., and N. Kohfeldt. 1995. Life history strategies of Florida scrub plants in relation to fire. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club 122: 282-297.
36. Muir, G., C. C. Fleming, and C. Schl ötterer.2000. Taxonomy-Species status of hybridizing oaks. Nature 405: 1016.
37. Muller, C. 1952. Ecological control of hybridization in Quercus: A factor in the mechanism of evolution. Evolution 6: 147-161.
38. Muller, C. H. 1961. The live oaks of the series Virentes. American Midland Naturalist 65: 17-39.
39. Müller, R. D., M. Sdrolias, C. Gaina, B. Steinberger, and C. Heine. 2008. Long-term sea-level fluctuations driven by ocean basin dynam- ics. Science 319: 1357-1362.
40. Myers, R. L. 1985. Fire and the dynamic relationship between Florida san- dhill and sand pine scrub vegetation. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club 112: 241-252.
41. Myers, R. L., and J. J. Ewel. 1990. Ecosystems of Florida. University of Central Florida Press, Orlando, Florida, USA.
42. Nixon, K. C. 1985. A biosystematic study of Quercus series Virentes (the live oaks) with phylogenetic analyses of Fagales, Fagaceae and Quercus. University of Texas, Austin, Texas, USA.
43. Nixon, K. C., and C. H. Muller. 1997. Quercus Linnaeus sect. Quercus white oaks. In Flora of North America Editorial Committee [ed.], Flora of North America north of Mexico, 436 - 506. Oxford University Press, New York, New York, USA.
44. Oh, S.-H., and P. S. Manos. 2008. Molecular phylogenetics and cupule evolution in Fagaceae as inferred from nuclear CRABS CLAW se- quences. Taxon 57: 434-451.
45. Palmer, E. J. 1948. Hybrid oaks of North America. Journal of the Arnold Arboretum 29: 1-48.
46. Peakall, R., and P. E. Smouse. 2006. GenAlEx 6: Genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research. Molecular Ecology Notes 6: 288-295.
47. Petit, R. J., C. Bodenes, A. Ducousso, G. Roussel, and A. Kremer. 2004. Hybridization as a mechanism of invasion in oaks. New Phytologist 161: 151-164.
48. Pritchard, J. K., M. Stephens, and P. Donnelly. 2000. Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155: 945 - 959.
49. Putz, F. E., R. M. Archibald, and G. G. Parker. 1984. Mechanical abra- sion and intercrown spacing. American Midland Naturalist 112: 24-28.
50. Rasband, W. S. 1997 - 2006. ImageJ v. 1.36. National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. URL: http://rsbweb.nih.gov/ij/.
51. Reich, P. B. 2002. Root-shoot relationships: Optimality in acclimation and allocation or the "emperor' s new clothes"In Y. Waisel, A. Eshel, and U. Kafkafi [eds.], Plant roots: The hidden half, 205 - 220. Marcel Dekker, New York, New York, USA.
52. Rieseberg, L., and J. Wendel. 1993. Introgression and its consequences in plants. In R. Harrison [ed.], Hybrid zones and the evolutionary pro- cess, 70 - 109. Oxford University Press, New York, New York, USA.
53. Ross, K. G., M. J. Krieger, D. D. Schoemaker, E. L. Vargo, and L. Keller. 1997. Hierarchical analysis of genetic structure in native fire ant populations: Results from three classes of molecular markers. Genetics 147: 643-655.
54. Sargent, C. S. 1918. Notes on North American trees 1. Quercus. Botanical Gazette 65: 423-459.
55. Savolainen, V., M. C. Anstett, C. Lexer, I. Hutton, J. J. Clarkson, M. V. Norup, M. P. Powell, et al. 2006. Sympatric speciation in palms on an oceanic island. Nature 441: 210-213.
56. Schaal, B. A., S. L. Okane, and S. H. Rogstad. 1991. DNA variation in plant-populations. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 6: 329-333.
57. Schluter, D. 2000a. The ecology of adaptive radiation. Oxford University Press, New York, New York, USA.
58. Schluter, D. 2000b. Ecological character displacement in adaptive radia- tion. American Naturalist 156: S4-S16.
59. Slatkin, M. 1995. A measure of population subdivision based on micro- satellite allele frequencies. Genetics 139: 457-462.
60. Slatkin, M., and L. Excoffier. 1996. Testing for linkage disequilibrium in genotypic data using the EM algorithm. Heredity 76: 377-383.
61. Spector, T., and F. E. Putz. 2006. Crown retreat of open-grown south- ern live oaks (Quercus virginiana) due to canopy encroachment in Florida, USA. Forest Ecology and Management 228: 168-176.
62. Spellenberg, R., and J. R. Bacon. 1996. Taxonomy and distribution of a natural group of black oaks of Mexico (Quercus, section Lobatae, subsection Racemiflorae). Systematic Botany 21: 85-99.
63. Stebbins, G. L. 1950. Variation and evolution in plants. Columbia University Press, New York, New York, USA.
64. Steinkeller, H., C. Lexer, E. Turetschek, and J. Gloessl. 1997. Conservation of (GA)n microsatellite loci between Quercus species. Molecular Ecology 6: 1189-1194.
65. Tomlinson, P. T., R. J. Jensen, and J. F. Hancock. 2000. Do whole tree silvic characters indicate hybridization in red oak (Quercus section Lobatae)? American Midland Naturalist 143: 154-168.
66. Trelease, W. 1924. The American oaks. Wheldon and Wesley, New York, New York, USA.
67. VanValen, L. 1976. Ecological species, multispecies, and oaks. Taxon 25: 233-239.
68. Vences, M., and D. B. Wake. 2007. Speciation, species boundaries and phylogeography of amphibians. Amphibian Biology 6: 2613-669.
69. Weir, B. S. 1996. Genetic data analysis II: Methods for discrete popula- tion genetic data. Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA.
70. Whittemore, A. T., and B. A. Schaal. 1991. Interspecific gene flow in sympatric oaks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 88: 2540-2544.
71. Williams, J. H., W. J. Boecklen, and D. J. Howard.2001. Reproductive processes in two oak (Quercus) contact zones with different levels of hybridization. Heredity 87: 680-690.
72. You, F., M. Luo, Y. Gu, G. Lazo, K. Deal, J. Dvorak, and O. Anderson. 2007. GenoProfiler: Batch processing of high-throughput capillary fingerprinting data. Bioinformatics 23: 240-242.
73. Zhu, Y., J. E. Strassmann, and D. C. Queller. 2000. Insertions, sub- stitutions, and the origin of microsatellites. Genetical Research 76: 227-236.