Leaf shape variation and differentiation in three sympatric white oak species revealed by elliptic Fourier analysis

Nordic Journal of Botany

Volumn 29, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 632-640

  Viscosi, Vincenzo ^a   Fortini, Paola ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MOLISE   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ASYMMETRY; CANONICAL ANALYSIS; DECIDUOUS TREE; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; FOURIER TRANSFORM; GENOTYPE; HYBRIDIZATION; INTROGRESSION; LEAF MORPHOLOGY; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; SPECIES COMPLEX; SYMPATRY; TAXONOMY; VARIANCE ANALYSIS;

ITALY;

QUERCUS; QUERCUS ALBA; QUERCUS FRAINETTO; QUERCUS PETRAEA; QUERCUS PUBESCENS;

EID: 80053456977     PISSN: 0107055X     EISSN: 17561051     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1756-1051.2011.01098.x     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Adams, D. C. et al. 2004. Geometric morphometrics: ten years of progress following the revolution. Ital. J. Zool. 71: 5-16.
2. Albarran-Lara, A. L. et al. 2010. Leaf fluctuating asymmetry increases between Quercus magnoliifolia and Quercus resinosa (Fagaceae) through an altitudinal gradient in Mexico. Int. J. Plant Sci. 171: 310-322.
3. Aldridge, G. 2005. Variation in frequency of hybrids and spatial structure among Ipomopsis (Polemoniaceae) contact sites. New Phytol. 167: 279-288.
4. Andrade, I. M. et al. 2010. Elliptic Fourier analysis of leaf outline shape in forest fragment populations of Anthurium sinuatum and A. pentaphyllum (Araceae) from northeast Brazil. Kew Bull. 65: 1-18.
5. Barton, N. H. 2001. The role of hybridization in evolution. Mol. Ecol. 10: 551-568.
6. Borazan, A. and Babac, M. T. 2003. Morphometric leaf variation in oaks (Quercus) of Bulu, Turkey. Ann. Bot. Fenn. 40: 233-242.
7. Bruschi, P. et al. 2000. Morphological and molecular differentation between Quercus petraea (Matt.) and Quercus pubescens Willd. (Fagaceae) in northern and central Italy. Ann. Bot. 85: 325-333.
8. Buerkle, C. A. 2009. Ecological context shapes hybridization dynamics. Mol. Ecol. 18: 2077-2079.
9. Camus, A. 19361954. Le Chénes: monographie du genere Quercus. Vol. 2. P. Lechevalier.
10. Cornelissen, T. and Stiling, P. 2005. Perfect is best: low leaf fluctuating asymmetry reduces herbivory by leaf miners. Oecologia 142: 46-56.
11. Curtu, A. L. et al. 2007. Genetic variation and differentiation within a natural community of five oak species (Quercus spp.). Plant Biol. 9: 116-126.
12. Curtu, A. et al. 2009. Patterns of contemporary hybridization inferred from paternity analysis in a four-oak-species forest. BMC Evol. Biol. 9: 284-293.
13. Dupouey, J. L. and Badeau, V. 1993. Morphological variability of oaks (Q. robur L., Q. petraea (Matt) Liebl., Q. pubescens Willd.) in northeastern France: preliminary results. Ann. For. Sci. 50: 35-40.
14. Fair, J. M. and Breshears, D. D. 2005. Drought stress and fluctuating asymmetry in Quercus undulata leaves: confounding effects of absolute and relative amounts of stress?. J. Arid Environ. 62: 235-249.
15. Fortini, P. et al. 2009. Comparative leaf surface morphology and molecular data of five oaks of subgenus Quercus Oerst. (Fagaceae). Plant Biosyst. 143: 543-554.
16. Furuta, N. et al. 1995. Quantitative evaluation of soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.) leaflet shape by principal component scores based on elliptic Fourier descriptor. Breeding Sci. 45: 315-320.
17. Gottschalk, K. W. 1994. Shade, leaf growth and crown development of Quercus rubra, Quercus velutina, Prunus serotina and Acer rubrum seedlings. Tree Physiol. 14: 135-149.
18. Gugerli, F. et al. 2007. Coincidence of small-scale spatial discontinuities in leaf morphology and nuclear microsatellite variation of Quercus petraea and Q. robur in a mixed forest. Ann. Bot. 99: 713-722.
19. Hódar, J. 2002. Leaf fluctuating asymmetry of Holm oak in response to drought under contrasting climatic conditions. J. Arid Environ. 52: 233-243.
20. Iwata, H. and Ukai, Y. 2002. SHAPE ver. 1.2. A computer program package for quantitative evaluation of biological shape based on elliptic Fourier descriptors. J. Heredity 93: 384-385.
21. Iwata, H. et al. 1998. Evaluation of variation of root shape of Japanese vadizh (Rapharees sativus L.) based on image analysis using ellipore Fourier descriptors. Euphytica 102: 143-149.
22. Jensen, R. J. 2003. The conundrum of morphometrics. Taxon 52: 663-671.
23. Kelleher, C. T. et al. 2005. Species distinction in Irish populations of Quercus petraea and Q. robur: morphological versus molecular analyses. Ann. Bot. 96: 1237-1246.
24. Kremer, A. et al. 2002. Leaf morphological differentiation between Quercus robur and Quercus petraea is stable across western European mixed oak stands. Ann. For. Sci. 59: 777-787.
25. Kuhl, F. P. and Giardina, C. R. 1982. Elliptic Fourier features of a closed contour. Comput. Graph. Image Process. 18: 236-258.
26. Leamy, L. and Klingenberg, C. P. 2005. The genetics and evolution of fluctuating asymmetry. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 36: 1-21.
27. Lepais, O. et al. 2009. Species relative abundance and direction of introgression in oaks. Mol. Ecol. 18: 2228-2242.
28. Lexer, C. and Widmer, A. 2008. The genic view of plant speciation: recent progress and emerging questions. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 363: 3023-3036.
29. Lexer, C. et al. 2009. The use of digital image-based morphometrics to study the phenotypic mosaic in taxa with porous genomes. Taxon 58: 349-364.
30. Lòpez de Heredia, U. et al. 2009. Variation components in leaf morphology of recruits of two hybridising oaks [Q. petraea (Matt.) Liebl. and Q. pyrenaica Willd.] at small spatial scale. Eur. J. For. Res. 128: 543-554.
31. Mantel, N. A. 1967. The detection of disease clustering and a generalized regression approach. Cancer Res. 27: 209-220.
32. Martens, H. A. and Dardenne, P. 1998. Validation and verification regression in small data sets. Chemomeonts and Intelligent Laboratory systems 44: 99-121.
33. McLellan, T. 1993. The roles of heterochrony and heteroblasty in the diversification of leaf shapes in Begonia dregei (Begoniaceae). Am. J. Bot. 80: 796-804.
34. Minihan, V. B. and Rushton, B. S. 1984. Taxonomic status of oaks (Quercus ssp.) in Breen Wood Co. Antri, northern Ireland. Watsonia 15: 27-32.
35. Neto, J. C. et al. 2006. Plant species identification using elliptic Fourier leaf shape analysis. Comput. Electron. Agricult. 50: 121-134.
36. Ohsawa, R. et al. 1998. Quantitative evaluation of common buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum Moench) kernel shape by elliptic Fourier descriptor. Euphytica 101: 175-183.
37. Olsson, A. et al. 2000. Relationships between Nordic dog-roses (Rosa L. sect. Caninae, Rosaceae) assessed by RAPDs and elliptic Fourier analysis of leaflet shape. Syst. Bot. 25: 511-521.
38. Ponton, S. et al. 2004. Leaf morphology as species indicator in seedlings of Quercus robur L. and Q. petraea (Matt.) Liebl.: modulation by irradiance and growth flush. Ann. For. Sci. 61: 73-80.
39. Rieseberg, L. H. 1997. Hybrid origins of plant species. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 28: 359-389.
40. Saintagne, C. et al. 2004. Distribution of genomic regions differentiating oak species assessed by QTL detection. Heredity 92: 20-30.
41. Salvini, D. et al. 2009. Natural hybridisation between Quercus petraea (Matt.) Liebl. & Quercus pubescens Willd. within an Italian stand as revealed by microsatellite fingerprinting. Plant Biol. 11: 758-765.
42. Schwarz, O. 1993. Quercus L. - In: Tutin, T. G. et al (eds), Flora Europaea. Vol. 1. Cambridge Univ. Press, pp. 72-76.
43. Smouse, P. E. et al. 1986. Multiple regression and correlation extensions of the Mantel test of matrix correspondence. Syst. Zool. 35: 627-632.
44. Torres, M. A. J. and Demayo, C. G. 2008. Elliptic Fourier analysis of leaf outline differences between and among sixteen species of Hoya. Philippine Agricult. Sci. 91: 18-28.
45. Toyohara, H. et al. 2000. Evaluation of tuber shape of yam (Dioscorea alta L.) cultivars by image analysis and elliptic Fourier descriptors. J. Breeding Genet. 32: 31-37.
46. Van Valen, L. 1962. A study of fluctuating asymmetry. Evolution 16: 125-142.
47. Van Valen, L. 1976. Ecological species, multispecies and oaks. Taxon 25: 233-239.
48. Viscosi, V. et al. 2009a. Geometric morphometric analyses of leaf variation in four oak species of subgenus Quercus (Fagaceae). Plant Biosyst. 143: 575-587.
49. Viscosi, V. et al. 2009b. Leaf morphological analyses in four European oak species (Quercus) and their hybrids: a comparison of traditional and geometric morphometric method. Plant Biosyst. 143: 564-574.
50. Viscosi, V. et al. 2010. Geometric morphometric analysis as a tool to explore covariation between shape and other quantitative leaf traits in European white oaks. - In: Nimis, P. L. and Lebbe, R. G. (eds), Tools for identifying biodiversity: progress and problems. Vol. 1. Univ. Press, pp. 257-261.
51. White, R. et al. 1988. Automated image acquisition and morphometric description. Can. J. Bot. 66: 450-459.
52. Wigston, D. L. 1975. The distribution of Quercus robur L., Q. petraea (Matt.) Leibl. and their hybrids in southwestern England. 1. The assessment of the taxonomic status of population from leaf characters. Watsonia 10: 345-369.
53. Wilsey, B. J. et al. 1998. Leaf fluctuating asymmetry increases with hybridization and elevation in tree-line birches. Ecology 79: 2092-2099.
54. Yoshida, Y. et al. 2008. Genetic variation and differentiation of floral morphology in wild Primula sieboldii evaluated by image analysis data and SSR markers. Breeding Sci. 58: 301-307.
55. Yoshioka, Y. et al. 2004. Analysis of petal variation of Primula sieboldii by elliptic Fourier descriptors and principal component analysis. Ann. Bot. 94: 657-664.
56. Yoshioka, Y. et al. 2005. Quantitative evaluation of the petal shape variation in Primula sieboldii caused by breeding process in the last 300 years. Heredity 94: 657-663.
57. Zelditch, M. L. et al. 2004. Geometric morphometrics for biologists: a primer. Elsevier Academic Press.