Fitness and morphological outcomes of many generations of hybridization in the copepod Tigriopus californicus

Journal of Evolutionary Biology

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 416-433

  Pritchard, V L ^a,b   Knutson, V L ^a,c   Lee, M ^a   Zieba, J ^a   Edmands, S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TURKU   (Finland)

^c CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES   (United States)

Author keywords

Controlled cross; Hybrid breakdown; Hybrid swarm; Interpopulation cross; Outbreeding; Survivorship; Tigriopus

Indexed keywords

FITNESS; GENETIC ANALYSIS; INSECT; INTERPOPULATION VARIATION; MATING SUCCESS; MORPHOLOGY; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHENOTYPIC PLASTICITY; POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BREEDING; COPEPOD; FEMALE; GENETICS; HISTOLOGY; HYBRIDIZATION; MALE; PHENOTYPE; PHYSIOLOGY; SURVIVAL;

ANIMALS; BREEDING; COPEPODA; FEMALE; HYBRIDIZATION, GENETIC; MALE; PHENOTYPE; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS;

COPEPODA; TIGRIOPUS; TIGRIOPUS CALIFORNICUS;

EID: 84872598044     PISSN: 1010061X     EISSN: 14209101     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/jeb.12060     Document Type: Article

References (73)

1. Ar-rushdi, A.H. 1963. The cytology of achiasmatic meiosis in the female Tigriopus (Copepoda). Chromosoma 539: 526.
2. Barreto, F.S., Moy, G.W. & Burton, R.S. 2011. Interpopulation patterns of divergence and selection across the transcriptome of the copepod Tigriopus californicus. Mol. Ecol. 20: 560-572.
3. Bates, D., Maechler, M. & Bolker, B. 2012. lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999999-0. Available at: http://lme4.r-forge.r-project.org/
4. Bijlsma, R., Westerhof, M.D.D., Roekx, L.P. & Pen, I. 2010. Dynamics of genetic rescue in inbred Drosophila melanogaster populations. Conserv. Genet. 11: 449-462.
5. Bimová, B.V., Macholán, M., Baird, S.J.E., Munclinger, P., Dufková, P., Laukaitis, C.M. et al. 2011. Reinforcement selection acting on the European house mouse hybrid zone. Mol. Ecol. 20: 2403-2424.
6. Brown, A.F. 1991. Outbreeding depression as a cost of dispersal in the harpacticoid copepod, Tigriopus californicus. Biol. Bull. 181: 123-126.
7. Buerkle, C.A. & Rieseberg, L.H. 2008. The rate of genome stabilization in homoploid hybrid species. Evolution 62: 266-275.
8. Burton, R.S. 1985. Mating system of the intertidal copepod Tigriopus californicus. Mar. Biol. 86: 247-252.
9. Burton, R.S. 1986. Evolutionary consequences of restricted gene flow amongst natural populations of the copepod, Tigriopus californicus. Bull. Mar. Sci. 39: 526-535.
10. Burton, R.S. 1987. Differentiation and integration of the genome in populations of the marine copepod Tigriopus californicus. Evolution 41: 504-513.
11. Burton, R.S. 1990. Hybrid breakdown in developmental time in the copepod Tigriopus californicus. Evolution 44: 1814-1822.
12. Burton, R.S., Byrne, R.J. & Rawson, P.D. 2007. Three divergent mitochondrial genomes from California populations of the copepod Tigriopus californicus. Gene 403: 53-59.
13. Carson, E.W., Tobler, M., Minckley, W.L., Ainsworth, R.J. & Dowling, T.E. 2012. Relationships between spatio-temporal environmental and genetic variation reveal an important influence of exogenous selection in a pupfish hybrid zone. Mol. Ecol. 21: 1209-1222.
14. Darling, J.A. 2011. Interspecific hybridization and mitochondrial introgression in invasive Carcinus shore crabs. PLoS ONE 6: 17828.
15. Edmands, S. 1999. Heterosis and outbreeding depression in interpopulation crosses spanning a wide range of divergence. Evolution 53: 1757-1768.
16. Edmands, S. 2001. Phylogeography of the intertidal copepod Tigriopus californicus reveals substantially reduced population differentiation at northern latitudes. Mol. Ecol. 10: 1743-1750.
17. Edmands, S. 2002. Does parental divergence predict reproductive compatibility? Trends Ecol. Evol. 17: 520-527.
18. Edmands, S. 2007. Between a rock and a hard place: evaluating relative risks of inbreeding and outbreeding for conservation and management. Mol. Ecol. 16: 463-475.
19. Edmands, S. & Burton, R.S. 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.
20. Edmands, S. & Deimler, J.K. 2004. Local adaptation, intrinsic coadaptation and the effects of environmental stress on interpopulation hybrids in the copepod Tigriopus californicus. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 303: 183-196.
21. Edmands, S. & Harrison, J.S. 2003. Molecular and quantitative trait variation within and amongst populations of the intertidal copepod Tigriopus californicus. Evolution 57: 2277-2285.
22. Edmands, S., Feaman, H.V., Harrison, J.S. & Timmerman, C.C. 2005. Genetic consequences of many generations of hybridization between divergent copepod populations. J. Hered. 96: 114-123.
23. Edmands, S., Northrup, S.L. & Hwang, A.S. 2009. Maladapted gene complexes within populations of the intertidal copepod Tigriopus californicus? Evolution 63: 2184-2192.
24. Ellison, C.K. & Burton, R.S. 2008a. Genotype-dependent variation of mitochondrial transcriptional profiles in interpopulation hybrids. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105: 15831-15836.
25. Ellison, C.K. & Burton, R.S. 2008b. Interpopulation hybrid breakdown maps to the mitochondrial genome. Evolution 62: 631-638.
26. Ellison, C.K. & Burton, R.S. 2010. Cytonuclear conflict in interpopulation hybrids: the role of RNA polymerase in mtDNA transcription and replication. J. Evol. Biol. 23: 528-538.
27. Erickson, D.L. & Fenster, C.B. 2006. Intraspecific hybridization and the recovery of fitness in the native legume Chamaecrista fasciculata. Evolution 60: 225-233.
28. Fitzpatrick, B.M. & Shaffer, H.B. 2007. Hybrid vigor between native and introduced salamanders raises new challenges for conservation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104: 15793-15798.
29. Flowers, J.M. & Burton, R.S. 2006. Ribosomal RNA gene silencing in interpopulation hybrids of Tigriopus californicus: nucleolar dominance in the absence of intergenic spacer subrepeats. Genetics 173: 1479-1486.
30. Frankham, R., Ballou, J.D., Eldridge, M.D., Lacy, R.C., Ralls, K., Dudash, M.R. et al. 2011. Predicting the probability of outbreeding depression. Conserv. Biol. 25: 465-475.
31. Ganz, H.H. & Burton, R.S. 1995. Genetic differentiation and reproductive incompatibility amongst Baja California populations of the copepod Tigriopus californicus. Mar. Biol. 123: 821-827.
32. Han, Z., Mtango, N.R., Patel, B.G., Sapienza, C. & Latham, K.E. 2008. Hybrid vigor and transgenerational epigenetic effects on early mouse embryo phenotype. Biol. Reprod. 79: 638-648.
33. Harrison, J.S. & Edmands, S. 2006. Chromosomal basis of viability differences in Tigriopus californicus interpopulation hybrids. J. Evol. Biol. 19: 2040-2051.
34. Heber, S., Briskie, J.V. & Apiolaza, L.A. 2012. A test of the 'genetic rescue' technique using bottlenecked donor populations of Drosophila melanogaster. PLoS ONE 7: 43133.
35. Hercus, M.J. & Hoffman, A.A. 1999. Does interspecific hybridization influence evolutionary rates? An experimental study of laboratory adaptation in hybrids between Drosophila serrata and Drosophila birchii. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 266: 2195-2220.
36. Holm, S. 1979. A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scand. J. Stat. 6: 65-70.
37. Hwang, A.S., Northrup, S.L., Alexander, J.K., Vo, K.T. & Edmands, S. 2011. Long-term experimental hybrid swarms between moderately incompatible Tigriopus californicus populations: hybrid inferiority in early generations yields to hybrid superiority in later generations. Conserv. Genet. 12: 895-909.
38. Hwang, A.S., Northrup, S.L., Peterson, D.L., Kim, Y. & Edmands, S. 2012. Long-term experimental hybrid swarms between nearly incompatible Tigriopus californicus populations: persistent fitness problems and assimilation by the superior population. Conserv. Genet. 13: 567-579.
39. Johansen-Morris, A.D. & Latta, R.G. 2008. Genotype by environment interactions for fitness in hybrid genotypes of Avena barbata. Evolution 62: 573-585.
40. Johnson, J.R., Fitzpatrick, B.M. & Shaffer, H.B. 2010. Retention of low-fitness genotypes over six decades of admixture between native and introduced tiger salamanders. BMC Evol. Biol. 10: 147.
41. Jormalainen, V. 1998. Precopulatory mate guarding in crustaceans: male competitive strategy and intersexual conflict. Q. Rev. Biol. 73: 275-304.
42. Keller, M., Kollmann, J. & Edwards, P.J. 2000. Genetic introgression from distant provenances reduces fitness in local weed populations. J. Appl. Ecol. 37: 647-659.
43. Lancaster, M., Bradshaw, C.J.A., Goldsworthy, S.D. & Sunnucks, P. 2007. Lower reproductive success in hybrid fur seal males indicates fitness costs to hybridization. Mol. Ecol. 16: 3187-3197.
44. Lucek, K., Roy, D., Bezault, E., Sivasundar, A. & Seehausen, O. 2010. Hybridization between distant lineages increases adaptive variation during a biological invasion: stickleback in Switzerland. Mol. Ecol. 19: 3995-4011.
45. Madsen, T., Ujvari, B. & Olsson, M. 2004. Novel genes continue to enhance population growth in adders (Vipera berus). Biol. Conserv. 120: 145-147.
46. Martin, N.H. & Willis, J.H. 2010. Geographic variation in postzygotic isolation and its genetic basis within and between two Mimulus species. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 365: 2469-2478.
47. Miller, J.M., Poissant, J., Hogg, J.T. & Coltman, D.W. 2012. Genomic consequences of genetic rescue in an insular population of bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis). Mol. Ecol. 21: 1583-1596.
48. Muhlfeld, C.C., Kalinowski, S.T., McMahon, T.E., Taper, M.L., Painter, S., Leary, R.F. et al. 2009. Hybridization rapidly reduces fitness of a native trout in the wild. Biol. Lett. 5: 328-331.
49. Palmer, C.A. & Edmands, S. 2000. Mate choice in the face of both inbreeding and outbreeding depression in the intertidal copepod Tigriopus californicus. Mar. Biol. 136: 693-698.
50. Pardo-Diaz, C., Salazar, C., Baxter, S.W., Merot, C., Figueiredo-Ready, W., Joron, M. et al. 2012. Adaptive introgression across species boundaries in Heliconius butterflies. PLoS Genet. 8: 1002752.
51. Pekkala, N., Knott, K.E., Kotiaho, J.S., Nissinen, K. & Puurtinen, M. 2012. The benefits of interpopulation hybridization diminish with increasing divergence of small populations. J. Evol. Biol. 25: 2181-2193.
52. Pereira, R.J., Monahan, W.B. & Wake, D.B. 2011. Predictors for reproductive isolation in a ring species complex following genetic and ecological divergence. BMC Evol. Biol. 11: 194.
53. Pritchard, V.L. & Edmands, S. 2012. The genomic trajectory of hybrid swarms: outcomes of repeated crosses between populations of Tigriopus californicus. Evolution doi: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2012.01814.x.
54. Pritchard, V.L., Dimond, L., Harrison, J.S., Velázquez, C.C., Zieba, J.T., Burton, R.S. et al. 2011. Interpopulation hybridization results in widespread viability selection across the genome in Tigriopus californicus. BMC Genet. 12: 54.
55. R Development Core Team. 2011. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna Austria. Available at www.R-project.org/. Accessed September 1 2012.
56. Ranganath, H.A. & Aruna, S. 2003. Hybridization, transgressive segregation and evolution of new genetic systems in Drosophila. J. Genet. 82: 163-177.
57. Rieseberg, L.H., Sinervo, B., Linder, C.R., Ungerer, M.C. & Arias, D.M. 1996. Role of gene interactions in hybrid speciation: evidence from ancient and experimental hybrids. Science 272: 741-745.
58. Rieseberg, L.H., Arche, M.A. & Wayne, R.K. 1999. Transgressive segregation, adaptation and speciation. Heredity 83: 363-372.
59. Schweitzer, J.A., Martinsen, G.D. & Whitham, T.G. 2002. Cottonwood hybrids gain fitness traits of both parents: a mechanism for their long-term persistence? Am. J. Bot. 89: 981-990.
60. Shivaprasad, P.V., Dunn, R.M., Santos, B.A.C.M., Bassett, A. & Baulcombe, D.C. 2011. Extraordinary transgressive phenotypes of hybrid tomato are influenced by epigenetics and small silencing RNAs. EMBO J. 31: 257-266.
61. Song, Y., Endepols, S., Klemann, N., Richter, D., Matuschka, F.-R., Shih, C.H. et al. 2011. Adaptive introgression of anticoagulant rodent poison resistance by hybridization between old world mice. Curr. Biol. 21: 1296-1301.
62. Stelkens, R.B., Schmid, C., Selz, O. & Seehausen, O. 2009. Phenotypic novelty in experimental hybrids is predicted by the genetic distance between species of cichlid fish. BMC Evol. Biol. 9: 283.
63. Vilà, M., Weber, E. & D'Antonio, C.M. 2000. Conservation implications of invasion by plant hybridization. Biol. Invasions 2: 207-217.
64. Vittor, B.A. 1971. Effects of the environment on fitness-related life history characters in Tigriopus californicus. Ph. D. dissertation, University of Oregon. Available at scholarsbank.uoregon.edu. Accessed September 1 2012.
65. Voordouw, M.J. & Anholt, B.R. 2002a. Environmental sex determination in a splash pool copepod. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 76: 511-520.
66. Voordouw, M.J. & Anholt, B.R. 2002b. Heritability of sex tendency in a harpacticoid copepod, Tigriopus californicus. Evolution 56: 1754-1763.
67. Voordouw, M.J., Robinson, H.E. & Anholt, B.R. 2005. Paternal inheritance of the primary sex ratio in a copepod. J. Evol. Biol. 18: 1304-1314.
68. Willett, C.S. 2006. Deleterious epistatic interactions between electron transport system protein-coding loci in the copepod Tigriopus californicus. Genetics 173: 1465-1477.
69. Willett, C.S. 2007. Significant variation for fitness impacts of ETS loci in hybrids between populations of Tigriopus californicus. J. Hered. 99: 56-65.
70. Willett, C.S. 2008. No evidence for faster male hybrid sterility in population crosses of an intertidal copepod (Tigriopus californicus). Genetica 133: 129-136.
71. Willett, C.S. 2011. Complex deleterious interactions associated with malic enzyme may contribute to reproductive isolation in the copepod Tigriopus californicus. PLoS ONE 6: 12.
72. Willett, C.S. 2012. Hybrid breakdown weakens under thermal stress in population crosses of the copepod Tigriopus californicus. J. Hered. 103: 103-114.
73. Wolf, D.E., Takebayashi, N. & Rieseberg, L.H. 2001. Predicting the risk of extinction through hybridization. Conserv. Biol. 15: 1039-1053.