Location and Species Matters: Variable Influence of the Environment on the Gene Flow of Imperiled, Native and Invasive Cottontails.
New England cottontail (Sylvilagus transitionalis)
ddRADSeq
eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus)
geographic information systems
landscape genetics
random forest
specialist-generalist variation hypothesis
Journal
Frontiers in genetics
ISSN: 1664-8021
Titre abrégé: Front Genet
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101560621
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
12
05
2021
accepted:
14
09
2021
entrez:
18
10
2021
pubmed:
19
10
2021
medline:
19
10
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The environment plays an important role in the movement of individuals and their associated genes among populations, which facilitates gene flow. Gene flow can help maintain the genetic diversity both within and between populations and counter the negative impact of genetic drift, which can decrease the fitness of individuals. Sympatric species can have different habitat preferences, and thus can exhibit different patterns of genetic variability and population structure. The specialist-generalist variation hypothesis (SGVH) predicts that specialists will have lower genetic diversity, lower effective population sizes (Ne), and less gene flow among populations. In this study, we used spatially explicit, individual-based comparative approaches to test SGVH predictions in two sympatric cottontail species and identify environmental variables that influence their gene flow. New England cottontail (
Identifiants
pubmed: 34659333
doi: 10.3389/fgene.2021.708871
pii: 708871
pmc: PMC8511500
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
708871Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 McGreevy, Michaelides, Djan, Sullivan, Beltrán, Buffum and Husband.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Mol Ecol. 2019 Nov;28(21):4737-4754
pubmed: 31550391
PLoS One. 2015 Aug 12;10(8):e0135067
pubmed: 26267857
Mol Ecol. 2013 Nov;22(22):5516-30
pubmed: 24118539
Mol Ecol Resour. 2017 Jan;17(1):67-77
pubmed: 27601374
BMC Evol Biol. 2018 Sep 3;18(1):131
pubmed: 30176805
Bioinformatics. 2008 Jun 1;24(11):1403-5
pubmed: 18397895
Parasitol Res. 2019 Feb;118(2):667-672
pubmed: 30465071
Genetics. 1964 Apr;49(4):561-76
pubmed: 17248204
Mol Ecol. 2021 Jan;30(1):62-82
pubmed: 33145846
Ecol Evol. 2020 Dec 19;11(2):912-930
pubmed: 33520175
Bioinformatics. 2012 Oct 1;28(19):2537-9
pubmed: 22820204
Bioinformatics. 2009 Jul 15;25(14):1754-60
pubmed: 19451168
Genetics. 1943 Mar;28(2):114-38
pubmed: 17247074
Bioinformatics. 2012 Dec 15;28(24):3326-8
pubmed: 23060615
G3 (Bethesda). 2011 Aug;1(3):171-82
pubmed: 22384329
Trends Ecol Evol. 2013 Oct;28(10):614-21
pubmed: 23769416
Zookeys. 2020 May 28;936:1-24
pubmed: 32547291
PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e37135
pubmed: 22675423
Trends Ecol Evol. 2012 Sep;27(9):489-96
pubmed: 22727017
Front Genet. 2018 Mar 13;9:68
pubmed: 29593776
Nat Genet. 2016 Jan;48(1):94-100
pubmed: 26642242
Mol Ecol. 2013 Jun;22(11):3124-40
pubmed: 23701397
PLoS One. 2016 Mar 08;11(3):e0148842
pubmed: 26954014
Ecol Evol. 2014 May;4(10):1853-75
pubmed: 24963381
Genetics. 2010 Nov;186(3):983-95
pubmed: 20739713
Conserv Biol. 2011 Jun;25(3):465-75
pubmed: 21486369
J Evol Biol. 2012 Jun;25(6):1039-52
pubmed: 22487242
Bioinformatics. 2011 Aug 1;27(15):2156-8
pubmed: 21653522
Mol Ecol Resour. 2014 Jan;14(1):209-14
pubmed: 23992227
Proc Biol Sci. 2014 Jan 08;281(1777):20132858
pubmed: 24403340
Ecology. 2010 Jan;91(1):252-61
pubmed: 20380214
BMC Genet. 2010 Oct 15;11:94
pubmed: 20950446
Mol Ecol Resour. 2011 Sep;11(5):922-34
pubmed: 21679313
PLoS One. 2019 Mar 26;14(3):e0214483
pubmed: 30913279
Mol Ecol. 2016 Feb;25(4):849-63
pubmed: 26756865