1 / 23

A fistful of Astragalus : incipient speciation in the American West? Brian J. Knaus 1

A fistful of Astragalus : incipient speciation in the American West? Brian J. Knaus 1 Rich Cronn 2 Aaron Liston 1 1 Oregon State University, Botany & Plant Pathology 2 USDA Forest Service PNW. Family. Scientific Name. Infra-rank. count. Fabaceae. Astragalus lentiginosus. var. 35.

chynna
Download Presentation

A fistful of Astragalus : incipient speciation in the American West? Brian J. Knaus 1

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. A fistful of Astragalus: incipient speciation in the American West? Brian J. Knaus1 Rich Cronn2 Aaron Liston1 1Oregon State University, Botany & Plant Pathology 2USDA Forest Service PNW

  2. Family Scientific Name Infra-rank count Fabaceae Astragalus lentiginosus var. 35 Polygonaceae Eriogonum umbellatum var. 30 Asteraceae Ericameria nauseosa ssp. & var. 22 Asteraceae Hymenopappus filifolius var. 13 Malvaceae Sidalcea malviflora ssp. 13 Polygonaceae Eriogonum nudum var. 13 Asteraceae Ericameria parryi var. 12 Asteraceae Eriophyllum lanatum var. 12 Brassicaceae Lepidium montanum var. 12 Asteraceae Achillea millefolium var. 11 Caryophyllaceae Arenaria congesta var. 11 Fabaceae Trifolium longipes ssp. 11 Rosaceae Potentilla glandulosa ssp. 11 USDA, NRCS. 2006. The PLANTS database (http://plants.usda.gov, 11 Nov. 2006), National Plant Data Center, Baton Rogue, LA 70874-4490 USA.

  3. Datasets: • Chloroplast simple sequence repeats. • Taxonomic hypothesis. • IBD hypothesis. • Coalescence simulation (to propose an explanation for the empirical dataset). • Deme size and mutation rate. • Time since divergence.

  4. Variety Rydbergian Section Distribution Barneby's Sample Barneby's Specimens CpSSR pops A. l. var. australis Coulteriana widespread 31 5 1 A. l. var. borreganus Coulteriana widespread 31 4 2 A. l. var. coachellae Coulteriana endemic 34 2 3 A. l. var. fremontii Coulteriana widespread 101 14 8 A. l. var. kennedyi Coulteriana widespread 31 3 2 A. l. var. micans Coulteriana endemic 5 0 1 A. l. var. nigricalycis Coulteriana widespread 56 2 1 A. l. var. stramineus Coulteriana endemic 9 1 1 A. l. var. variabilis Coulteriana widespread 114 9 8 A. l. var. vitreus Coulteriana endemic 16 2 1 A. l. var. yuccanus Coulteriana endemic 16 3 1 A. l. var. araneosus Diphysa widespread 39 8 3 A. l. var. chartaceus Diphysa widespread 55 8 2 A. l. var. idriensis Diphysa endemic 24 1 1 A. l. var. piscinensis Diphysa endemic NA NA 1 A. l. var. sesquimetralis Diphysa endemic 1 0 2 A. l. var. albifolius Lentiginosa endemic 16 3 1 A. l. var. antonius Lentiginosa endemic 8 0 1 A. l. var. floribundus Lentiginosa widespread 26 2 2 A. l. var. ineptus Lentiginosa endemic 23 2 1 A. l. var. kernensis Lentiginosa endemic 8 0 1 A. l. var. lentiginosus Lentiginosa widespread 73 3 4 A. l. var. salinus Lentiginosa widespread 80 10 9 A. l. var. scorpionis Lentiginosa endemic 26 1 2 A. l. var. semotus Lentiginosa endemic 14 0 2 A. l. var. sierrae Lentiginosa endemic 18 2 1 A. l. var. maricopae Palantia endemic 5 0 1 A. l. var. mokiacensis Palantia endemic 5 0 2 A. l. var. palans Palantia widespread 40 9 1 A. l. var. trumbellensis Palantia endemic NA NA 1 A. l. var. ursinus Palantia endemic 1 0 1 A. l. var. wilsonii Palantia endemic 16 2 1 32 varieties 906 94 68 4 sections 32 varieties 68 populations 273 individuals CpSSR Sample

  5. 57 A. lentiginosus haplotypes Neighbor-Joining Tree 5 CpSSR markers Pairwise distance 4 sections 32 varieties 68 populations 273 individuals

  6. 57 A. lentiginosus haplotypes Neighbor-Joining Tree 5 CpSSR markers Pairwise distance 4 sections 32 varieties 68 populations 273 individuals

  7. Pugillus Astragalorum I-XX (a fistful of Astragalus) • “I think we chose a plant for the reasons one chooses a friend, not for splendor of apparel or purity of profile, but for character and individuality.” • Rupert Barneby, of gardening with Dwight. • “Ta ta, Dwighteen! And you, Miss Parish, may radioactive daydreams nourish!” • -Rupert Barneby, of Cymoteris ripleyi and Phacelia parishii. Nuclear testing began at the Nevada Test Site in 1951.

  8. Geneland K = 7 Hierarchical Bayesian analysis including x and y as parameters (Only A. lentiginosus)

  9. Simcoal 2.1.2 Coalescent Simulation. 5 haploid SSR loci. Demes of equal size. Sample matching empirical dataset: n= 113, 35, 97, 28. No migration. Stepwise mutation model. One chromosome, one linkage block (e.g., chloroplast, mitochondrion, Y chromosome). 1,000 simulated datasets per parameter set. Parameters of interest: Deme size? Mutation rate (µ)? Time since divergence = 10,000 generations.

  10. Mean Number of Haplotypes Parameters of interest: Deme size ≈ 100,000. Mutation rate (µ) ≈ 0.000 01. Time since divergence =10,000.

  11. Parameters of interest: Deme size = 100,000. Mutation rate (µ) = 0.00001 Time since divergence =??? 1,000 simulated datasets per parameter set.

  12. Generations since divergence =100 Majority rule NJ tree Euclidean distance

  13. Generations since divergence =1,000 Majority rule NJ tree Euclidean distance

  14. Generations since divergence =10,000 Majority rule NJ tree Euclidean distance

  15. Generations since divergence = 100,000 Majority rule NJ tree Euclidean distance

  16. Generations since divergence = 400,000 Majority rule NJ tree Euclidean distance

  17. Generations since divergence = 500,000 Majority rule NJ tree Euclidean distance

  18. Generations since divergence = 1,000,000 Majority rule NJ tree Euclidean distance

  19. FST’ FST FST Generations

  20. Conclusions • A. lentiginosus as a species appears to be retaining ancestral haplotypes, a process which slows cladogenesis. • CpSSRs do not support the taxonomic hypothesis. • CpSSRs do not support IBD hypothesis. • Coalescence simulation proposes an explanation for a finding of ‘no pattern.’ • Assuming: • Lack of genetic bottlenecks. • Large ancestral population size. • Large contemporary population size. • Expanding populations.

  21. Liston Lab (OSU BPP) Dr. Richard Halse Drs. Ken & Henny Chambers Dr. John Syring Dr. Ann Wilyard Paul Severns Matt Parks Jason Alexander (leaf tissue) Cronn Lab (USDA FS) Dr. Matt Horning Rebecca Huot Sue Huber Angie Rodriguez Nancy Mandel Dr. Randy Johnson Chris Poklemba Dr. Brad St.Clair Dr. Bruce McCune (OSU BPP) Dr. Sarah Jovan Heather Lintz Dr. Emily Holt Heather Root Funding: USDA FS PNW Research Station NPSO field research grant Nevada Native Plant Society Hardman Foundation Bonnie C. Templeton Award Dr. Nahla Bassil (USDA ARS) Wambui Njuguna April Nyberg Thank You!!!

More Related