Plant Systematics and Evolution

, Volume 293, Issue 1–4, pp 197–205

Discordant patterns of morphological and genetic divergence in the closely related species Schizanthus hookeri and S. grahamii (Solanaceae)

Original Article

Abstract

In this study I have examined the patterns of morphological and genetic differentiation between two species of the Andean genus Schizanthus that differ in their pollination and mating systems. Schizanthus hookeri has a bee pollination syndrome and is strongly dependent on pollinators for seed set. In contrast, S. grahamii has a hummingbird pollination syndrome and exhibits late autonomous selfing. Southern populations of the latter species have red flowers (reddish morph), while northern populations have yellow (yellowish morph) or pink flowers (pinkish morph). I used two noncoding chloroplast DNA (cpDNA) regions to investigate the genetic affinities between S. hookeri and the three morphs of S. grahamii. I also performed intra- and interspecific crosses to assess whether gene flow between species was possible. Phylogenetic analyses supported the existence of two differentiated clades that did not match currently accepted taxonomic classification. Accordingly, genetic distance did not correlate significantly with morphological distance. No fruits were produced from interspecific crosses, and there were no individuals with intermediate morphology that could indicate current and frequent hybridization events between species. I propose that the discordance between cpDNA data and conventional taxonomy could be explained by parallel evolution, or alternatively, by a very sporadic hybridization.

Keywords

cpDNA Flower morphology Parallel evolution Pollination Reproductive isolation Speciation 

References

  1. Bandelt HJ, Forster P, Röhl A (1999) Median-joining networks for inferring intraspecific phylogenies. Mol Biol Evol 16:37–48PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Bradshaw H, Wilbert S, Otto K, Schemske D (1995) Genetic mapping of floral traits associated with reproductive isolation in monkey flowers Mimulus. Nature 376:762–765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Castellanos MC, Wilson P, Thomson JD (2003) Pollen transfer by hummingbirds and bumblebees, and the divergence of pollination modes in Penstemon. Evolution 12:2742–2752Google Scholar
  4. Cubas P, Pardo C, Tahiri H (2006) Morphological convergence or lineage sorting? The case of Cytisus purgans (Leguminosae). Taxon 55:695–704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Draper I, Hedenas L, Grimm GW (2007) Molecular and morphological incongruence in European species of Isothecium (Bryophyta). Mol Phyl Evol 42:700–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Endler JA (1986) Natural selection in the wild. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  7. Farris JS, Kallersjo M, Kluge AG, Bult C (1994) Testing significance of incongruence. Cladistics 10:315–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Felsenstein J (1985) Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39:783–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Flagel LE, Rapp RA, Grover CE, Widrlechner MP, Hawkins J, Grafenberg JL, Alvarez I, Chung GY, Wendel JF (2008) Phylogenetic, morphological, and chemotaxonomic incongruence in the North American endemic genus Echinacea. Am J Bot 95:756–765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fluxus Technology Ltd. (1999-onwards) Network 4.516 available at http://www.fluxus-engineering.com
  11. Funk DJ, Omland KE (2003) Species-level paraphyly and polyphyly: frequency, causes, and consequences, with insights from animal mitochondrial DNA. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 34:397–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gegear RJ, Burns JG (2007) The birds, the bees, and the virtual flowers: can pollinator behaviour drive ecological speciation in flowering plants? Am Nat 170:551–566PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gottlieb LD (2004) Rethinking classic examples of recent speciation in plants. New Phytol 161:71–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Graham SW, Reeves PA, Burns ACE, Olmstead RG (2000) Microstructural changes in noncoding chloroplast DNA: interpretation, evolution, and utility of indels and inversions in basal angiosperm phylogenetic inference. Int J Plant Sci 161:S83–S96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grant V (1981) Plant speciation. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Grant V (1994) Modes and origins of mechanical and ethological isolation in angiosperms. Proc Natl Acad Sci 91:3–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Grant V, Grant K (1965) Flower pollination in the Phlox family. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Grau J, Grönbach E (1984) Untersuchungen zur variabilitat in der gattung Schizanthus.Solanaceae. Mitt Bot Staatssmmlung München 20:111–203Google Scholar
  19. Helbig AJ, Knox AG, Parkin DT, Sangster G, Collinson M (2002) Guidelines for assigning species rank. Ibis 144:518–525Google Scholar
  20. Hood GM (2004) PopTools Version 2.6.2. http://www.cse.csire.au/poptools
  21. Huelsenbeck JP, Ronquist F (2001) MrBayes: bayesian inference for phylogenetic trees. Bioinformatics 17:754–755PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kay KM (2006) Reproductive isolation between two closely related hummingbird-pollinated Neotropical gingers. Evolution 60:538–552PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Kim ST, Donoghue MJ (2008) Incongruence between cpDNA and nrITS trees indicates extensive hybridization within Eupersicaria (Polygonaceae). Am J Bot 95:1122–1135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Koch M, Dobes C, Matschinger M, Bleeker W, Vogel J, Kiefer M (2005) Evolution of the trnF (GAA) gene in Arabidopsis relatives and the Brassicaceae family: monophyletic origin and subsequent diversification of a plastidic pseudogene. Mol Bio Evol 22:1032–1043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kornkven AB, Watson LE, Estes JR (1998) Phylogenetic analysis of Artemisia section Tidentatae (Asteraceae) based on sequences from the internal transcribed spacers (ITS) of nuclear ribosomal DNA. Am J Bot 85:1787–1795CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Levin DA (1978) The origin of isolating mechanisms in flowering plants. Evol Biol 11:185–315Google Scholar
  27. Lihova J, Kucera J, Perny M, Marhold K (2007) Hybridization between two polyploid Cardamine (Brassicaceae) species in north-western Spain: discordance between morphological and genetic variation patterns. Ann Bot-London 99:1083–1096CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mantel N (1967) The detection of disease clustering and a generalized regression approach. Cancer Res 27:209–220PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Martin NH, Willis JH (2007) Ecological divergence associated with mating system causes nearly complete reproductive isolation between sympatric Mimulus species. Evolution 6:68–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mayr E (1942) Systematics and the origin of species. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Mayr E (1963) Populations, species and evolution. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, USAGoogle Scholar
  32. McKinnon JS, Mori S, Blackman BK, David L, Kingsley DM, Jamieson L, Chou J, Schluter D (2004) Evidence for ecology’s role in speciation. Nature 429:294–298PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. McNemar Q (1947) Note on the sampling error of the difference between correlated proportions or percentages. Psychometrika 12:153–157PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Millen RS, Olmstead RG, Adams KL, Palmer JD, Lao NT, Heggie L, Kavanagh TA, Hibberd JM, Gray JC, Morden CW, Calie PJ, Jermiin LS, Wolfe KH (2001) Many parallel losses of infa from chloroplast DNA during Angiosperm evolution with multiple independent transfers to the nucleus. Plant Cell 13:645–658PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nei M (1987) Molecular evolutionary genetics. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Neigel JE, Avise JC (1993) Application of a random-walk model to geographic distributions of animal mitochondrial-Dna variation. Genetics 135:1209–1220PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Notsu Y, Masood S, Nishikawa T, Kubo N, Akiduki G, Nakazono M, Hirai A, Kadowaki K (2002) The complete sequence of the rice (Oryza sativa L.) mitochondrial genome: frequent DNA sequence acquisition and loss during the evolution of flowering plants. Mol genet genomics 268:434–445PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pérez F, Arroyo MTK, Medel R, Hershkovitz MA (2006) Ancestral reconstruction of flower morphology and pollination systems in Schizanthus (Solanaceae). Am J Bot 93:1029–1038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pérez F, Arroyo MTK, Armesto JJ (2009) Evolution of autonomous selfing accompanies increased specialization in the pollination system of Schizanthus (Solanaceae). Am J Bot 96:1168–1176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Petit RJ, Bode′ne`s C, Ducousso A, Roussel G, Kremer A (2003) Hybridization as a mechanism of invasion in oaks. New Phytol 161:151–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ramsey J, Bradshaw H, Schemske D (2003) Components of reproductive isolation between the monkeyflowers Mimulus lewisii and M. cardinalis (Phrymaceae). Evolution 57:1520–1534PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Rieseberg LH, Brouillet L (1994) Are many plant species paraphyletic? Taxon 43:21–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rieseberg LH, Willis JH (2007) Plants speciation. Science 317:910–914PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Schluter D, Nagel LM (1995) Parallel speciation by natural selection. Am Nat 146:292–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Shaw KL (1999) A nested analysis of song groups and species boundaries in the Hawaiian cricket genus Laupala. Mol Phyl Evol 11:332–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Shaw J, Lickey EB, Schilling EE, Small RL (2007) Comparison of whole chloroplast genome sequences to choose noncoding regions for phylogenetic studies in angiosperms: the tortoise and the hare III. Am J Bot 94:275–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1995) Biometry. W.H. Freeman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  48. Soltis PS, Novak SJ (1997) Polyphyly of the tuberous Lomatiums (Apiaceae): cpDNA evidence for morphological convergence. Syst Bot 22:99–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. SPSS (1998) Sigma Scan Pro 5.0. SPSS Science, Chicago, USAGoogle Scholar
  50. Stebbins GL (1974) Flowering plants: evolution above the species level. Belknap, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  51. Swofford DL (1999) PAUP: phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods). Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA, USAGoogle Scholar
  52. Tsitrone A, Kirkpatrick M, Levin DA (2003) A model for chloroplast capture. Evolution 57:1776–1782PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Vijverberg K, Bachmann K (1999) Molecular evolution of a tandemly repeated trnF(GAA) gene in the chloroplast genomes of Microseris (Asteraceae) and the use of structural mutations in phylogenetic analyses. Mol Biol Evol 10:1329–1340Google Scholar
  54. Walters RD (1969) A revision of the genus Schizanthus. PhD thesis, Indiana UniversityGoogle Scholar
  55. Watanabe K, Ohi-Toma T, Murata J (2008) Multiple hybridization in the Aristolochia kaempferi group (Aristolochiaceae): evidence from reproductive isolation and molecular phylogeny. Am J Bot 95:885–896CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wendt T, Canela MBF, Klein DE, Ríos RI (2002) Selfing facilitates reproductive isolation among three sympatric species of Pitcairnia (Bromeliaceae). Plant Syst Evol 232:201–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wiens JJ, Penkrot TA (2002) Delimiting species using DNA and morphological variation and discordant species limits in spiny lizards (Sceloporus). Syst Evol 51:69–91Google Scholar
  58. Winker K, Pruett CL (2006) Seasonal migration, speciation, and morphological convergence in the genus Catharus (Turdidae). Auk 123:1052–1068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wolfe AD, Randle CP (2004) Recombination, heteroplasmy, haplotype polymorphism, and paralogy in plastid genes: implications for plant molecular systematics. Syst Bot 29:1011–1020CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Advanced Studies in Ecology and Biodiversity (CASEB), Departamento de Ecología, Facultad de Ciencias BiológicasPontificia Universidad Católica de ChileSantiagoChile
  2. 2.Instituto de Ecología y Biodiversidad (IEB)SantiagoChile

Personalised recommendations