An overlooked hybrid between the two diploid Chenopodium species in Central Europe determined by microsatellite and morphological analysis
- 255 Downloads
The presence and extent of hybridization within the Chenopodium album aggregate (Amaranthaceae) is still unclear. Although many hybrid combinations have been described, their existence in the field has never been systematically studied and verified. The main aim of this study was to ascertain the extent of interspecific hybridization between the diploid species C. ficifolium and C. suecicum using highly variable nuclear microsatellite markers. Due to the absence of such kind of molecular markers for the whole C. album group, we divided the analysis into two steps: (1) Eleven microsatellite loci designed for the closely related species C. quinoa were cross-amplified in five Eurasian species of the C. album diploid–polyploid complex, i.e. C. album s.s. (6x), C. striatiforme (4x), C. strictum (4x), C. ficifolium (2x) and C. suecicum (2x); (2) For the detection of interspecific hybridization between C. ficifolium and C. suecicum, we sampled 480 individuals from five localities in Central Europe. We also investigated morphological differences between the parental taxa and their hybrid and devised a key for their determination. Analysis of variation in microsatellite loci using Bayesian methods, PCoA and Neighbour-joining tree identified 32 F1 hybrids. These F1 hybrids, described here as C. paradoxum Mandák, formed a cluster between well-differentiated parental species, combining the morphological characters of both their parents. Moreover, genetic analyses also recognized several F2 or backcross hybrids, whose delimitation, mainly from C. suecicum and F1 hybrids, based on morphological characters, is problematic.
KeywordsBayesian analyses Chenopodium Cross-amplification Determination key Hybridization Microsatellite New nothospecies
We would like to thank Dagmar Boltíková, Petr Vít, Jan Machač and Pavel Trávníček for their help in the laboratory and field. Fred Rooks is thanked for helping with the language of the manuscript. We also would like to thank Pertti Uotila and Jindřich Chrtek for their discussion concerning nothospecies description.
This study was supported by the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic (13-02290S) and as part of long-term research development project RVO 67985939.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
The authors comply will all rules of the journal following the COPE guidelines; all authors have contributed and approved the final manuscript.
- Aellen P (1960) Chenopodium. In: Hegi G (ed) Illustrierte Flora von Mitteleuropa, vol. 3(2), 2nd edn. Parey, BerlinGoogle Scholar
- Aellen P (1972) Das vorkommen einer neuen hybride von Chenopodium ficifolium Sm. x Chenopodium viride L. (Chenopodium x gruellii Aellen hybr. nov.) in der ČSSR. Acta Mus Morav 57:167–170Google Scholar
- Arnold ML (1997) Natural hybridization and evolution. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Blom C (1961) Bidrag till kännedomen om Sveriges adventiv och ruderatflora V. Acta Horti Gotob 24:61–133Google Scholar
- Clemants S, Mosyakin S (2003) Chenopodiaceae. In: Flora of North America Editorial Committee (ed) Flora of North America North of Mexico, 4th edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 258–404Google Scholar
- Cole MJ (1957) Variation and interspecific relationships of Chenopodium album L. in Britain. PhD Thesis, University of Southampton, United KingdomGoogle Scholar
- Cole MJ (1961) Interspecific relationships and intraspecific variation of Chenopodium album L. in Britain. I. The taxonomic delimitation of the species. Watsonia 5:47–58Google Scholar
- Dostálek J, Hejný S, Husák Š, Schwarzová T, Dvořák F (1990) Chenopodium L., merlík. In: Hejný S, Slavík B (eds) Květena České republiky 2. Academia, Praha, pp 223–265Google Scholar
- Ellstrand NC, Elam DR (1993) Population genetic consequences of small population size: implications for plant conservation. Annual Rev Ecol Evol Syst 24:217–242. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.24.110193.001245 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Grant V (1981) Plant speciation, 2nd edn. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Hammer Ø, Harper DAT, Ryan PD (2001) PAST: paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontol Electronica 4:1–9. http://palaeo-electronica.org/2001_1/past/issue1_01.htm
- Jalas J, Suominen J (1980) Atlas Florae Europaeae distribution of vascular plants in Europe 5. Chenopodiaceae to Basellaceae. The Committee for Mapping the Flora of Europe and Societas Biologica Fennica Vanamo, HelsinkiGoogle Scholar
- Jüttersonke B, Arlt K (1989) Experimentelle Untersuchungen über die infraspezifische Struktur von Chenopodium album L. sowie Untersuchungen an Chenopodium suecicum. J Murr Feddes Repert 100:1–63Google Scholar
- Mason SL, Stevens MR, Jellen EN, Bonifacio A, Fairbanks DJ, Coleman CE, McCarty RR, Rasmussen AG, Maughan PJ (2005) Development and use of microsatellite markers for germplasm characterization in Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.). Crop Sci 45:1618–1630. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2004.0295 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Murr J (1896) Über einige kritische Chenopodium-Formen. Deutsche Bot Monatsschr 14:32–37Google Scholar
- Murr J (1901) Zur Chenopodium-Frage. II. Deutsche Bot Monatsschr 19:37–40Google Scholar
- Nei M (1973) The theory and estimation of genetic distance. In: Morton NE (ed) Genetics of population structure. University of Hawai Press, Honolulu, pp 45–54Google Scholar
- Pritchard JK, Wen X, Falush D (2009) STRUCTURE ver. 2.3.4. University of Chicago, Chicago. Available at: http://pritch.bsd.uchicago.edu/. Accessed 25 Apr 2015
- R Core Team (2014) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Available at: https://www.R-project.org/
- Rahiminejad MR (1995) Taxonomy and biosystematics of the Chenopodium album aggregate. PhD Thesis, University of Leicester, LeicesterGoogle Scholar
- Rieseberg LH, Wendel JF (1993) Introgression and its consequences in plants. In: Harrison R (ed) Hybrid zones and the evolutionary process. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 70–109Google Scholar
- Soltis PS, Soltis DE (2009) The role of hybridization in plant speciation. Annual Rev Pl Biol 60:561–588. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.arplant.043008.092039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Suda J, Trávníček P, Mandák B, Berchová-Bímová K (2010) Genome size as a marker for identifying the invasive alien taxa in Fallopia section Reynoutria. Preslia 82:97–106Google Scholar
- Uotila P (1977) Chenopodium strictum subsp. striatiforme in the Baltic Sea area. Ann Bot Fenn 14:199–205Google Scholar
- Uotila P (1978) Variation, distribution and taxonomy of Chenopodium suecicum and C. album in N Europe. Acta Bot Fenn 108:1–35Google Scholar
- Uotila P (1997) Chenopodium L. In: Rechinger KH (ed) Flora Iranica, 172nd edn. Akademische Druck-u. Verlagsanstalt, Graz, pp 24–59Google Scholar
- Uotila P (2001a) Chenopodium L. In: Jonsell B (ed) Flora Nordica 2. The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Stockholm, pp 4–31Google Scholar
- Uotila P (2001b) Taxonomic and nomenclatural notes on Chenopodium (Chenopodiaceae) for Flora Nordica. Ann Bot Fenn 38:95–97Google Scholar