Biological Invasions

, Volume 18, Issue 7, pp 1895–1910 | Cite as

The population genetics of the fundamental cytotype-shift in invasive Centaurea stoebe s.l.: genetic diversity, genetic differentiation and small-scale genetic structure differ between cytotypes but not between ranges

  • Christoph Rosche
  • Walter Durka
  • Isabell Hensen
  • Patrik Mráz
  • Matthias Hartmann
  • Heinz Müller-Schärer
  • Susanne Lachmuth
Original Paper

Abstract

Polyploids are overrepresented in invasive species. Yet, the role of genetic diversity and drift in colonization success of polyploids remains unclear. Here, we investigate genetic diversity, genetic differentiation and small-scale genetic structure in our model system, the three geo-cytotypes of Centaurea stoebe: monocarpic diploids and polycarpic (allo)tetraploids coexist in the native range (Eurasia), but only tetraploids are reported from the invasive range (North America). For each geo-cytotype, we investigated 18–20 populations varying in size and habitat type (natural vs. ruderal). Population genetic analyses were conducted at eight microsatellite loci. Compared to diploids, tetraploids revealed higher genetic diversity and lower genetic differentiation, whereas both were comparable in tetraploids between both ranges. Within spatial distances of a few meters, diploid individuals were more strongly related to one another than tetraploids. In addition, expected heterozygosity in diploids increased with population size and was higher in natural than in ruderal habitats. However, neither relationship was found for tetraploids. The higher genetic diversity of tetraploid C. stoebe may have enhanced its colonization abilities, if genetic diversity is correlated with fitness and adaptive capabilities. Furthermore, the inheritance of a duplicated chromosome set as well as longevity and frequent gene flow reduces drift in tetraploids. This counteracts genetic depletion during initial introductions and in subsequent phases of small or fluctuating population sizes in ruderal habitats. Our findings advocate the importance of studying colonization genetic processes to gain a more mechanistic understanding of the role of polyploidy in invasion dynamics.

Keywords

Biological invasion Centaurea stoebe Colonization Genetic diversity Geo-cytotype Polyploidy 

Supplementary material

10530_2016_1133_MOESM1_ESM.doc (778 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 778 kb)

References

  1. Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B (2014) lme4: linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.1-7. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4
  2. Blanchet É, Penone C, Maurel N et al (2015) Multivariate analysis of polyploid data reveals the role of railways in the spread of the invasive South African Ragwort (Senecio inaequidens). Conserv Genet 16:523–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bock DG, Caseys C, Cousens RD et al (2015) What we still don’t know about invasion genetics. Mol Ecol 24:2277–2297CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bousset L, Pointier J-P, David P, Jarne P (2013) Neither variation loss, nor change in selfing rate is associated with the worldwide invasion of Physa acuta from its native North America. Biol Invasions 16:1769–1783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Broennimann O, Mráz P, Petitpierre B et al (2014) Contrasting spatio-temporal climatic niche dynamics during the eastern and western invasions of spotted knapweed in North America. J Biogeogr 41:1126–1136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bruvo R, Michiels NK, D’Souza TG, Schulenburg H (2004) A simple method for the calculation of microsatellite genotype distances irrespective of ploidy level. Mol Ecol 13:2101–2106CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Clark LV, Jaseniuk M (2011) polysat: an R package for polyploid microsatellite analysis. Mol Ecol Res 11:562–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Comps B, Gömöry D, Letouzey J et al (2001) Diverging trends between heterozygosity and allelic richness during postglacial colonization in the European beech. Genetics 157:389–397PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Corn JG, Story JM, White LJ (2006) Impacts of the biological control agent Cyphocleonus achates on spotted knapweed, Centaurea maculosa, in experimental plots. Biol Control 37:75–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cosendai A-C, Wagner J, Ladinig U et al (2013) Geographical parthenogenesis and population genetic structure in the alpine species Ranunculus kuepferi (Ranunculaceae). Heredity 110:560–569CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Crawley MJ (2014) Statistics: an introduction using R. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  12. Development Core Team R (2014) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  13. Dietz H, Edwards PJ (2006) Recognition that causal processes change during plant invasion helps explain conflicts in evidence. Ecology 87:1359–1367CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Dlugosch KM, Parker IM (2008) Founding events in species invasions: genetic variation, adaptive evolution, and the role of multiple introductions. Mol Ecol 17:431–449CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Dufresne F, Stift M, Vergilino R, Mable BK (2014) Recent progress and challenges in population genetics of polyploid organisms: an overview of current state-of-the-art molecular and statistical tools. Mol Ecol 23:40–69CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Earl DA, vonHoldt BM (2012) STRUCTURE HARVESTER: a website and program for visualizing STRUCTURE output and implementing the Evanno method. Conserv Genet Resour 4:359–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Eliášová A, Trávníček P, Mandák B, Münzbergová Z (2013) Autotetraploids of Vicia cracca show a higher allelic richness in natural populations and a higher seed set after artificial selfing than diploids. Ann Bot 113:159–170CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. EUNIS (2008) European Nature Information System (EUNIS) database: habitat types and habitat classifications. European Topic Centre on Biological Diversity, ETC/BD-EEA, ParisGoogle Scholar
  19. Evanno G, Regnaut S, Goudet J (2005) Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software structure: a simulation study. Mol Ecol 14:2611–2620CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Ferrero V, Barrett SCH, Castro S et al (2015) Invasion genetics of the Bermuda buttercup (Oxalis pes-caprae): complex intercontinental patterns of genetic diversity, polyploidy and heterostyly characterize both native and introduced populations. Mol Ecol 24:2143–2155CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Ferriol M, Merle H, Garmendia A (2014) Microsatellite evidence for low genetic diversity and reproductive isolation in tetraploid Centaurea seridis (Asteraceae) coexisting with diploid Centaurea aspera and triploid hybrids in contact zones. Bot J Linn Soc 176:82–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Forsman A (2014) Effects of genotypic and phenotypic variation on establishment are important for conservation, invasion, and infection biology. PNAS 111:302–307CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Fox J, Weisberg S (2010) An R companion to applied regression. SAGE, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  24. Hahn MA, Buckley YM, Müller-Schärer H (2012) Increased population growth rate in invasive polyploid Centaurea stoebe in a common garden. Ecol Lett 15:947–954CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Hahn MA, Lanz T, Fasel D, Müller-Schärer H (2013) Increased seed survival and seedling emergence in a polyploid plant invader. Am J Bot 100:1555–1561CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Hardy OJ, Vekemans X (2001) Patterns of allozyme variation in diploid and tetraploid Centaurea jacea at different spatial scales. Evolution 55:943–954CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Hardy OJ, Vekemans X (2002) spagedi: a versatile computer program to analyse spatial genetic structure at the individual or population levels. Mol Ecol Notes 2:618–620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hothorn T, Bretz F, Westfall P (2008) Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biom J 50:346–363CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Hufbauer RA, Sforza R (2008) Multiple introductions of two invasive Centaurea taxa inferred from cpDNA haplotypes. Divers Distrib 14:252–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hufbauer RA, Facon B, Ravigné V et al (2012) Anthropogenically induced adaptation to invade (AIAI): contemporary adaptation to human-altered habitats within the native range can promote invasions. Evol Appl 5:89–101CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Hufbauer RA, Rutschmann A, Serrate B et al (2013) Role of propagule pressure in colonization success: disentangling the relative importance of demographic, genetic and habitat effects. J Evol Biol 26:1691–1699CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Jakobsson M, Rosenberg NA (2007) CLUMPP: a cluster matching and permutation program for dealing with label switching and multimodality in analysis of population structure. Bioinformatics 23:1801–1806CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Kelager A, Pedersen JS, Bruun HH (2012) Multiple introductions and no loss of genetic diversity: invasion history of Japanese Rose, Rosa rugosa, in Europe. Biol Invasions 15:1125–1141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Keller SR, Taylor DR (2010) Genomic admixture increases fitness during a biological invasion. J Evol Biol 23:1720–1731CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Keller SR, Gilbert KJ, Fields PD, Taylor DR (2012) Bayesian inference of a complex invasion history revealed by nuclear and chloroplast genetic diversity in the colonizing plant, Silene latifolia. Mol Ecol 21:4721–4734CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Maron JL, Waller LP, Hahn MA et al (2013) Effects of soil fungi, disturbance and propagule pressure on exotic plant recruitment and establishment at home and abroad. J Ecol 101:924–932CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Marrs RA, Sforza R, Hufbauer RA (2008) Evidence for multiple introductions of Centaurea stoebe micranthos (spotted knapweed, Asteraceae) to North America. Mol Ecol 17:4197–4208CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Meirmans PG, Van Tienderen PH (2013) The effects of inheritance in tetraploids on genetic diversity and population divergence. Heredity 110:131–137CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Mráz P, Bourchier RS, Treier U et al (2011) Polyploidy in phenotypic space and invastion context: a morphometric study of Centaurea stoebe s.l. Int J Plant Sci 172:386–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mráz P, Garcia-Jacas N, Gex-Fabry E et al (2012a) Allopolyploid origin of highly invasive Centaurea stoebe s.l. (Asteraceae). Mol Phylogenet Evol 62:612–623CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Mráz P, Španiel S, Keller A et al (2012b) Anthropogenic disturbance as a driver of microspatial and microhabitat segregation of cytotypes of Centaurea stoebe and cytotype interactions in secondary contact zones. Ann Bot 110:615–627CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. Mráz P, Tarbush E, Müller-Schärer H (2014) Drought tolerance and plasticity in the invasive knapweed Centaurea stoebe s.l. (Asteraceae): effect of populations stronger than those of cytotype and range. Ann Bot 114:289–299CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. Nei M (1978) Estimation of average heterozygosity and genetic distance from a small number of individuals. Genetics 89:583–590PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. Nybom H (2004) Comparison of different nuclear DNA markers for estimating intraspecific genetic diversity in plants. Mol Ecol 13:1143–1155CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Ochsmann J (2000) Morphologische und molekularsystematische Untersuchungen an der Centaurea stoebe L.–Gruppe (Asteraceae–Cardueae) in Europa. Dissertationes Botanicae, vol 324. J. Cramer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  46. Otisková V, Koutecký T, Kolář F, Koutecký P (2014) Occurrence and habitat preferences of diploid and tetraploid cytotypes of Centaurea stoebe in the Czech Republic. Preslia 86:67–80Google Scholar
  47. Pandit MK, Pocock MJO, Kunin WE (2011) Ploidy influences rarity and invasiveness in plants. J Ecol 99:1108–1115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pandit MK, White SM, Pocock MJO (2014) The contrasting effects of genome size, chromosome number and ploidy level on plant invasiveness: a global analysis. New Phytol 203:697–703CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P (2000) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155:945–959PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. Ronfort J, Jenczewski E, Bataillon T, Rousset F (1998) Analysis of population structure in autotetraploid species. Genetics 150:921–930PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. Rosenberg NA (2004) distruct: a program for the graphical display of population structure. Mol Ecol Notes 4:137–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sax DF, Brown JH (2000) The paradox of invasion. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 9:363–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Schlaepfer DR, Edwards PJ, Widmer A, Billeter R (2008) Phylogeography of native ploidy levels and invasive tetraploids of Solidago gigantea. Mol Ecol 17:5245–5256CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Schönswetter P, Tribsch A (2005) Vicariance and dispersal in the alpine perennial Bupleurum stellatum L. (Apiaceae). Taxon 54:725–732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Shah MA, Callaway RM, Shah T et al (2014) Conyza canadensis suppresses plant diversity in its nonnative ranges but not at home: a transcontinental comparison. New Phytol 202:1286–1296CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Simberloff D, Martin J-L, Genovesi P et al (2013) Impacts of biological invasions: what’s what and the way forward. Trends Ecol Evol 28:58–66CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Soltis PS, Soltis DE (2000) The role of genetic and genomic attributes in the success of polyploids. PNAS 97:7051–7057CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  58. Soltis DE, Visger CJ, Soltis PS (2014) The polyploidy revolution then…and now: Stebbins revisited. Am J Bot 101:1057–1078CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Stein K, Rosche C, Hirsch H, Kindermann A, Köhler J, Hensen I (2014) The influence of forest fragmentation on clonal diversity and genetic structure in Heliconia angusta, an endemic understorey herb of the Brazilian Atlantic rain forest. J Trop Ecol 30:199–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Szűcs M, Melbourne BA, Tuff T, Hufbauer RA (2014) The roles of demography and genetics in the early stages of colonization. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol 281:20141073. doi:10.1098/rspb.2014.1073 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. te Beest M, Roux JJL, Richardson DM et al (2011) The more the better? The role of polyploidy in facilitating plant invasions. Ann Bot 109:19–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Theoharides KA, Dukes JS (2007) Plant invasion across space and time: factors affecting nonindigenous species success during four stages of invasion. New Phytol 176:256–273CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Treier UA, Broennimann O, Normand S et al (2009) Shift in cytotype frequency and niche space in the invasive plant Centaurea maculosa. Ecology 90:1366–1377CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Uller T, Leimu R (2011) Founder events predict changes in genetic diversity during human-mediated range expansions. Glob Change Biol 17:3478–3485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Van Puyvelde K, Van Geert A, Triest L (2010) atetra, a new software program to analyse tetraploid microsatellite data: comparison with tetra and tetrasat. Mol Ecol Resour 10:331–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Verhoeven KJF, Macel M, Wolfe LM, Biere A (2011) Population admixture, biological invasions and the balance between local adaptation and inbreeding depression. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol 278:2–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Zeng X, Michalski SG, Fischer M, Durka W (2011) Species diversity and population density affect genetic structure and gene dispersal in a subtropical understory shrub. J Plant Ecol 5:270–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Zorić M, Dodig D, Kobiljski B et al (2012) Population structure in a wheat core collection and genomic loci associated with yield under contrasting environments. Genetica 140:259–275CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christoph Rosche
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Walter Durka
    • 2
    • 4
  • Isabell Hensen
    • 1
    • 4
  • Patrik Mráz
    • 3
  • Matthias Hartmann
    • 3
  • Heinz Müller-Schärer
    • 5
  • Susanne Lachmuth
    • 1
    • 4
  1. 1.Institute of Biology/Geobotany and Botanical GardenMartin Luther University Halle-WittenbergHalleGermany
  2. 2.Department Community Ecology (BZF)Helmholtz-Centre for Environmental Research – UFZHalleGermany
  3. 3.Herbarium and Department of Botany, Faculty of ScienceCharles University in PraguePragueCzech Republic
  4. 4.German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-LeipzigLeipzigGermany
  5. 5.Department of Biology, Unit of Ecology and EvolutionUniversity of FribourgFribourgSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations