Conservation Genetics

, Volume 12, Issue 1, pp 175–185 | Cite as

Mating system and pollen flow between remnant populations of the endangered tropical tree, Guaiacum sanctum (Zygophyllaceae)

Research Article

Abstract

Tropical trees are generally long-lived making it difficult to assess the long-term effects of habitat fragmentation on genetic diversity. Maintenance of genetic diversity in fragmented landscapes is largely dependent on the species’ mating system and the degree of genetic connectivity (seed and pollen flow) among fragments. Currently, these parameters are largely unknown for many endangered tropical tree species. Additionally, landscape fragmentation may isolate tropical tree populations from larger, more continuous populations. The role of isolated individuals in pollen transfer within and between remnant populations is not clear. In this study, we estimate the mating system and pollen flow patterns in continuous and remnant populations of the endangered tropical tree Guaiacum sanctum (Zygophyllaceae). Fractional paternity analyses were used to estimate average gene flow distances between fragmented remnant populations and the siring success of an intermediately located, but isolated individual. In these populations, G. sanctum is a mixed-mating species (tm = 0.72 − 0.95) whose pollen is transported over large distances (>4 km). An isolated tree may have functioned as a stepping-stone between two clusters of individuals, assisting long-distance pollen movement. This individual also sired a disproportionately high number of seeds (13.9%), and is thus an important component of the reproductive success of these populations, thus rejecting Janzen’s “living-dead” hypothesis. The high levels of genetic diversity maintained as a consequence of long-distance pollen-flow suggest that this endangered species may have the potential for future adaptation and population expansion if suitable habitats become available.

Keywords

Mating system Pollen flow Fractional paternity Isolated trees Allozymes Guaiacum sanctum Costa Rica 

References

  1. Ahmed S, Compton SG, Butlin RK, Gilmartin PM (2009) Wind-borne insects mediate directional pollen transfer between desert fig trees 160 kilometers apart. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106:20342–20347CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Aldrich PR, Hamrick JL (1998) Reproductive dominance of pasture trees in a fragmented tropical forest mosaic. Science 281:103–105CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Apsit VJ, Hamrick JL, Nason JD (2001) Breeding population size of a fragmented population of a Costa Rican dry forest tree species. J Hered 92:415–420CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bawa KS, Bullock SH, Perry DR, Coville RE, Grayum MH (1985) Reproductive biology of tropical lowland rain forest trees. II. Pollination systems. Am J Bot 72:346–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cascante A, Quesada M, Lobo JA, Fuchs EJ (2001) Effects of dry tropical forest fragmentation on the reproductive success and genetic structure of the tree Samanea saman. Conserv Biol 16:137–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chakraborty R, Meagher TR, Smouse PE (1988) Parentage analysis with genetic markers in natural populations. I. The expected proportion of offspring with unambiguous paternity. Genetics 118:527–536PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Chase MR, Moller C, Kesseli R, Bawa KS (1996) Distant gene flow in tropical trees. Nature 383:398–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. CITES (2000) Proposal to transfer Guaiacum sanctum from Appendix II to Apendix I of CITES. Speller & Sons, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Devlin B, Roeder K, Ellstrand NC (1988) Fractional paternity assignment: theoretical development and comparison to other methods. Theor Appl Genet 76:369–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dick CW (2001) Genetic rescue of remnant tropical trees by an alien pollinator. Proc R Soc Lond 268:2391–2396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dick CW, Etchelecu G, Austerlitz F (2003) Pollen dispersal of tropical trees (Dinizia excelsa: Fabaceae) by native insects and African honeybees in pristine and fragmented Amazonian rainforest. Mol Ecol 12:753–764CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Dick CW, Hardy OJ, Jones FA, Petit RJ (2008) Spatial scales of pollen and seed-mediated gene flow in tropical rain forest trees. Trop Plant Biol 1:20–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ehrlich PR, Raven PH (1969) Differentiation of populations. Science 165:1228–1232CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Frankie G, Haber W (1983) Why bees move among mass-flowering neotropical trees. In: Jones CE, Little RJ (eds) Handbook of experimental pollination biology. Van Nostrand Neinhold, New York, USA, pp 360–372Google Scholar
  15. Frankie GW, Opler PA, Bawa KS (1976) Foraging behaviour of solitary bees: implications for outcrossing of a neotropical forest tree species. J Ecol 64:1049–1057CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fuchs EJ, Hamrick JL (2010a) Genetic diversity in the endangered tropical tree, Guaiacum sanctum (Zygophyllaceae). J Hered 101:284–291CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Fuchs EJ, Hamrick JL (2010b) Spatial genetic structure within size classes of the endangered tropical tree Guaiacum sanctum (Zygophyllaceae). Am J Bot 97:1200–1207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fuchs EJ, Lobo J, Quesada M (2003) Effects of forest fragmentation and flowering phenology on the reproductive success and mating patterns of the tropical dry forest tree Pachira quinata. Conserv Biol 17:149–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Geist HJ, Lambin EF (2004) Dynamic causal patterns of desertification. BioSci 54:817–829CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gerber S, Chabrier P, Kremer A (2003) FAMOZ: a software for parentage analysis using dominant, codominant and uniparentally inherited markers. Mol Ecol Notes 3:479–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. González-Rivas B, Tigabu M, Gerhardt K, Castro-Marín G, Odén P (2006) Species composition, diversity and local uses of tropical dry deciduous and gallery forests in Nicaragua. Biodivers Conserv 15:1509–1527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hamilton MB (1999) Tropical tree gene flow and seed dispersal. Nature 401:129–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hamrick JL (1994) Genetic diversity and conservation in tropical forests. In: Drysdale RM, John S, Yapa A (eds) Proceedings international symposium on genetic conservation and production of tropical forest tree seed. Asian-Canada Forest Tree Seed Centre, Muak-Lek, Saraburi, Thailand, pp 1–9Google Scholar
  24. Hamrick JL, Apsit VJ (2004) Breeding structure of neotropical dry forest tree species in fragmented landscapes. In: Frankie GW, Mata A, Vinson SB (eds) Biodiversity conservation in Costa Rica. Learning the lessons in a seasonal dry forest. University of California Press, Berkley, CA, USA, pp 30–37Google Scholar
  25. Hamrick JL, Nason JD (1996) Consequences of dispersal in plants. In: Rhodes OE, Chesser RK, Smith MH (eds) Population dynamics in ecological space and time. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 203–236Google Scholar
  26. Hamrick JL, Godt MJW, Sherman-Broyles SL (1992) Factors influencing levels of genetic diversity in woody plant species. New For 6:95–124Google Scholar
  27. Holdrige LR, Poveda LJ (1975) Árboles de Costa Rica. Centro Científico Tropical, San José, Costa RicaGoogle Scholar
  28. Janzen DH (1971) Euglossine bees as long-distance pollinators of tropical plants. Science 171:203–205CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Janzen DH (1986) Blurry catastrophes. Oikos 47:1–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Janzen DH (1988) Tropical dry forests: the most endangered major tropical ecosystem. In: Wilson EO (ed) Biodiversity. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, pp 130–137Google Scholar
  31. Jiménez QM (1993) Árboles maderables en peligro de extinción en Costa Rica. Museo Nacional de Costa Rica, San Jose, Costa RicaGoogle Scholar
  32. Kenta T, Isagi Y, Nakagawa M, Yamashita M, Nakashizuka T (2004) Variation in pollen dispersal between years with different pollination conditions in a tropical emergent tree. Mol Ecol 13:3575–3584CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Konuma A, Tsumura Y, Lee CT, Lee SL, Okuda T (2000) Estimation of gene flow in the tropical-rainforest tree Neobalanocarpus heimii (Dipterocarpaceae), inferred from paternity analysis. Mol Ecol 9:1843–1852CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Latouche-Hallé C, Ramboer A, Bandou E, Caron H, Kremer A (2004) Long-distance pollen flow and tolerance to selfing in a neotropical tree species. Mol Ecol 13:1055–1064CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Levin DA, Kerster HW (1970) Phenotypic dimorphism and population fitness in Phlox. Evolution 24:128–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Levin D, Kerster H (1974) Gene flow in seed plants. Evol Biol 7:139–220Google Scholar
  37. Loveless MD, Hamrick JL (1984) Ecological determinants of genetic structure in plant populations. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 15:65–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Loveless MD, Hamrick JL, Foster RB (1998) Population structure and mating system in Tachigali versicolor, a monocarpic neotropical tree. Heredity 81:134–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lowe AJ, Boshier D, Ward M, Bacles CFE, Navarro C (2005) Genetic resource impacts of habitat loss and degradation; reconciling empirical evidence and predicted theory for neotropical trees. Heredity 95:255–273CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Manchenko GP (1994) Handbook of detection of enzymes on electrophoretic gels. CRC Press, Ann Arbor, MIGoogle Scholar
  41. Meagher TR, Thompson E (1986) The relationship between single parent and parent pair genetic likelihoods in genealogy reconstruction. Theor Pop Biol 29:87–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Murawski DA, Hamrick JL (1991) The effect of the density of flowering individuals on the mating systems of nine tropical tree species. Heredity 67:167–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Murawski DA, Hamrick JL (1992) Mating system and phenology of Ceiba pentandra (Bombacaceae) in central Panama. J Hered 83:401–404Google Scholar
  44. Nason JD, Hamrick JL (1997) Reproductive and genetic consequences of forest fragmentation: two case studies of neotropical canopy trees. J Hered 88:264–276Google Scholar
  45. Nason JD, Herre EA, Hamrick JL (1996) Paternity analysis of the breeding structure of strangler fig populations: evidence for substantial long-distance wasp dispersal. J Biogeogr 23:501–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Nason JD, Herre EA, Hamrick JL (1998) The breeding structure of a tropical keystone plant resource. Nature 391:685–687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Oldfield S, Lusty C, MacKinven A (1998) The world list of threatened trees. World Conservation Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  48. Petit RJ, Duminil J, Fineschi S, Hampe A, Salvini D, Vendramin GG (2005) Comparative organization of chloroplast, mitochondrial and nuclear diversity in plant populations. Mol Ecol 14:689–701CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Quesada M, Fuchs EJ, Lobo JA (2001) Pollen load size, reproductive success and progeny kinship of natural pollinated flowers of the tropical dry forest tree, Pachira quinata (Bombacaceae). Am J Bot 88:2113–2118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Quesada M, Stoner KE, Rosas-Guerrero V, Palacios-Guevara C, Lobo JA (2003) Effects of habitat disruption on the activity of nectarivorous bats (Chiroptera: Phyllostomidae) in a dry tropical forest: implications for the reproductive success of the neotropical tree Ceiba grandiflora. Oecologia 135:400–406PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Ritland K (2002) Extensions of models for the estimation of mating systems using n independent loci. Heredity 88:221–228CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Roubik DW (1992) Ecology and natural history of tropical bees. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USAGoogle Scholar
  53. Schnabel A, Hamrick JL (1995) Understanding the population genetic structure of Gleditsia triacanthos l. The scale and pattern of pollen gene flow. Evolution 49:921–931CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Smouse PE, Sork VL (2004) Measuring pollen flow in forest trees: an exposition of alternative approaches. For Ecol Manag 197:21–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Soltis DE, Haufler CH, Darrow DC, Gastony GJ (1983) Starch gel electrophoresis of ferns: a compilation of grinding buffers, gel and electrode buffers, and staining schedules. Am Fern J 73:9–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sork V, Smouse P (2006) Genetic analysis of landscape connectivity in tree populations. Landsc Ecol 21:821–836CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Streiff R, Ducousso A, Lexer C, Steinkellner H, Gloessl J, Kremer A (1999) Pollen dispersal inferred from paternity analysis in a mixed oak stand of Quercus robur L. and Q. petrae Liebl. Mol Ecol 8:831–841CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Trapnell DW, Hamrick JL (2004) Partitioning nuclear and chloroplast variation at multiple spatial scales in the neotropical epiphytic orchid, Laelia rubescens. Mol Ecol 13:2655–2666CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Voeks RA (2004) Disturbance pharmacopoeias: medicine and myth from the humid tropics. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 94:868–888Google Scholar
  60. Wendel JF, Weeden NF (1989) Visualization and interpretation of plant isozymes. In: Soltis D, Soltis P (eds) Isozymes in plant biology. Advances in plant sciences series. Dioscorides Press, Portland, OR, pp 5–45Google Scholar
  61. White GM, Boshier DH, Powell W (2002) Increased pollen flow counteracts fragmentation in a tropical dry forest: an example from Swietenia humilis Zuccarini. Proc Natl Acad Sci 99:2038–2042CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Young A, Boyle T, Brown T (1996) The population genetic consequences of habitat fragmentation for plants. Trends Ecol Evol 11:413–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Plant BiologyUniversity of GeorgiaAthensUSA
  2. 2.Escuela de BiologíaUniversidad de Costa RicaSan JoseCosta Rica

Personalised recommendations