Conservation Genetics

, Volume 15, Issue 4, pp 869–878 | Cite as

Are invasive marsh frogs (Pelophylax ridibundus) replacing the native P. lessonae/P. esculentus hybridogenetic complex in Western Europe? Genetic evidence from a field study

  • Julien Leuenberger
  • Antoine Gander
  • Benedikt R. Schmidt
  • Nicolas Perrin
Research Article

Abstract

The water-frog L–E system, widespread in Western Europe, comprises the pool frog Pelophylax lessonae and the hybridogenetic edible frog P. esculentus, which originated from hybridization between pool frogs and marsh frogs (P. ridibundus). In P. esculentus, the lessonae (L) genome is eliminated during meiosis and has to be gained anew each generation from a P. lessonae partner, while the ridibundus (R′) genome is transmitted clonally. It therefore accumulates deleterious mutations, so that R′R′ offspring from P.esculentus×P.esculentus crosses are normally unviable. This system is now threatened by invasive P. ridibundus (RR) imported from Eastern Europe and the Balkans. We investigated the genetic interactions between invasive marsh frogs and native water frogs in a Swiss wetland area, and used genetic data collected in the field to validate several components of a recently postulated mechanism of species replacement. We identified neo-ridibundus individuals derived from crosses between invasive ridibundus and native esculentus, as well as newly arisen hybridogenetic esculentus lineages stemming from crosses between invasive ridibundus (RR) and native lessonae (LL). As their ridibundus genomes are likely to carry less deleterious mutations, such lineages are expected to produce viable ridibundus offspring, contributing to species replacement. However, such crosses with invasive ridibundus only occurred at a limited scale; moreover, RR×LL crosses did not induce any introgression from the ridibundus to the lessonae genome. We did not find any ridibundus stemming from crosses between ancient esculentus lineages. Despite several decades of presence on the site, introduced ridibundus individuals only represent 15 % of sampled frogs, and their spatial distribution seems shaped by specific ecological requirements rather than history of colonization. We therefore expect the three taxa to coexist stably in this area.

Keywords

Amphibian Hybridogenesis Invasion Microsatellites Water frog 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank M. Antoniazza and A. Ghiraldi for sharing their knowledge of the Grande Cariçaie; C. Benjemia, S. Biollay, O. Darbellay, L. Dutoit, F. Goetschi, N. Hazi, A. Jost, H. Lovis, T. Martignier, L. Megali, G. Mottaz, A. Murakozy, M. Podolak, E. Rapin, M. Ribaux, N. Rodrigues, P. Roelli, A. Rogivue, M. Stojiljkovic and Q. Theiler for their help during field work; S. Röthlisberger and N. Pruvost from Uli Reyer’s lab in Zürich for sharing their experience with Pelophylax microsatellites; C. Aletti, C. Berney, C. Dufresnes, R. Savary and R. Sermier for their help in the lab; S. Dubey for his help in phylogenetic analyses; C. Betto-Colliard for discussions. We acknowledge financial support from the Association de la Grande Cariçaie, the School of Biology (University of Lausanne) and the Swiss National Science Foundation (Grant 31003A_129894 to NP). The samples were collected with the authorisation of the veterinary and nature offices of the Canton de Vaud (N°2012-24).

Supplementary material

10592_2014_585_MOESM1_ESM.xls (93 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (XLS 93 kb)
10592_2014_585_MOESM2_ESM.docx (2.6 mb)
Distribution of Pelophylax species among the five sampling sites. Color legend to pie charts: dark blue RR ridibundus, pale blue neo-ridibundus (3_EN_13), dark green ancient R′L esculentus, pale green neo R′L esculentus, red LL lessonae (DOCX 2677 kb)

References

  1. Arioli M (2007) Reproductive patterns and population genetics in pure hybridogenetic water frog populations of Rana esculenta. PhD thesis. (http://www.dissertationen.uzh.ch), University of Zurich
  2. Berger L (1970) Some characteristics of the crosses within Rana esculenta complex in postlarval development. Ann Zool 27:373–416Google Scholar
  3. Berger L, Uzzell T, Hotz H (1988) Sex determination and sex ratios in western Palearctic water frogs: XX and XY female hybrids in the Pannonian Basin? Proc Acad Natl Sci Phila 140:220–239Google Scholar
  4. Berthoud G, Perret-Gentil C (1976) Les lieux humides et les batraciens du canton de Vaud. Mém Soc vaud Sci Nat 16:1–39Google Scholar
  5. Broquet T, Berset-Braendli L, Emaresi G, Fumagalli L (2007) Buccal swabs allow efficient and reliable microsatellite genotyping in amphibians. Conserv Genet 8:509–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Christiansen DG (2009) Gamete types, sex determination and stable equilibria of all-hybrid populations of diploid and triploid edible frogs (Pelophylax esculentus). BMC Evol Biol 9:135PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Christiansen DG, Reyer H-U (2009) From clonal to sexual hybrids: genetic recombination via triploids in all-hybrid populations of water frogs. Evolution 63:1754–1768PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Earl Dent A, VonHoldt Bridgett M (2012) STRUCTURE HARVESTER: a website and program for visualizing SRUCTURE output and implementing the Evanno method. Conserv Genet Resour 4:359–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Evanno G, Regnaut S, Goudet J (2005) Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software STRUCTURE: a simulation study. Mol Ecol 14:2611–2620PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Garner TWJ, Gautschi B, Rothlisberger S, Reyer H-U (2000) A set of CA repeat microsatellite markers derived from the pool frog, Rana lessonae. Mol Ecol 9:2173–2175PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Goudet J (1995) FSTAT (Version 1.2): a computer program to calculate F-statistics. J Hered 86:485–486Google Scholar
  12. Goudet J (2005) PCAGEN. http://www2.unil.ch/popgen/softwares/pcagen.htm. Accessed 7 Nov 2012
  13. Gouy M, Guindon S, Gascuel O (2010) SeaView version 4: a multiplatform graphical user interface for sequence alignment and phylogenetic tree building. Mol Biol Evol 27:221–224PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Graf J-D, Polls Pelaz M (1989) Evolutionary genetics of the Rana esculenta complex. In: Dawley RM, Bogart JP (eds) Evolution and ecology of unisexual vertebrates. Bulletin 466, New York State Museum, pp 289–302Google Scholar
  15. Guex GD, Hotz H, Semlitsch RD (2002) Deleterious alleles and differential viability in progeny of natural hemiclonal frogs. Evolution 56:1036–1044PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Guindon S, Gascuel O (2003) A simple, fast, and accurate algorithm to estimate large phylogenies by maximum likelihood. Syst Biol 52:696–704PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Higgins D, Thompson J, Gibson T (1994) CLUSTAL W: improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position-specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice. Nucleic Acids Res 22:4673–4680PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Holenweg Peter A-K, Reyer H-U, Abt Tietje G (2002) Species and sex ratio differences in mixed populations of hybridogenetic water frogs: the influence of pond features. Ecoscience 9:1–11Google Scholar
  19. Holsbeek G, Jooris R (2009) Potential impact of genome exclusion by alien species in the hybridogenetic water frogs (Pelophylax esculentus complex). Biol Invasions 12:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hotz H, Mancino G, Bucci-Innocenti S, Ragghianti M, Berger L, Uzzell T (1985) Rana ridibunda varies geographically in inducing clonal gametogenesis in interspecies hybrids. J Exp Zool 236:199–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hotz H, Beerli P, Spolsky C (1992) Mitochondrial-DNA reveals formation of nonhybrid frogs by natural matings between hemiclonal hybrids. Mol Biol Evol 9:610–620PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Hotz H, Uzzell T, Guex G et al (2001) Microsatellites: a tool for evolutionary genetic studies of western Palearctic water frogs. Mitt Mus Nat kd Berl Zool 77:43–50Google Scholar
  23. Huxel GR (1999) Rapid displacement of native species by invasive species: effects of hybridization. Biol Conserv 89:143–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kuzmin S, Tarkhnishvili D, Ishchenko, Vladimir Dujsebayeva T, et al (2009) Pelophylax ridibundus IUCN red list of threatened species. http://www.iucnredlist.org/. Accessed 6 Jan 2013
  25. Lengagne T, Grolet O, Joly P (2006) Male mating speed promote hybridization in the Rana lessonaeRana esculenta waterfrog system. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 60:123–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Luquet E, Vorburger C, Hervant F et al (2011) Invasiveness of an introduced species: the role of hybridization and ecological constraints. Biol Invasions 13:1901–1915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Manchester SJ, Bullock JM (2000) The impacts of non-native species on UK biodiversity and the effectiveness of control. J Appl Ecol 37:845–864CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Marchesi P, Fournier J, Rey A (1999) Etat des populations de “grenouilles vertes” Rana lessonae, Rana kl. esculenta du Bois de Finges (Salquenen, VS). Bull Murithienne 117:13–22Google Scholar
  29. Meyer A, Zumbach S, Schmidt B, Monney J-C (2009) Amphibiens et reptiles de Suisse, Haupt Verlag, Bern, 336 ppGoogle Scholar
  30. Mooney HA, Cleland EE (2001) The evolutionary impact of invasive species. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:5446–5451PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Negovetic S, Anholt BR, Semlitsch RD, Reyer HU (2001) Specific responses of sexual and hybridogenetic European waterfrog tadpoles to temperature. Ecology 82:766–774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nöllert A, Nöllert C (2003) Guide des amphibiens d’Europe, Delachaux & Niestlé, 383 ppGoogle Scholar
  33. Nylander J (2004) MrAIC. pl. Program distributed by the author. Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala UniversityGoogle Scholar
  34. Petranka JW, Harp EM, Holbrook CT, Hamel JA (2007) Long-term persistence of amphibian populations in a restored wetlands complex. Biol Cons 138:371–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Plénet S, Hervant F, Joly P (2001) Ecology of the hybridogenetic Rana esculenta complex: differential oxygen requirements of tadpoles. Evol Ecol 14:13–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Plénet S, Joly P, Hervant F et al (2005) Are hybridogenetic complexes structured by habitat in water frogs? J Evol Biol 18:1575–1586PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Plötner J, Uzzell T, Beerli P, Spolsky C, Ohst T, Litvinchuk SN, Guex G-D, Reyer H-U, Hotz H (2008) Widespread unidirectional transfer of mitochondrial DNA: a case in western Palaearctic water frogs. J Evol Biol 21:668–681PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P (2000) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155:945–959PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. R Core Team (2012) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical ComputingGoogle Scholar
  40. Rannap R, Lõhmus A, Briggs L (2009) Restoring ponds for amphibians: a success story. Hydrobiologia 634:87–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rhymer M, Simberloff D (1996) Extinction by hybridization and introgression. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst 27:83–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schmeller DS, Seitz A, Crivelli A, Veith M (2005) Crossing species’ range borders: interspecies gene exchange mediated by hybridogenesis. Proc R Soc Biol Sci Ser B 272:1625–1631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schmeller DS, Pagano A, Plénet S, Veith M (2007) Introducing water frogs—is there a risk for indigenous species in France? C R Biol 330:684–690Google Scholar
  44. Schmidt BR (1993) Are hybridogenetic frogs cyclical parthenogens? Trends Ecol Evol 8:271–273PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Spolsky C, Uzzell T (1984) Natural interspecies transfer of mitochondrial DNA in amphibians. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 81:5802–5805PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Spolsky C, Uzzell T (1986) Evolutionary History of the hybridogenetic hybrid frog Rana esculenta as deduced from mtDNA Analyses. Mol Biol Evol 3:44–56PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Tamura K, Peterson D, Peterson N et al (2011) MEGA5: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis using maximum likelihood, evolutionary distance, and maximum parsimony methods. Mol Biol Evol 28:2731–2739PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tunner HG, Heppich S (1981) Premeiotic genome exclusion during oogenesis in the common edible frog, Rana esculenta. Naturwissenschaften 68:207–208PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Uzzell T, Berger L (1975) Electrophoretic phenotypes of Rana ridibunda, Rana lessonae, and their hybridogenetic associate, Rana esculenta. Proc Acad Nat Sci Phila 127:13–24Google Scholar
  50. Vorburger C (2001a) Fixation of deleterious mutations in clonal lineages: evidence from hybridogenetic frogs. Evolution 55:2319–2332PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Vorburger C (2001b) Non-hybrid offspring from matings between hemiclonal hybrid waterfrogs suggest occasional recombination between clonal genomes. Ecol Lett 4:628–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Vorburger C, Reyer H (2003) A genetic mechanism of species replacement in European waterfrogs ? Conserv Genet 4:141–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Vorburger C, Ribi G (1999) Aggression and competition for shelter between a native and an introduced crayfish in Europe. Freshw Biol 42:111–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Westphal MI, Browne M, MacKinnon K, Noble I (2008) The link between international trade and the global distribution of invasive alien species. Biol Invasions 10:391–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wilcove DS, Rothstein D, Dubow J et al (1998) Quantifying threats to imperiled species in the United States. BioSciences 48:607–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Williamson M, Fitter A (1966) The varying success of invaders. Ecology 77:1661–1666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zeisset I, Rowe G, Beebee TJC (2000) Polymerase chain reaction primers for microsatellite loci in the north European water frogs Rana ridibunda and R. lessonae. Mol Ecol 9:1173–1174PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Julien Leuenberger
    • 1
  • Antoine Gander
    • 2
  • Benedikt R. Schmidt
    • 3
    • 4
  • Nicolas Perrin
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Ecology and EvolutionUniversity of LausanneLausanneSwitzerland
  2. 2.Association de la Grande CariçaieCheseaux-NoréazSwitzerland
  3. 3.Institute of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental StudiesUniversity of ZurichZurichSwitzerland
  4. 4.KARCHNeuchâtelSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations