Genetica

, Volume 132, Issue 3, pp 219–225 | Cite as

Does organismal pedigree impact the magnitude of topological congruence among gene trees for unlinked loci?

Article

Abstract

One of the fundamental assumptions in the multi-locus approach to phylogeographic studies is that unlinked loci have independent genealogies. For this reason, congruence among gene trees from unlinked loci is normally interpreted as support for the existence of external forces that may have concordantly shaped the topology of multiple gene trees. However, it is also important to address and quantify the possibility that gene trees within a given species are all inherently constrained to some degree by their shared organismal pedigree, and thus in this strict sense are not entirely independent. Here we demonstrate by computer simulations that gene trees from a shared pedigree tend to display higher topological concordance than do gene trees from independent pedigrees with the same demographic parameters, but we also show that these constraining effects are normally minor in comparison to the much higher degree of topological concordance that can routinely emerge from external phylogeographic shaping forces. The topology-constraining effect of a shared pedigree decreases as effective population size increases, and becomes almost negligible in a random mating population of more than 1,000 individuals. Moreover, statistical detection of the pedigree effect requires a relatively large number of unlinked loci that far exceed what is typically used in current phylogeographic studies. Thus, with the possible exception of extremely small populations, multiple unlinked genes within a pedigree can indeed be assumed, for most practical purposes, to have independent genealogical histories.

Keywords

Dispersal Gene flow Genealogy Phylogeny Phylogeography Vicariance 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank J. Kissinger, the Institute of Bioinformatics, and the Research Computing Center at University of Georgia for providing computation resources. Comments from anonymous reviewers and editor greatly improved this manuscript. C.-H.K. was supported by a National Institute of Health Training Grant (GM07103) and the Alton Graduate Research Fellowship to the Department of Genetics at University of Georgia, and J.C.A. was supported by funds from the University of California at Irvine.

References

  1. Avise JC (2000) Phylogeography: the history and formation of species. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  2. Avise JC, Wollenberg K (1997) Phylogenetics and the origin of species. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94:7748–7755PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ball RM, Neigel JE, Avise JC (1990) Gene genealogies within the organismal pedigrees of random-mating populations. Evolution 44:360–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bourque M (1978) Arbres de Steiner et reseaux dont certains sommets sont a localization variable. Ph.D. Dissertation, Universite de Montreal, QuebecGoogle Scholar
  5. Degnan JH, Salter LA (2005). Gene tree distributions under the coalescent process. Evolution 59:24–37PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Felsenstein J (1978) The number of evolutionary trees. Syst Zool 27:27–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hudson RR, Coyne JA (2002) Mathematical consequences of the genealogical species concept. Evolution 56:1557–1565PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Kuhner MK, Felsenstein J (1994) A simulation comparison of phylogeny algorithms under equal and unequal evolutionary rates. Mol Biol Evol 11:459–468PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Kuo CH, Avise JC (2005) Phylogeographic breaks in low-dispersal species: the emergence of concordance across gene trees. Genetica 124:179–186PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Maddison WP (1997) Gene trees in species trees. Syst Biol 46:523–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Wilkins JF, Wakeley J (2002) The coalescent in a continuous, finite, linear population. Genetics 161:873–888PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Wollenberg K, Avise JC (1998) Sampling properties of genealogical pathways underlying population pedigrees. Evolution 52:957–966CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of GeneticsUniversity of GeorgiaAthensUSA
  2. 2.Department of Ecology and Evolutionary BiologyUniversity of CaliforniaIrvineUSA

Personalised recommendations