Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution

, Volume 61, Issue 3, pp 651–662 | Cite as

Genetic structure and gene flow in Beta vulgaris subspecies maritima along the Atlantic coast of France

  • Christopher M. Richards
  • Patrick A. Reeves
  • Ann L. Fenwick
  • Lee Panella
Research Article


Locating and quantifying genetic variation within crop wild relatives is an ongoing activity of gene banks tasked with ex situ conservation. Without detailed information about the population genetics of a species, geography often serves as a reasonable proxy for differentiation. With this in mind, this paper examines the genetic diversity and differentiation of Beta vulgaris subsp. maritima accessions collected along a well-studied latitudinal gradient along the French Atlantic coast of France as well as Corsica, for use as representative genotypes from the Mediterranean basin. The aim of this work is to identify the scale and magnitude of differentiation and diversity in this set of accessions, using both molecular and quantitative traits. We assessed clinal variation and admixture in genetic and morphometric data along this latitudinal gradient. Results from this study revealed a complex pattern of recent gene flow and immigration on a historical biogeographic structure. Our data suggest that a presumed latitudinal cline is in reality an admixed mosaic of genotypes.


Beta vulgaris Biogeography Crop wild relative Gene flow Genetic diversity Genetic structure 


  1. Biancardi E, Panella LW, Lewellen RT (2012) Beta maritima, the origin of beets. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Boudry P, Mccombie H, Van Dijk H (2002) Vernalization requirement of wild beet Beta vulgaris ssp. maritima: among population variation and its adaptive significance. J Ecol 90:693–703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. de Bock TSM (1986) The genus Beta: domestication, taxonomy and interspecific hybridization for plant breeding. Acta Horticul 182:335–343Google Scholar
  4. Doney DL (1992) Morphology of North French Atlantic Beta. In: Frese L (ed) International Beta genetic resources network. A report on the 2nd international Beta genetic resources workship held at the institute for crop science and plant breeding, Braunschweig, Germany, 24–28 June 1991. International Crop Network Series No. 7. IBPGR, Rome, pp 17–28Google Scholar
  5. El Mousadik A, Petit RJ (1996) High level of genetic differentiation for allelic richness among populations of the argan tree [Argania spinosa (L.) Skeels] endemic to Morocco. Theor Appl Genet 92:832–839PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 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
  7. Fievet V, Touzet P, Arnaud JF, Cuguen J (2007) Spatial analysis of nuclear and cytoplasmic DNA diversity in wild sea beet (Beta vulgaris ssp. maritima) populations: do marine currents shape the genetic structure? Mol Ecol 16:1847–1864PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ford-Lloyd BV, Williams ALS, Williams JT (1975) A revision of Beta section Vulgares (Chenopodiaceae), with new light on the origin of cultivated beets. Bot J Linn Soc 71:89–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Frese L, Desprez B, Ziegler D (2001) Potential of genetic resources and breeding strategies for base-broadening in Beta. In: Cooper HD, Spillane C, Hodgkin T (eds) Broadening the genetic base of crop production. FAO, IBPRGI jointly with CABI Publishing, Rome, pp 295–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Goudet J (1995) FSTAT (Version 1.2): a computer program to calculate F-statistics. J Hered 86:485–486Google Scholar
  11. Gur A, Zamir D (2004) Unused natural variation can lift yield barriers in plant breeding. PLoS Biol 2:e245PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Harlan JR (1976) Genetic resources in wild relatives of crops. Crop Sci 16:329–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hautekèete NC, Piquot Y, Van Dijk H (2002a) Life span in Beta vulgaris ssp. maritima: the effects of age at first reproduction and disturbance. J Ecol 90:508–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hautekèete NC, Piquot Y, Van Dijk H (2002b) Variation in ageing and meristemic activity in relation to flower-bud and fruit excision in the Beta species complex. New Phytol 154:575–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hewitt GM (1999) Post-glacial re-colonization of European biota. Biol J Linn Soc 68:87–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hewitt G (2000) The genetic legacy of the Quaternary ice ages. Nature 405:907–913PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Holsinger KE, Weir BS (2009) Genetics in geographically structured populations: defining, estimating and interpreting Fst. Nat Rev Genet 10:639–650PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Huelsenbeck JP, Andolfatto P (2007) Inference of population structure under a dirichlet process model. Genetics 175:1787–1802PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 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 23:1801–1806PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Letschert JPW (1993) Beta section Beta: biogeographical patterns of variation, and taxonomy. Ph.D. Wageningen Agricultural University Papers, pp 93–1Google Scholar
  21. Letschert JPW, Frese L (1993) Analysis of morphological variation in wild beet (Beta vulgaris L.) from Sicily. Genet Resour Crop Evol 40:15–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Letschert JPW, Lange W, Frese L, van Der Berg RG (1994) Taxonomy of Beta section Beta. J Sugar Beet Res 31:69–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lewis PO, Zaykin D (2001) GDA user’s manual. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Connecticut,
  24. Lockwood DR, Richards CM, Volk GM (2007) Probabilistic models for collecting genetic diversity: comparisons, caveats and limitations. Crop Sci 47:859–866CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Manel S, Schwartz MK, Luikart G, Taberlet P (2003) Landscape genetics: combining landscape ecology and population genetics. Trends Ecol Evol 18:189–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Manel S, Gaggiotti OE, Waples RS (2005) Assignment methods: matching biological questions with appropriate techniques. Trends Ecol Evol 20:136–142PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Maxted N, Ford-Lloyd BV, Jury SL, Kell SP, Scholten MA (2006) Towards a definition of a crop wild relative. Biodiv Conserv 15:2673–2685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Maxted N, Dulloo E, Ford-Lloyd BV, Iriondo JM, Jarvis A (2008) Gap analysis: a tool for complementary genetic conservation assessment. Divers Distrib 14:1018–1030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McCouch SR, McNally KL, Wang W, Sackville Hamilton R (2012) Genomics of gene banks: a case study in rice. Am J Bot 99:407–423PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McGrath JM, Trebbi D, Fenwick A, Panella L, Schulz B, Laurent V, Barnes S, Murray SC (2007) An open-source first-generation molecular genetic map from a sugarbeet × table beet cross and its extension to physical mapping. Plant Genom 47:27–44. (A supplement to Crop Science)Google Scholar
  31. Merimans PG, Hedrick PW (2011) Assessing population structure: Fst and related measures. Mol Ecol Res 11:5–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Panella L, Lewellen RT (2007) Broadening the genetic base of sugar beet: introgression from wild relatives. Euphytica 154:382–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Perrier X, Jacquemoud-Collet JP (2006) DARwin software. Accessed 20 Feb 2013
  34. Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P (2000) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155:945–959PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Rambaut A (2006) FigTree v1.3.1. 1.3.1 edn. Accessed 20 Feb 2013
  36. Rambaut A, Drummond A (2009). FigTree v1. 3.1. Computer program and documentation distributed by the author at
  37. Ramirez-Villegas J, Khoury C, Jarvis A, Debouck DG, Guarino L (2010) A gap analysis methodology for collecting crop genepools: a case study with Phaseolus beans. PLoS One 5:e13497PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. Reeves P, Panella L, Richards C (2012) Retention of agronomically important variation in germplasm core collections: implications for allele mining. Theor Appl Genet 124:1155–1171PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Richards CM, Brownson M, Mitchell S, Kresovich S, Panella L (2004) Length polymorphisms of simple sequence repeats in Beta vulgaris. Mol Ecol Notes 4:243–245Google Scholar
  40. Santoni S, Bervillè A (1995) Characterization of the nuclear ribosomal DNA units and phylogeny of Beta L. wild forms and cultivated beets. Theor Appl Genet 83:533–542Google Scholar
  41. Schmitt T (2007) Molecular biogeography of Europe: pleistocene cycles and postglacial trends. Frontiers Zool 4:11–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schwartz M, McKelvey K (2009) Why sampling scheme matters: the effect of sampling scheme on landscape genetic results. Conserv Genet 10:441–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Slatkin M, Barton NH (1989) A comparison of three indirect methods for estimating average levels of gene flow. Evolution 43:1349–1368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tanksley SD, McCouch SR (1997) Seed banks and molecular maps: unlocking genetic potential from the wild. Science 277:1063–1066PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Van Dijk H (2009) Evolutionary change in flowering phenology in the iteroparous herb Beta vulgaris ssp. maritima: a search for the underlying mechanisms. J Exp Bot 60:3143–3155PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Van Dijk H, Boudry P (1992) Genetic variation for life histories in Beta maritima. In: International Beta genetic resources network. A report on the 2nd international WBN workshop, institute for crop science and plant breeding, Braunschweig, Germany, 24–28, June, 1991. International Crop Network Series No. 7. IPGRI, Rome, pp 9–16Google Scholar
  47. Van Dijk H, Boudry P, Mccombie H, Vernet P (1997) Flowering time in wild beet (Beta vulgaris ssp. maritima) along a latitudinal cline. Acta Oecol 18:47–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Viard F, Bernard J, Desplanque B (2002) Crop-weed interactions in the Beta vulgaris complex at a local scale: allelic diversity and gene flow within sugar beet fields. Theor Appl Genet 104:688–697PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Viard F, Arnaud J-F, Delescluse M, Cuguen J (2004) Tracing back seed and pollen flow within the crop-wild Beta vulgaris complex: genetic distinctiveness vs. hot spots of hybridization over a regional scale. Mol Ecol 13:1357–1364PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Villain S (2007) Histoire evolutive de la section Beta. Ph.D. Universite des Sciences et Technologies de LilleGoogle Scholar
  51. Villain S, Touzet P, Cuguen J (2009) Reconstructing the evolutionary history of Beta section Beta with molecular data. A focus on the Canary Islands. In: Frese L, Germeier CU, Lipman E, Maggioni L (eds) Report of the 3rd joint meeting of the ECP/GR Beta working group and world Beta network, 8–10 March 2006. Tenerife, Spain. Bioversity International, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  52. Volk GM, Richards CM, Reilley AA, Henk AD, Forsline PL, Aldwinckle HS (2005) Ex situ conservation of vegetatively propagated species: development of a seed-based core collection for Malus sieversii. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 130:203–210Google Scholar
  53. Wagmann K, Hautekèete NC, Piquot Y, Meunier C, Schmitt SE, Van Dijk H (2012) Seed dormancy distribution: explanatory ecological factors. Ann Bot 110:1205–1219PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Waples RS, Gaggiotti O (2006) What is a population? An empirical evaluation of some genetic methods for identifying the number of gene pools and their degree of connectivity. Mol Ecol 15:1419–1439PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Whitlock MC, McCauley DE (1999) Indirect measures of gene flow and migration: FST[ne]1/(4Nm + 1). Heredity 82:117–125PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wilson GA, Rannala B (2003) Bayesian inference of recent migration rates using multilocus genotypes. Genetics 163:1177–1191PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht (outside the USA) 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher M. Richards
    • 1
  • Patrick A. Reeves
    • 1
  • Ann L. Fenwick
    • 2
  • Lee Panella
    • 3
  1. 1.National Center for Genetic Resources Preservation, Agricultural Research ServiceUnited States Department of AgricultureFort CollinsUSA
  2. 2.Beet Sugar Development FoundationFort CollinsUSA
  3. 3.Sugarbeet Research Unit, Agricultural Research ServiceUnited States Department of AgricultureFort CollinsUSA

Personalised recommendations