Conservation Genetics

, Volume 11, Issue 2, pp 497–508 | Cite as

An experimental study of the S-Allee effect in the self-incompatible plant Biscutella neustriaca

  • Jean-Baptiste Leducq
  • Célia Chantal Gosset
  • Matthieu Poiret
  • Frédéric Hendoux
  • Xavier Vekemans
  • Sylvain Billiard
Research Article


Homomorphic self-incompatibility (SI) evolved in many plant families to enforce selfing avoidance, and is controlled by a single multiallelic locus (the S-locus). In a fragmented landscape, strong variation in population size and in local density is expected to cause strong variation in allelic diversity at the S-locus, which could generate an Allee effect on female reproductive success by constraining compatible pollen availability. In this experimental study, we aimed at detecting this SI-specific Allee effect (or S-Allee effect) in the endangered species Biscutella neustriaca. We demonstrated the occurrence of a SI mating system in the species and determined compatibility relationships among genotypes through a large set of controlled pollinations. For the experiment, we chose three different pollen receptor genotypes, each compatible with respectively 100, 75 and 25% of four other genotypes, which constituted the pollen sources. We placed different ramets of each receptor at different distances from the pollen sources to control for pollen limitation due to low local density, and we measured the seed set on each receptor plant three times consecutively. Analyses performed with generalized linear mixed models showed that both the distance to the pollen sources and the mate availability due to SI had a significant effect on seed set, with a strong reduction observed when mate availability was limited to 25%. Our results suggest that pollen limitation due to a restriction in compatible mate availability could occur in small or scattered populations exhibiting low allelic diversity at the S-locus.


Allee effect Pollen limitation Mate availability Self-incompatibility Generalized linear mixed model Brassicaceae 

Supplementary material

10592_2010_55_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (177 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 176 kb)


  1. Ågren J (1996) Population size, pollinator limitation and seed set in the self-incompatible herb Lythrum salicaria. Ecology 77:1779–1790CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Antonovics J, Levin DA (1980) The ecological and genetic consequences of density-dependent regulation in plants. Ann Rev Ecol Sys 11:411–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ashman TL, Knight TM, Steets JA, Amarasekare P, Burd M, Campbell DR, Dudash MR, Johnston MO, Mazer SJ, Mitchell RJ, Morgan MT, Wilson WG (2004) Pollen limitation of plant reproduction: ecological and evolutionary causes and consequences. Ecology 85:2408–2421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bates D, Maechler M (2009) lme4: linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999375-31Google Scholar
  5. Barrett SCH, Husband BC (1997) Ecology and genetics of ephemeral plant populations: Eichhornia paniculata (Pontederiaceae) in Northeast Brazil. J Hered 88:277–284Google Scholar
  6. Billiard S, Castric V, Vekemans X (2007) A general model to explore complex dominance patterns in plant sporophytic self-incompatibility systems. Genetics 175:1351–1369CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Brys R, Jacquemyn H, Beeckman T (2008) Morph-ratio variation, population size and female reproductive success in distylous Pulmonaria officinalis (Boraginaceae). J Evol Biol 21:1281–1289CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Brys R, Jacquemyn H, De Bruyn L, Hermy M (2007) Pollination success and reproductive output in experimental populations of the self-incompatible Primula vulgaris. Int J Plant Sci 168:571–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Busch JW, Schoen JD (2008) The evolution of self-incompatibility when mates are limiting. Trends Plant Sci 13:128–136CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Byers DL, Meagher TR (1992) Mate availability in small populations of plant species with homomorphic sporophytic self-incompatibility. Heredity 68:353–359Google Scholar
  11. Campbell LG, Husband BC (2007) Small populations are mate-poor but pollinator-rich in a rare, self-incompatible plant, Hymenoxys herbacea (Asteraceae). New Phytol 174:915–925CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Cartwright RA (2009) Antagonism between local dispersal and self-incompatibility systems in a continuous plant population. Mol Ecol 18:2327–2336CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Castric V, Vekemans X (2004) Plant self-incompatibility in natural populations: a critical assessment of recent theoretical and empirical advances. Mol Ecol 13:2873–2889CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. DeMauro MM (1993) Relationship of breeding system to rarity in the lakeside daisy (Hymenoxys acaulis var. glabra). Conserv Biol 7:542–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eckert CG, Manicacci D, Barrett SCH (1996) Genetic drift and founder effect in native versus introduced populations of an invading plant, Lythrum salicaria (Lythraceae). Evolution 50:1512–1519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Elam DR, Ridley CE, Goodell K, Ellstrand NC (2007) Population size and relatedness affect fitness of a self-incompatible invasive plant. P Natl Acad Sci USA 104:549–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fischer M, Hock M, Paschke M (2003) Low genetic variation reduces cross-compatibility and offspring fitness in populations of a narrow endemic plant with a self-incompatibility system. Conserv Genet 4:325–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gascoigne J, Berec L, Gregory S, Courchamp F (2009) Dangerously few liaisons: a review of mate-finding Allee effects. Popul Ecol 51:355–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Glémin S, Bataillon T, Ronfort J, Mignot A, Olivieri I (2001) Inbreeding depression in small populations of self-incompatible plants. Genetics 159:1217–1229PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Glémin S, Petit C, Maurice S, Mignot A (2008) Consequences of low mate availability in the rare self-incompatible species Brassica insularis. Conserv Biol 22:216–221CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Holderegger R, Häner R, Csencsics D, Angelone S, Hoebee S (2008) S-allele diversity suggests no mate limitation in small populations of a self-incompatible plant. Evolution 62:2922–2928CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Igic B, Lande R, Kohn JR (2008) Loss of self-incompatibility and its evolutionary consequences. Int J Plant Sci 169:93–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kirchner F, Luijten SH, Imbert E, Riba M, Mayol M, Gonzalez-Martýnez SC, Mignot A, Colas B (2005) Effects of local density on insect visitation and fertilization success in the narrow-endemic Centaurea corymbosa (Asteraceae). Oikos 111:130–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Knight TM, Steets JA, Vamosi JC, Mazer SJ, Burd M, Campbell DR, Dudash MR, Johnston MO, Mitchell RJ, Ashman T-L (2005) Pollen limitation of plant reproduction: pattern and process. Annu Rev Ecol Evol S 36:467–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Larson BMH, Barrett SCH (2000) A comparative analysis of pollen limitation in flowering plants. Biol J Linn Soc 69:503–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lawrence MJ (2000) Population genetics of the homomorphic self-incompatibility polymorphisms in flowering plants. Ann Bot 85:221–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Levin DA, Kelley C, Sarkar S (2009) Enhancement of Allee effects in plants due to self-incompatibility alleles. J Ecol 97:518–527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Llaurens V, Billiard S, Leducq JB, Castric V, Klein EK, Vekemans X (2008) Does frequency-dependent selection with complex dominance interactions accurately predict allelic frequencies at the self-incompatibility locus in Arabidopsis halleri? Evolution 62:2545–2557CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Marshall TC, Slate J, Kruuk L, Pemberton JM (1998) Statistical confidence for likelihood-based paternity inference in natural populations. Mol Ecol 7:639–655CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Ockendon DJ (1975) Dominance relationships between S-alleles in the stigma of Brussels sprouts (Brassica oleraceae var. gemmifera). Euphytica 24:165–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pickup M, Young AG (2008) Population size, self-incompatibility and genetic rescue in diploid and tetraploid races of Rutidosis leptorrhynchoides (Asteraceae). Heredity 100:268–274CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Prigoda NL, Nassuth A, Mable BK (2005) Phenotypic and genotypic expression of self-incompatibility haplotypes in Arabidopsis lyrata suggests unique origin of alleles in different dominance classes. Mol Biol Evol 22:1609–1620CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Reinartz JA, Les DH (1994) Bottleneck-induced dissolution of self-incompatibility and breeding system consequences in Aster Furcatus (Asteraceae). Am J Bot 81:446–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. R Development Core Team (2009) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  35. Schierup MH, Vekemans X, Christiansen FB (1997) Evolutionary dynamics of sporophytic self-incompatibility alleles in plants. Genetics 147:835–846PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Takayama S, Isogai A (2005) Self-incompatibility in plants. Annu Rev Plant Biol 56:467–489CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Vekemans X, Schierup MH, Christiansen FB (1998) Mate availability and fecundity selection in multi-allelic self-incompatibility systems in plants. Evolution 52:19–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wagenius S, Lonsdorf E, Neuhauser C (2007) Patch aging and the S-Allee effect: breeding system effects on the demographic response of plants to habitat fragmentation. Am Nat 169:383–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Waites AR, Ågren J (2004) Pollinator visitation, stigmatic pollen loads, and among-population variation in seed set in Lythrum salicaria. J Ecol 92:512–526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Willi Y, Van Buskirk J, Fischer M (2005) A threefold Allee effect: population size affects cross-compatibility, inbreeding depression, and drift load in the self-incompatible Ranunculus repens. Genetics 169:2255–2265CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Wright S (1939) The distribution of self-sterility alleles in populations. Genetics 24:538–552PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Yokoyama S, Hetherington LE (1982) The expected number of self-incompatibility alleles in finite plant populations. Heredity 48:299–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Zuur AF, Ieno EN, Walker NJ, Saveliev AA, Smith GM (2009) Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jean-Baptiste Leducq
    • 1
  • Célia Chantal Gosset
    • 1
  • Matthieu Poiret
    • 1
  • Frédéric Hendoux
    • 2
  • Xavier Vekemans
    • 1
  • Sylvain Billiard
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratoire Génétique et Evolution des Populations VégétalesVilleneuve d’AscqFrance
  2. 2.Conservatoire Botanique National de Bailleul, Hameau de HaendriesBailleulFrance

Personalised recommendations