Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Does genetic diversity of restored sites differ from natural sites? A comparison of Vallisneria americana (Hydrocharitaceae) populations within the Chesapeake Bay

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Conservation Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The goal of ecological restoration is to re-establish self-sustaining ecosystems that will resist future perturbation without additional human input. We focus here on the re-establishment of submersed aquatic macrophyte beds in the restoration of the Chesapeake Bay estuary. Degraded environmental conditions are often to blame for poor bed establishment, but genetic factors could also be contributing to low survival. We quantified the effect of restoration practices on genetic diversity in the submersed aquatic plant species Vallisneria americana Michx. (Hydrocharitaceae) in the Chesapeake Bay. In 2007, we collected 440 shoots from 8 restored/natural site pairs and 4 restoration stock repositories, and genotyped those individuals at 10 microsatellite loci. Restoration practices do not appear to negatively impact genetic diversity, and basic measures of genetic diversity within restored sites overlap with natural sites. However, small population size of restored sites, significant inbreeding coefficients within 3 sites, and low overlap of allele composition among sites provide cause for concern. These problems are relatively minor, and we propose several corrections that would alleviate them altogether. Managers should be encouraged by our findings as well as the current state of the genetic diversity within V. americana restoration efforts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arnaud-Haond S, Belkhir K (2007) GENCLONE: a computer program to analyse genotypic data, test for clonality and describe spatial clonal organization. Mol Ecol Notes 7:15–17

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Arnaud-Haond S, Duarte CM, Alberto F, Serrao EA (2007) Standardizing methods to address clonality in population studies. Mol Ecol 16:5115–5139

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Broadhurst LM, Lowe A, Coates DJ, Cunningham SA, McDonald M, Vesk PA, Yates C (2008) Seed supply for broadscale restoration: maximizing evolutionary potential. Evol Appl 1:587–597

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnett RK, Lloyd MW, Engelhardt KAM, Neel MC (2009) Development of 11 polymorphic microsatellite markers in a macrophyte of conservation concern, Vallisneria americana Michaux (Hydrocharitaceae). Mol Ecol Resour 9:1427–1429

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cornuet JM, Luikart G (1996) Description and power analysis of two tests for detecting recent population bottlenecks from allele frequency data. Genetics 144:2001–2014

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dennison WC, Orth RJ, Moore KA, Stevenson JC, Carter V, Kollar S, Bergstrom PW, Batiuk RA (1993) Assessing water-quality with submersed aquatic vegetation. Bioscience 43:86–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deredec A, Courchamp F (2007) Importance of the allee effect for reintroductions. Ecoscience 14:440–451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Rienzo A, Peterson AC, Garza JC, Valdes AM, Slatkin M, Freimer NB (1994) Mutational processes of simple-sequence repeat loci in human populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91:3166–3170

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dudash MR (1990) Relative fitness of selfed and outcrossed progeny in a self-compatible, protandrous species, Sabatia angularis L. (Gentianaceae): a comparison in three environments. Evolution 1129–1139

  • Ehlers A, Worm B, Reusch TBH (2008) Importance of genetic diversity in eelgrass Zostera marina for its resilience to global warming. Mar Ecol 355:1–7

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellers J, Rog S, Braam C, Berg MP (2011) Genotypic richness and phenotypic dissimilarity enhance population performance. Ecology 92:1605–1615

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ellstrand NC, Elam DR (1993) Population genetic consequences of small population size: implications for plant conservation. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 24:217–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fenster CB, Dudash MR (1994) Genetic considerations in plant population conservation and restoration. In: Bowles ML, Whelan C (eds) Restoration of endangered species: conceptual issues. Planning and Implementation Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 34–62

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fenster CB, Galloway LF (2000) Inbreeding and outbreeding depression in natural populations of Chamaecrista fasciculata (Fabaceae). Conserv Biol 14:1406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fonseca MS, Kenworthy WJ, Thayer GW (1998) Guidelines for the conservation and restoration of seagrasses in the United States and adjacent waters. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coastal Ocean Office NOAA Coastal Ocean, Program Decision Analysis Series no 12

    Google Scholar 

  • Frankham R (1995) Inbreeding and extinction—a threshold effect. Conserv Biol 9:792–799

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frankham R (1996) Relationship of genetic variation to population size in wildlife. Conserv Biol 10:1500–1508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franklin IR (1980) Evolutionary change in small populations. In: Soule ME, Wilcox BA (eds) Conservation biology: an evolutionary-ecological perspective. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, pp 151–169

    Google Scholar 

  • Gigord L, Lavigne C, Shykoff JA (1998) Partial self-incompatibility and inbreeding depression in a native tree species of La Réunion (Indian Ocean). Oecologia 117:342–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffith B, Scott JM, Carpenter JW, Reed C (1989) Translocation as a species conservation tool: status and strategy. Science 245:477–480

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hartl DL, Clark AG (2007) Principles of population genetics, 4th edn. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedrick PW, Kalinowski ST (2000) Inbreeding depression in conservation biology. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 31:139–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopper KR, Roush RT (1993) Mate finding, dispersal, number released, and the success of biological-control introductions. Ecol Entomol 18:321–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hufford KM, Mazer SJ (2003) Plant ecotypes: genetic differentiation in the age of ecological restoration. Trends Ecol Evol 18:147–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes AR, Stachowicz JJ (2004) Genetic diversity enhances the resistance of a seagrass ecosystem to disturbance. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:8998–9002

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes AR, Stachowicz JJ (2009) Ecological impacts of genotypic diversity in the clonal seagrass Zostera marina. Ecology 90:1412–1419

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes AR, Stachowicz JJ (2011) Seagrass genotypic diversity increases disturbance response via complementarity and dominance. J Ecol 99:445–453

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordan WR, Peter RL, Allen EB (1988) Ecological restoration as a strategy for conserving biological diversity. Environ Manag 12:55–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalinowski ST (2004) Counting alleles with rarefaction: private alleles and hierarchical sampling designs. Conserv Genet 5:539–543

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kalinowski ST (2005a) Do polymorphic loci require large sample sizes to estimate genetic distances? Heredity 94:33–36

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kalinowski ST (2005b) HP-RARE 1.0: a computer program for performing rarefaction on measures of allelic richness. Mol Ecol Notes 5:187–189

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Keller LF, Waller DM (2002) Inbreeding effects in wild populations. Trends Ecol Evol 17:230–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kemp WM, Boynton WR, Stevenson JC, Twilley RR, Means JC (1983) The decline of submerged vascular plants in upper Chesapeake Bay: summary of results concerning possible causes. Mar Technol Soc J 17:78–89

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis PO, Zaykin D (2001) Genetic data analysis: computer program for the analysis of allelic data. free program distributed by the authors over the internet from http://ewis.eeb.unconn.edu/lewishome/software.html

  • Linhart YB, Grant MC (1996) Evolutionary significance of local genetic differentiation in plants. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 27:237–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu MH, Chen XY, Zhang X, Shen DW (2008) A population genetic evaluation of ecological restoration with the case study on Cyclobalanopsis myrsinaefolia (Fagaceae). Plant Ecol 197:31–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd M, Burnett R, Engelhardt K, Neel M (2011) The structure of population genetic diversity in Vallisneria americana in the Chesapeake Bay: implications for restoration. Conserv Genet 12:1269–1285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch M, Lande R (1998) The critical effective size for a genetically secure population. Anim Conserv 1:70–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meirmans PG, Van Tienderen PH (2004) GENOTYPE and GENODIVE: two programs for the analysis of genetic diversity of asexual organisms. Mol Ecol Notes 4:792–794

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montalvo A, Ellstrand N (2000) Transplantation of the subshrub Lotus scoparius: testing the home-site advantage hypothesis. Conserv Biol 14:1034–1045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montalvo AM, Ellstrand NC (2001) Nonlocal transplantation and outbreeding depression in the subshrub Lotus scoparius (Fabaceae). Am J Bot 88:258–269

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Montalvo AM, Williams SL, Rice KJ, Buchmann SL, Cory C, Handel SN, Nabhan GP, Primack R, Robichaux RH (1997) Restoration biology: a population biology perspective. Restor Ecol 5:277–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neel MC, McKelvey K, Waples RS, Ryman N, Lloyd MW, Short Bull R, Allendorf FW, Schwartz MK (in review) Estimation of effective population size in continuously distributed populations: there goes the neighborhood. Am Nat

  • Newman D, Pilson D (1997) Increased probability of extinction due to decreased genetic effective population size: experimental populations of Clarkia pulchella. Evolution 51:354–362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palstra FP, Ruzzante DE (2008) Genetic estimates of contemporary effective population size: what can they tell us about the importance of genetic stochasticity for wild population persistence? Mol Ecol 17:3428–3447

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pleasants JM, Wendel JF (1989) Genetic diversity in a clonal narrow endemic, Erythronium propullans, and in its widespread progenitor, Erythronium albidum. Am J Bot 76:1136–1151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Procaccini G, Piazzi L (2001) Genetic polymorphism and transplantation success in the mediterranean seagrass Posidonia oceanica. Restor Ecol 9:332–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pruett CL, Winker K (2008) The effects of sample size on population genetic diversity estimates in song sparrows Melospiza melodia. J Avian Biol 39:252–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team (2010) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramp JM, Collinge SK, Ranker TA (2006) Restoration genetics of the vernal pool endemic Lasthenia conjugens (Asteraceae). Conserv Genet 7:631–649

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Reusch TBH (2001) Fitness-consequences of geitonogamous selfing in a clonal marine angiosperm (Zostera marina). J Evol Biol 14:129–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reusch TBH, Ehlers A, Hammerli A, Worm B (2005) Ecosystem recovery after climatic extremes enhanced by genotypic diversity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102:2826–2831

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rice KJ, Emery NC (2003) Managing microevolution: restoration in the face of global change. Front Ecol Environ 1:469–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson DM, Pysek P (2006) Plant invasions: merging the concepts of species invasiveness and community invasibility. Prog Phys Geog 30:409–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowntree JK, Cameron DD, Preziosi RF (2011) Genetic variation changes the interactions between the parasitic plant-ecosystem engineer Rhinanthus and its hosts. Philos T R Soc B 366:1380–1388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruckelshaus MH (1995) Estimates of outcrossing rates and of inbreeding depression in a population of the marine angiosperm Zostera marina. Mar Biol 123:583–593

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Short FT, Wyllie-Echeverria S (1996) Natural and human-induced disturbance of seagrasses. Environ Conserv 23:17–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soule ME (1980) Thresholds for survival: maintaining fitness and evolutionary potential. In: Soule ME, Wilcox BA (eds) Conservation biology: an evolutionary-ecological perspective. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, pp 151–169

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomas F, Abbott JM, Steinberg C, Balk M, Williams SL, Stachowicz JJ (2011) Plant genotype and nitrogen loading influence seagrass productivity, biochemistry, and plant–herbivore interactions. Ecology 92:1807–1817

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • van Katwijk M, Bos A, de Jonge V, Hanssen L, Hermus D, de Jong D (2009) Guidelines for seagrass restoration: importance of habitat selection and donor population, spreading of risks, and ecosystem engineering effects. Mar Pollut Bull 58:179–188

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Waples RS (1991) Genetic methods for estimating the effective size of cetacean populations. Report of **the International Whaling Commision Special Issue 13:279–300

    Google Scholar 

  • Waples RS (2006) A bias correction for estimates of effective population size based on linkage disequilibrium at unlinked gene loci. Conserv Genet 7:167–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waples RS, Do C (2008) LDNe: a program for estimating effective population size from data on linkage disequilibrium. Mol Ecol Resour 8:753–756

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weir BS, Cockerham CC (1984) Estimating F-statistics for the analysis of population structure. Evolution 38:1358–1370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitlock MC (2000) Fixation of new alleles and the extinction of small populations: drift load, beneficial alleles, and sexual selection. Evolution 54:1855–1861

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Williams SL (2001) Reduced genetic diversity in eelgrass transplantations affects both population growth and individual fitness. Ecol Appl 11:1472–1488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams SL, Davis CA (1996) Population genetic analyses of transplanted eelgrass (Zostera marina) beds reveal reduced genetic diversity in southern California. Restor Ecol 4:163–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wimp GM, Martinsen GD, Floate KD, Bangert RK, Whitham TG (2005) Plant genetic determinants of arthropod community structure and diversity. Evolution 59:61–69

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zaviezo T, Grez AA, Estades CF, Perez A (2006) Effects of habitat loss, habitat fragmentation, and isolation on the density, species richness, and distribution of ladybeetles in manipulated alfalfa landscapes. Ecol Entomol 31:646–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zayed A, Constantin SA, Packer L (2007) Successful biological invasion despite a severe genetic load. PLos One 2:e868

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of a number of organizations and individuals that were instrumental in assistance with location of sites and collection of samples: Maryland Department of Natural Resources; USDA plant materials center, Beltsville, Maryland; Kester’s wild game food nurseries; Jason Granberg; Peter Bergstrom; Lee Karrh; Mark Lewandowski; Stan Kollar; Nancy Rybicki; Todd Beser; Ken Moore; and Steve Ailstock. We thank Paul Widmeyer for creating the study area map. Funding was provided through NOAA Sea Grant Maryland, and University of Maryland Department of Plant Science and Landscape Architecture, and the University of Maryland Agricultural Experiment Station.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Plant Science and Landscape Architecture, University of Maryland-College Park, 2116 Plant Sciences Building, College Park, MD, 20742-4452, USA

    Michael W. Lloyd, Robert K. Burnett Jr. & Maile C. Neel

  2. Department of Entomology, University of Maryland-College Park, 2116 Plant Sciences Building, College Park, MD, 20742-4452, USA

    Michael W. Lloyd, Robert K. Burnett Jr. & Maile C. Neel

  3. Appalachian Laboratory, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, 301 Braddock Road, Frostburg, MD, 21532-2307, USA

    Katharina A. M. Engelhardt

Authors
  1. Michael W. Lloyd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robert K. Burnett Jr.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Katharina A. M. Engelhardt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Maile C. Neel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael W. Lloyd.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lloyd, M.W., Burnett, R.K., Engelhardt, K.A.M. et al. Does genetic diversity of restored sites differ from natural sites? A comparison of Vallisneria americana (Hydrocharitaceae) populations within the Chesapeake Bay. Conserv Genet 13, 753–765 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-012-0324-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-012-0324-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation