Landscape Ecology

, Volume 21, Issue 6, pp 797–807 | Cite as

Adaptive vs. neutral genetic diversity: implications for landscape genetics

  • Rolf HoldereggerEmail author
  • Urs Kamm
  • Felix Gugerli
Research Article


Genetic diversity is important for the maintenance of the viability and the evolutionary or adaptive potential of populations and species. However, there are two principal types of genetic diversity: adaptive and neutral – a fact widely neglected by non-specialists. We introduce these two types of genetic diversity and critically point to their potential uses and misuses in population or landscape genetic studies. First, most molecular-genetic laboratory techniques analyse neutral genetic variation. This means that the gene variants detected do not have any direct effect on fitness. This type of genetic variation is thus selectively neutral and tells us nothing about the adaptive or evolutionary potential of a population or a species. Nevertheless, neutral genetic markers have great potential for investigating processes such as gene flow, migration or dispersal. Hence, they allow us to empirically test the functional relevance of spatial indices such as connectivity used in landscape ecology. Second, adaptive genetic variation, i.e. genetic variation under natural selection, is analysed in quantitative genetic experiments under controlled and uniform environmental conditions. Unfortunately, the genetic variation (i.e. heritability) and population differentiation at quantitative, adaptive traits is not directly linked with neutral genetic diversity or differentiation. Thus, neutral genetic data cannot serve as a surrogate of adaptive genetic data. In summary, neutral genetic diversity is well suited for the study of processes within landscapes such as gene flow, while the evolutionary or adaptive potential of populations or species has to be assessed in quantitative genetic experiments. Landscape ecologists have to mind these differences between neutral and adaptive genetic variation when interpreting the results of landscape genetic studies.


Adaptive genetic variation Heritability Landscape genetics Neutral genetic variation Population differentiation Quantitative genetics 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Antolin M.F., Savage L.T. and Eisen R.J. 2006. Landscape features influence genetic structure of Black-Tailed Prairie Dogs (Cynomys ludovicianus). Landsc. Ecol. 21: 867–875.Google Scholar
  2. Conner, J.K., Hartl, D.L. 2004A Primer to Ecological GeneticsSinauerSunderland, Massachusetts, USAGoogle Scholar
  3. Darwin, C. 1859The Origin of Species by Means of Natural SelectionJohn MurrayLondon, UKGoogle Scholar
  4. Falconer, D.S., MacKay, T.F.C. 1996Introduction to Quantitative GeneticsLongmanHarlow, UKGoogle Scholar
  5. Frankham, R., Ballou, J.D., Briscoe, D.A. 2004A Primer to Conservation GeneticsCambridge University PressCambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  6. Futuyma, D.J. 2005EvolutionSinauerSunderland, Massachusetts, USAGoogle Scholar
  7. Godoy, J.A., Jordano, P. 2001Seed dispersal by animals: exact identification of source trees with endocarp DNA microsatellitesMol. Ecol.1022752283PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hartl, D.L., Clark, A.G. 1997Principles of Population GeneticsSinauerSunderland, Massachusetts, USAGoogle Scholar
  9. Holderegger, R., Gugerli, F., Scheidegger, C., Taberlet, P. In pressIntegrating genetics with landscape ecology to infer spatio-temporal processesKienast, F.Gosh, R.Wildi, O. eds. A Changing World: Challenges for Landscape ResearchSpringerDordrecht, NLGoogle Scholar
  10. Jackson, R.B., Linder, C.R., Lynch, M., Puruganen, M., Sommerville, S., Thayer, S.S. 2002Linking molecular insight and ecological researchTrends Ecol. Evol.17409414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kimura, M. 1983The Neutral Theory of Molecular EvolutionCambridge University PressCambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  12. Kremer, A., Kleinschmit, J., Cottrell, J.,  et al. 2002Is there a correlation between chloroplastic and nuclear divergenceor what are the roles of history and selection on genetic diversity in European oaksFor. Ecol. Manage.1567587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Latta, R.G. 2003Gene flow, adaptive population divergence and comparative population structure across lociNew Phytol.1615158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Latta, R.G. 2006Using comparisons among different classes of genetic markers to infer spatial processesLandscape Ecol.21809820Google Scholar
  15. Li, W.-H., Graur, D. 1991Fundamentals of Molecular EvolutionSinauerSunderland, Massachusetts, USAGoogle Scholar
  16. Li, H., Wu, J. 2004Use and misuse of landscape indicesLandscape Ecol.19389399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lowe, A., Harris, S., Ashton, P. 2004Ecological Genetics. Design, Analysis and ApplicationBlackwellOxford, UKGoogle Scholar
  18. Manel, S., Schwartz, M.K., Luikart, G., Taberlet, P. 2003Landscape genetics: combining landscape ecology and population geneticsTrends Ecol. Evol.18189197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. McKay, J.K., Latta, R.G. 2002Adaptive population divergence: markers, QTL and traitsTrends Ecol. Evol.17285291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Merilä, J., Crnokrak, P. 2001Comparison of genetic differentiation at marker loci and quantitative traitsJ. Evol. Biol.14892903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. O’Meally, D., Colgan, D.J. 2005Genetic ranking for biological conservation using information from multiple speciesBiol. Conserv.122395407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pannell J.R. and Dorken M.E. 2006. Colonisation as a common denominator in plant metapopulations and range expansions: effects on genetic diversity and sexual systems. Landscape Ecol. 21: 837–847.Google Scholar
  23. Pearman, P.B. 2001Conservation value of independently evolving units: sacred cow or testable hypothesis?Conserv. Biol.15780783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pearse, D.E., Crandall, K.A. 2004Beyond F ST: analysis of population genetic data for conservationConserv. Genet.5585602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Petit, R., Csaikl, U.M., Bordács, S.,  et al. 2002Chloroplast DNA variation in European white oaks. Phylogeography and patterns of diversity based on data from over 2600 populationsFor. Ecol. Manage.156526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Reed, D.H., Frankham, R. 2001How closely correlated are molecular and quantitative measures of genetic variation? A meta-analysisEvolution5510951103PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Reed, D.H., Frankham, R. 2002Correlation between fitness and genetic diversityConserv. Biol.17230237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Savolainen, O., Bokma, F., García-Gil, R., Komulainen, P., Repo, T. 2004Genetic variation in cessation of growth and frost hardiness and consequences for adaptation of Pinus sylvestris to climatic changesFor. Ecol. Manage.1977989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schwaegerle, K.E.K., Garbutt, K., Bazzaz, F.A. 1986Differentiation among nine populations of Phlox. I. Electrophoretic and quantitative variationEvolution40506517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Slatkin, M. 2005Seeing ghosts: the effect of unsampled populations on migration rates estimated for sampled populationsMol. Ecol.146773PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Smouse, P.E., Sork, V.L. 2004Measuring pollen flow in forest trees: an exposition of alternative approachesFor. Ecol. Manage.1972138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sork, V.L., Smouse, P.E. 2006Landscape gene flow in contemporary tree populationsLandscape Ecol.21821836Google Scholar
  33. Turner, M.G., Gardner, R.H., O’Neill, R.V. 2001Landscape Ecology in Theory and PracticeSpringerNew York, USAGoogle Scholar
  34. Vandewoestijne, S., Baquette, M. 2004Demographic versus genetic dispersal measuresPopul. Ecol.46281285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wagner H., Werth S., Kalwij J.M., Bolli J. and Scheidegger C. 2006. Modelling the persistence and genetic structure of an epiphytic lichen. Landscape Ecol. 21: 849–865.Google Scholar
  36. Widmer, A., Lexer, C. 2001Glacial refugia: sanctuaries for allelic richness, but not for gene diversityTrends Ecol. Evol.16267269PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wiens, J.A. 1989Spatial scaling in ecologyFunct. Ecol.3385397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wright, S. 1951The genetical structure of populationsAnn. Eugen.15323354Google Scholar
  39. Wu, J., Hobbs, R. 2002Key issues and research priorities in landscape ecology: an idiosyncratic synthesisLandscape Ecol.17355365CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Section of Ecological GeneticsWSL Swiss Federal Research InstituteBirmensdorfSwitzerland
  2. 2.Department of Environmental SciencesETH Zürich ZentrumZürichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations