Different landscape effects on the genetic structure of two broadly distributed woody legumes, and (Fabaceae).

Francisco Encinas-Viso, Christiana McDonald-Spicer, Nunzio Knerr, Peter H Thrall, Linda Broadhurst
Author Information
  1. Francisco Encinas-Viso: Centre for Australian National Biodiversity Research CSIRO Canberra ACT Australia. ORCID
  2. Christiana McDonald-Spicer: Centre for Australian National Biodiversity Research CSIRO Canberra ACT Australia.
  3. Nunzio Knerr: Centre for Australian National Biodiversity Research CSIRO Canberra ACT Australia.
  4. Peter H Thrall: CSIRO Agriculture & Food Canberra ACT Australia.
  5. Linda Broadhurst: Centre for Australian National Biodiversity Research CSIRO Canberra ACT Australia.

Abstract

Restoring degraded landscapes has primarily focused on re-establishing native plant communities. However, little is known with respect to the diversity and distribution of most key revegetation species or the environmental and anthropogenic factors that may affect their demography and genetic structure. In this study, we investigated the genetic structure of two widespread Australian legume species ( and ) in the Murray-Darling Basin (MDB), a large agriculturally utilized region in Australia, and assessed the impact of landscape structure on genetic differentiation. We used AFLP genetic data and sampled a total of 28 and 30 sampling locations across southeastern Australia. We specifically evaluated the importance of four landscape features: forest cover, land cover, water stream cover, and elevation. We found that both species had high genetic diversity (mean percentage of polymorphic loci, 55.1% for versus. 64.3% for and differentiation among local sampling locations (: Φ = 0.301, 30%; : Φ = 0.235, 23%). Population structure analysis showed that both species had high levels of structure (6 clusters each) and admixture in some sampling locations, particularly . Although both species have a similar geographic range, the drivers of genetic connectivity for each species were very different. Genetic variation in seems to be mainly driven by geographic distance, while for , land cover appears to be the most important factor. This suggests that for the latter species, gene flow among populations is affected by habitat fragmentation. We conclude that these largely co-occurring species require different management actions to maintain population connectivity. We recommend active management of in the MDB to improve gene flow in the adversity of increasing disturbances ( droughts) driven by climate change and anthropogenic factors.

Keywords

References

  1. Ann Bot. 2014 Oct;114(5):961-71 [PMID: 25100675]
  2. Proc Biol Sci. 2017 Mar 15;284(1850): [PMID: 28298350]
  3. Ecol Lett. 2006 Aug;9(8):968-80 [PMID: 16913941]
  4. Genetics. 2000 Jun;155(2):945-59 [PMID: 10835412]
  5. AoB Plants. 2015 Nov 16;7: [PMID: 26578741]
  6. Conserv Biol. 2012 Apr;26(2):228-37 [PMID: 22044646]
  7. Bioinformatics. 2012 Oct 1;28(19):2537-9 [PMID: 22820204]
  8. Ecology. 2008 Oct;89(10):2712-24 [PMID: 18959309]
  9. Nucleic Acids Res. 1995 Nov 11;23(21):4407-14 [PMID: 7501463]
  10. Mol Ecol. 2007 Mar;16(6):1303-14 [PMID: 17391415]
  11. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019 Jul 30;116(31):15580-15589 [PMID: 31308227]
  12. Mol Ecol. 2005 Jul;14(8):2611-20 [PMID: 15969739]
  13. Evolution. 2006 Aug;60(8):1551-61 [PMID: 17017056]
  14. Ecol Evol. 2020 Oct 31;10(23):13476-13487 [PMID: 33304553]
  15. Mol Ecol Resour. 2009 Jan;9(1):110-3 [PMID: 21564574]
  16. Trends Ecol Evol. 1996 Oct;11(10):413-8 [PMID: 21237900]
  17. Mol Ecol. 2004 Jul;13(7):1713-27 [PMID: 15189198]
  18. Biol Lett. 2014 Jul;10(7): [PMID: 25079493]
  19. Mol Ecol. 2008 Dec;17(24):5177-88 [PMID: 19120995]
  20. Mol Ecol. 2020 Jan;29(2):218-246 [PMID: 31758601]
  21. Oecologia. 2008 Feb;155(1):85-92 [PMID: 17965887]
  22. Genetics. 1992 Jun;131(2):479-91 [PMID: 1644282]
  23. Cancer Res. 1967 Feb;27(2):209-20 [PMID: 6018555]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0speciesgeneticstructurelandscapecoverAustraliasamplinglocationsconnectivitygeneflowdiversityanthropogenicfactorstwoMDBdifferentiationlandhighamong:Φ = 0geographicdifferentdrivenhabitatfragmentationmanagementpopulationRestoringdegradedlandscapesprimarilyfocusedre-establishingnativeplantcommunitiesHoweverlittleknownrespectdistributionkeyrevegetationenvironmentalmayaffectdemographystudyinvestigatedwidespreadAustralianlegumeMurray-DarlingBasinlargeagriculturallyutilizedregionassessedimpactusedAFLPdatasampledtotal2830acrosssoutheasternspecificallyevaluatedimportancefourfeatures:forestwaterstreamelevationfoundmeanpercentagepolymorphicloci551%versus643%local30130%23523%Populationanalysisshowedlevels6clustersadmixtureparticularlyAlthoughsimilarrangedriversGeneticvariationseemsmainlydistanceappearsimportantfactorsuggestslatterpopulationsaffectedconcludelargelyco-occurringrequireactionsmaintainrecommendactiveimproveadversityincreasingdisturbancesdroughtsclimatechangeDifferenteffectsbroadlydistributedwoodylegumesFabaceaegeneticsresistancesurfaces

Similar Articles

Cited By