Selfing rate variation within species is unrelated to life‐history traits or geographic range position
Selfing rate variation within species is unrelated to life‐history traits or geographic range position
复制标题
物种内自交率的变化与生命历史特征或地理范围位置无关
DOI：
10.1002/ajb2.1766
复制
发表时间：
2021
影响因子：
3
通讯作者：
Busch, Jeremiah W.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Prior, Carly J.;Busch, Jeremiah W.
在植物中，从异交到自交，种群和物种沿着连续体变化很大。生活史性状和生态环境影响种间自交率的变化，但它们在解释种内变化方面的一般作用尚不清楚。使用植物物种的数据库，我们测试是否生活史性状，地理范围的位置，或丰度预测自交率的变化populations.MethodsWe确定物种的自交率估计在至少三个人口在已知的位置。两个关键的生活史性状（世代时间和生长形式）被用来预测种内自交率的变化。在物种的原生分布区内取样的种群被评估了与最近边缘的接近程度和丰度。最后，我们进行了线性和分段回归，以确定自交率和地理范围的位置之间的函数关系species.ResultsSelfing率木本植物的变化小于草本植物，这是解释木本植物的平均自交率较低。自交和边缘性或丰富度之间的关系显着不同的物种在其方向和幅度。然而，没有一般的模式增加自交向范围边缘。功效分析表明，对这一假设的检验需要研究许多（即，40+）population.ConclusionsIntrasecular变化在植物交配系统往往是实质性的，但仍然难以解释。除了对更多的种群进行采样外，未来对地理学假设的检验将受益于有关特定范围边缘的地理信息，对影响交配系统的性状的研究（例如，herkogamy），以及在局部尺度上的丰度测量（例如，人口密度）。
PremiseIn plants, populations and species vary widely along the continuum from outcrossing to selfing. Life‐history traits and ecological circumstances influence among‐species variation in selfing rates, but their general role in explaining intraspecific variation is unknown. Using a database of plant species, we test whether life‐history traits, geographic range position, or abundance predict selfing rate variation among populations.MethodsWe identified species where selfing rates were estimated in at least three populations at known locations. Two key life‐history traits (generation time and growth form) were used to predict within‐species selfing rate variation. Populations sampled within a species’ native range were assessed for proximity to the nearest edge and abundance. Finally, we conducted linear and segmented regressions to determine functional relationships between selfing rate and geographic range position within species.ResultsSelfing rates for woody species varied less than for herbs, which is explained by the lower average selfing rate of woody species. Relationships between selfing and peripherality or abundance significantly varied among species in their direction and magnitude. However, there was no general pattern of increased selfing toward range edges. A power analysis shows that tests of this hypothesis require studying many (i.e., 40+) populations.ConclusionsIntraspecific variation in plant mating systems is often substantial yet remains difficult to explain. Beyond sampling more populations, future tests of biogeographic hypotheses will benefit from phylogeographic information concerning specific range edges, the study of traits influencing mating system (e.g., herkogamy), and measures of abundance at local scales (e.g., population density).