Different Geographical Distributions of Two Chemotypes of Barbarea vulgaris that Differ in Resistance to Insects and a Pathogen
The interactions of plants with herbivores and pathogens have been suggested to drive the evolution of resistances in plants and in some cases new lineages and taxa. However, such divergence may require reproductive isolation, e.g., in allopatry. In the crucifer Barbarea vulgaris, some plants are re...
Saved in:
Published in | Journal of chemical ecology Vol. 40; no. 5; pp. 491 - 501 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Boston
Springer-Verlag
01.05.2014
Springer US Springer Nature B.V |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | The interactions of plants with herbivores and pathogens have been suggested to drive the evolution of resistances in plants and in some cases new lineages and taxa. However, such divergence may require reproductive isolation, e.g., in allopatry. In the crucifer Barbarea vulgaris, some plants are resistant to the flea beetle Phyllotreta nemorum, due to production of specific saponins, whereas others are susceptible. Resistant and susceptible plants additionally differ in resistance to the pathogen Albugo candida, content of glucosinolates, and leaf pubescence, and they are genetically strongly divergent and partially reproductively incompatible. This suggests that at some point they were separated for a considerable length of time. Previously, the insect susceptible P-type had been described only from Denmark, Sweden, and Estonia, whereas the resistant G-type is widely distributed in Western Europe. Here, we tested whether the two plant types have divergent geographical distributions and maintain their distinct trait associations throughout their range. The insect-susceptible type was found in Russia, the Baltics, and parts of Fennoscandia, but not in Central Europe. In contrast, the insect resistant type was found from Finland and westwards. Their different trait associations were consistent within the two ranges. We therefore suggest that the two plant types diverged in allopatry at some time in the past, and evolved different resistances in response to local antagonists. The two plant types probably maintain their distinctness due to a hybridization barrier. Thus, the present distributions of the two types may be shaped by both historical processes and current differential biotic selection. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10886-014-0430-4 ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
ISSN: | 0098-0331 1573-1561 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s10886-014-0430-4 |