Inferring landscape effects on dispersal from genetic distances: how far can we go?

被引:79
|
作者
Jaquiery, J. [1 ,2 ]
Broquet, T. [1 ,3 ]
Hirzel, A. H. [1 ]
Yearsley, J. [1 ,4 ]
Perrin, N. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Lausanne, Dept Ecol & Evolut, CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland
[2] INRA, UMR Biol Organisms & Populat Appl Plant Protect 1, F-35653 Domaine De La Motte, Le Rheu, France
[3] Univ Paris 06, Team Divers & Connect Coastal Marine Landscapes, Roscoff Biol Stn, CNRS,UMR 7144, F-29682 Roscoff, France
[4] Univ Coll Dublin, Sch Biol & Environm Sci, Belfield Dublin 4, Ireland
关键词
barriers; connectivity; dispersal; gene flow; individual-based simulations; Landscape genetics; POPULATION-STRUCTURE; BAYESIAN METHOD; FLOW; CONNECTIVITY; INFERENCE; SCALE; MIGRATION; PATTERNS; DIFFERENTIATION; CONSEQUENCES;
D O I
10.1111/j.1365-294X.2010.04966.x
中图分类号
Q5 [生物化学]; Q7 [分子生物学];
学科分类号
071010 ; 081704 ;
摘要
Functional connectivity affects demography and gene dynamics in fragmented populations. Besides species-specific dispersal ability, the connectivity between local populations is affected by the landscape elements encountered during dispersal. Documenting these effects is thus a central issue for the conservation and management of fragmented populations. In this study, we compare the power and accuracy of three methods (partial correlations, regressions and Approximate Bayesian Computations) that use genetic distances to infer the effect of landscape upon dispersal. We use stochastic individual-based simulations of fragmented populations surrounded by landscape elements that differ in their permeability to dispersal. The power and accuracy of all three methods are good when there is a strong contrast between the permeability of different landscape elements. The power and accuracy can be further improved by restricting analyses to adjacent pairs of populations. Landscape elements that strongly impede dispersal are the easiest to identify. However, power and accuracy decrease drastically when landscape complexity increases and the contrast between the permeability of landscape elements decreases. We provide guidelines for future studies and underline the needs to evaluate or develop approaches that are more powerful.
引用
收藏
页码:692 / 705
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] HOW FAR CAN WE GO WITH COMPARTMENTAL-MODELS
    HULL, CJ
    [J]. ANESTHESIOLOGY, 1990, 72 (03) : 399 - 402
  • [32] Evolution and the Human Mind: how far can we go?
    Plotkin, H
    [J]. NATURALISM, EVOLUTION AND MIND, 2001, 49 : 267 - 275
  • [33] Digital drainage system: how far can we go?
    Costa, Altair da Silva, Jr.
    Villaca Leao, Luiz Eduardo
    Succi, Jose Ernesto
    Rymkiewicz, Erika
    Folador, Juliana
    Kazantzis, Thamara
    [J]. JORNAL BRASILEIRO DE PNEUMOLOGIA, 2014, 40 (05) : 579 - 581
  • [34] Just how far into the vacuum ultraviolet can we go?
    Griesmann, U
    [J]. FOURIER TRANSFORM SPECTROSCOPY, TECHNICAL DIGEST, 2001, 51 : 128 - 128
  • [35] Interferometry of CP stars: how far can we go?
    Shulyak, D.
    Paladini, C.
    Causi, Li G.
    Sacuto, S.
    Kochukhov, O.
    [J]. PUTTING A STARS INTO CONTEXT: EVOLUTION, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED STARS, 2014, : 129 - 129
  • [36] Laparoscopic liver resection: how far can we go?
    Wakabayashi, Go
    [J]. JOURNAL OF HEPATO-BILIARY-PANCREATIC SURGERY, 2009, 16 (04): : 403 - 404
  • [37] How far can we go beyond linear cryptanalysis?
    Baignères, T
    Junod, P
    Vaudenay, S
    [J]. ADVANCES IN CRYPTOLOGY - ASIACRYPT 2004, PROCEEDINGS, 2004, 3329 : 432 - 450
  • [38] APPS: stepping into the future - how far can we go?
    Magarey, R. C.
    [J]. AUSTRALASIAN PLANT PATHOLOGY, 2007, 36 (06) : 503 - 509
  • [39] APPS: stepping into the future — how far can we go?
    R. C. Magarey
    [J]. Australasian Plant Pathology, 2007, 36 : 503 - 509
  • [40] Heart failure registries: how far can we go?
    Parissis, John
    Farmakis, Dimitrios
    Triposkiadis, Filippos
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEART FAILURE, 2016, 18 (06) : 626 - 628