A comparison of genetic diversity and population structure of the endangered scaleshell mussel (Leptodea leptodon), the fragile papershell (Leptodea fragilis) and their host-fish the freshwater drum (Aplodinotus grunniens)
The larvae of freshwater mussels in the order Unionoida are obligate parasites on fishes. Because adult mussels are infaunal and largely sessile, it is generally assumed that the majority of gene flow among mussel populations relies on the dispersal of larvae by their hosts. The objective of this st...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Conservation genetics 2018-04, Vol.19 (2), p.425-437 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 437 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 425 |
container_title | Conservation genetics |
container_volume | 19 |
creator | Chong, Jer Pin Roe, Kevin J. |
description | The larvae of freshwater mussels in the order Unionoida are obligate parasites on fishes. Because adult mussels are infaunal and largely sessile, it is generally assumed that the majority of gene flow among mussel populations relies on the dispersal of larvae by their hosts. The objective of this study was to compare the genetic diversity and the degree of congruence between the population structures of two related freshwater mussels
Leptodea leptodon
and
Leptodea fragilis
and their fish host,
Aplodinotus grunniens
. Host specificity in parasites has been shown to result in greater congruence between the population structures of the two interacting species, and assessing the congruence of genetic structure of the endangered
L. leptodon
with its sister species
L. fragilis
and their sole host is an important step in understanding the impact of host dispersal on population structure. Analysis of microsatellite data indicated that despite its imperiled status,
L. leptodon
displayed greater genetic diversity than the more common
L. fragilis
. However, the population structures of all three species were incongruent even in the presence of substantial gene flow. Other factors such as habitat specificity may play a role in generating the differences in population structure observed. This study indicates that barriers to gene flow or lack of available host fish are not the cause of decline of the federally endangered
L. leptodon
, and suggests that alternative explanations should be considered. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10592-017-1015-x |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2016325548</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2016325548</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c359t-be6c76940ab66de287a5eefaf6ed49356ed90dc9fa7f58c55a25e924ad3e02ae3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kcFq3DAQhk1poGmaB8hN0EsWqlaSV_b6uIS2CSz00pyNIo12FbSSqpHb5GX7LJXXgZx60oC-b36Yv2muOPvMGeu_IGdyEJTxnnLGJX1605xz2Qs69G3_dp67jrJO8HfNe8RHxngnen7e_N0SHY9JZYcxkGjJHgIUp4lxvyGjK89EBUNSTJNXxVUGS550mTLMdDkAgWBU2EMGQ1ArD3gA78lxQgRPrneQSjSgiD8NMaw-nSyb1d55IEmlmnNSXtnl0-HqFF5xl8khYqHW4eFFrzl_VIFMTJ6O5HqbfDQuxDIh2ecpBAcBVx-aM6s8wuXLe9Hcf_v68-aW7n58v7vZ7qhu5VDoA3S674Y1Uw9dZ0BseiUBrLIdmPXQyvoMzOjBqt7KjZZSCQmDWCvTAhMK2ovm47I35fhrAizjY5xyqJGjqKduhZTrTaX4QukcETPYMWV3VPl55GycaxyXGsda4zjXOD5VRywOVnY-8-vm_0v_AEX1p48</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2016325548</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A comparison of genetic diversity and population structure of the endangered scaleshell mussel (Leptodea leptodon), the fragile papershell (Leptodea fragilis) and their host-fish the freshwater drum (Aplodinotus grunniens)</title><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><creator>Chong, Jer Pin ; Roe, Kevin J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Chong, Jer Pin ; Roe, Kevin J.</creatorcontrib><description>The larvae of freshwater mussels in the order Unionoida are obligate parasites on fishes. Because adult mussels are infaunal and largely sessile, it is generally assumed that the majority of gene flow among mussel populations relies on the dispersal of larvae by their hosts. The objective of this study was to compare the genetic diversity and the degree of congruence between the population structures of two related freshwater mussels
Leptodea leptodon
and
Leptodea fragilis
and their fish host,
Aplodinotus grunniens
. Host specificity in parasites has been shown to result in greater congruence between the population structures of the two interacting species, and assessing the congruence of genetic structure of the endangered
L. leptodon
with its sister species
L. fragilis
and their sole host is an important step in understanding the impact of host dispersal on population structure. Analysis of microsatellite data indicated that despite its imperiled status,
L. leptodon
displayed greater genetic diversity than the more common
L. fragilis
. However, the population structures of all three species were incongruent even in the presence of substantial gene flow. Other factors such as habitat specificity may play a role in generating the differences in population structure observed. This study indicates that barriers to gene flow or lack of available host fish are not the cause of decline of the federally endangered
L. leptodon
, and suggests that alternative explanations should be considered.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1566-0621</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1572-9737</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10592-017-1015-x</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Animal Genetics and Genomics ; Aplodinotus grunniens ; Biodiversity ; Biomedical and Life Sciences ; Conservation Biology/Ecology ; Dispersal ; Dispersion ; Ecology ; Endangered species ; Evolutionary Biology ; Fish ; Fish parasites ; Freshwater fish ; Gene flow ; Genetic diversity ; Genetic structure ; Host specificity ; Larvae ; Leptodea fragilis ; Leptodea leptodon ; Life Sciences ; Mollusks ; Mussels ; Parasites ; Plant Genetics and Genomics ; Population ; Population genetics ; Population structure ; Population studies ; Research Article ; Sibling species</subject><ispartof>Conservation genetics, 2018-04, Vol.19 (2), p.425-437</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2017</rights><rights>Conservation Genetics is a copyright of Springer, (2017). All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c359t-be6c76940ab66de287a5eefaf6ed49356ed90dc9fa7f58c55a25e924ad3e02ae3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c359t-be6c76940ab66de287a5eefaf6ed49356ed90dc9fa7f58c55a25e924ad3e02ae3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-2228-3019</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10592-017-1015-x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10592-017-1015-x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,27905,27906,41469,42538,51300</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chong, Jer Pin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roe, Kevin J.</creatorcontrib><title>A comparison of genetic diversity and population structure of the endangered scaleshell mussel (Leptodea leptodon), the fragile papershell (Leptodea fragilis) and their host-fish the freshwater drum (Aplodinotus grunniens)</title><title>Conservation genetics</title><addtitle>Conserv Genet</addtitle><description>The larvae of freshwater mussels in the order Unionoida are obligate parasites on fishes. Because adult mussels are infaunal and largely sessile, it is generally assumed that the majority of gene flow among mussel populations relies on the dispersal of larvae by their hosts. The objective of this study was to compare the genetic diversity and the degree of congruence between the population structures of two related freshwater mussels
Leptodea leptodon
and
Leptodea fragilis
and their fish host,
Aplodinotus grunniens
. Host specificity in parasites has been shown to result in greater congruence between the population structures of the two interacting species, and assessing the congruence of genetic structure of the endangered
L. leptodon
with its sister species
L. fragilis
and their sole host is an important step in understanding the impact of host dispersal on population structure. Analysis of microsatellite data indicated that despite its imperiled status,
L. leptodon
displayed greater genetic diversity than the more common
L. fragilis
. However, the population structures of all three species were incongruent even in the presence of substantial gene flow. Other factors such as habitat specificity may play a role in generating the differences in population structure observed. This study indicates that barriers to gene flow or lack of available host fish are not the cause of decline of the federally endangered
L. leptodon
, and suggests that alternative explanations should be considered.</description><subject>Animal Genetics and Genomics</subject><subject>Aplodinotus grunniens</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Biomedical and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Conservation Biology/Ecology</subject><subject>Dispersal</subject><subject>Dispersion</subject><subject>Ecology</subject><subject>Endangered species</subject><subject>Evolutionary Biology</subject><subject>Fish</subject><subject>Fish parasites</subject><subject>Freshwater fish</subject><subject>Gene flow</subject><subject>Genetic diversity</subject><subject>Genetic structure</subject><subject>Host specificity</subject><subject>Larvae</subject><subject>Leptodea fragilis</subject><subject>Leptodea leptodon</subject><subject>Life Sciences</subject><subject>Mollusks</subject><subject>Mussels</subject><subject>Parasites</subject><subject>Plant Genetics and Genomics</subject><subject>Population</subject><subject>Population genetics</subject><subject>Population structure</subject><subject>Population studies</subject><subject>Research Article</subject><subject>Sibling species</subject><issn>1566-0621</issn><issn>1572-9737</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kcFq3DAQhk1poGmaB8hN0EsWqlaSV_b6uIS2CSz00pyNIo12FbSSqpHb5GX7LJXXgZx60oC-b36Yv2muOPvMGeu_IGdyEJTxnnLGJX1605xz2Qs69G3_dp67jrJO8HfNe8RHxngnen7e_N0SHY9JZYcxkGjJHgIUp4lxvyGjK89EBUNSTJNXxVUGS550mTLMdDkAgWBU2EMGQ1ArD3gA78lxQgRPrneQSjSgiD8NMaw-nSyb1d55IEmlmnNSXtnl0-HqFF5xl8khYqHW4eFFrzl_VIFMTJ6O5HqbfDQuxDIh2ecpBAcBVx-aM6s8wuXLe9Hcf_v68-aW7n58v7vZ7qhu5VDoA3S674Y1Uw9dZ0BseiUBrLIdmPXQyvoMzOjBqt7KjZZSCQmDWCvTAhMK2ovm47I35fhrAizjY5xyqJGjqKduhZTrTaX4QukcETPYMWV3VPl55GycaxyXGsda4zjXOD5VRywOVnY-8-vm_0v_AEX1p48</recordid><startdate>20180401</startdate><enddate>20180401</enddate><creator>Chong, Jer Pin</creator><creator>Roe, Kevin J.</creator><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>RC3</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2228-3019</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20180401</creationdate><title>A comparison of genetic diversity and population structure of the endangered scaleshell mussel (Leptodea leptodon), the fragile papershell (Leptodea fragilis) and their host-fish the freshwater drum (Aplodinotus grunniens)</title><author>Chong, Jer Pin ; Roe, Kevin J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c359t-be6c76940ab66de287a5eefaf6ed49356ed90dc9fa7f58c55a25e924ad3e02ae3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Animal Genetics and Genomics</topic><topic>Aplodinotus grunniens</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Biomedical and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Conservation Biology/Ecology</topic><topic>Dispersal</topic><topic>Dispersion</topic><topic>Ecology</topic><topic>Endangered species</topic><topic>Evolutionary Biology</topic><topic>Fish</topic><topic>Fish parasites</topic><topic>Freshwater fish</topic><topic>Gene flow</topic><topic>Genetic diversity</topic><topic>Genetic structure</topic><topic>Host specificity</topic><topic>Larvae</topic><topic>Leptodea fragilis</topic><topic>Leptodea leptodon</topic><topic>Life Sciences</topic><topic>Mollusks</topic><topic>Mussels</topic><topic>Parasites</topic><topic>Plant Genetics and Genomics</topic><topic>Population</topic><topic>Population genetics</topic><topic>Population structure</topic><topic>Population studies</topic><topic>Research Article</topic><topic>Sibling species</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chong, Jer Pin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roe, Kevin J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Conservation genetics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chong, Jer Pin</au><au>Roe, Kevin J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A comparison of genetic diversity and population structure of the endangered scaleshell mussel (Leptodea leptodon), the fragile papershell (Leptodea fragilis) and their host-fish the freshwater drum (Aplodinotus grunniens)</atitle><jtitle>Conservation genetics</jtitle><stitle>Conserv Genet</stitle><date>2018-04-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>19</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>425</spage><epage>437</epage><pages>425-437</pages><issn>1566-0621</issn><eissn>1572-9737</eissn><abstract>The larvae of freshwater mussels in the order Unionoida are obligate parasites on fishes. Because adult mussels are infaunal and largely sessile, it is generally assumed that the majority of gene flow among mussel populations relies on the dispersal of larvae by their hosts. The objective of this study was to compare the genetic diversity and the degree of congruence between the population structures of two related freshwater mussels
Leptodea leptodon
and
Leptodea fragilis
and their fish host,
Aplodinotus grunniens
. Host specificity in parasites has been shown to result in greater congruence between the population structures of the two interacting species, and assessing the congruence of genetic structure of the endangered
L. leptodon
with its sister species
L. fragilis
and their sole host is an important step in understanding the impact of host dispersal on population structure. Analysis of microsatellite data indicated that despite its imperiled status,
L. leptodon
displayed greater genetic diversity than the more common
L. fragilis
. However, the population structures of all three species were incongruent even in the presence of substantial gene flow. Other factors such as habitat specificity may play a role in generating the differences in population structure observed. This study indicates that barriers to gene flow or lack of available host fish are not the cause of decline of the federally endangered
L. leptodon
, and suggests that alternative explanations should be considered.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Netherlands</pub><doi>10.1007/s10592-017-1015-x</doi><tpages>13</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2228-3019</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1566-0621 |
ispartof | Conservation genetics, 2018-04, Vol.19 (2), p.425-437 |
issn | 1566-0621 1572-9737 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2016325548 |
source | SpringerLink Journals |
subjects | Animal Genetics and Genomics Aplodinotus grunniens Biodiversity Biomedical and Life Sciences Conservation Biology/Ecology Dispersal Dispersion Ecology Endangered species Evolutionary Biology Fish Fish parasites Freshwater fish Gene flow Genetic diversity Genetic structure Host specificity Larvae Leptodea fragilis Leptodea leptodon Life Sciences Mollusks Mussels Parasites Plant Genetics and Genomics Population Population genetics Population structure Population studies Research Article Sibling species |
title | A comparison of genetic diversity and population structure of the endangered scaleshell mussel (Leptodea leptodon), the fragile papershell (Leptodea fragilis) and their host-fish the freshwater drum (Aplodinotus grunniens) |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-19T07%3A25%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20comparison%20of%20genetic%20diversity%20and%20population%20structure%20of%20the%20endangered%20scaleshell%20mussel%20(Leptodea%20leptodon),%20the%20fragile%20papershell%20(Leptodea%20fragilis)%20and%20their%20host-fish%20the%20freshwater%20drum%20(Aplodinotus%20grunniens)&rft.jtitle=Conservation%20genetics&rft.au=Chong,%20Jer%20Pin&rft.date=2018-04-01&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=425&rft.epage=437&rft.pages=425-437&rft.issn=1566-0621&rft.eissn=1572-9737&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10592-017-1015-x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2016325548%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2016325548&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |