Premium
Does phylogeographical structure relate to climatic niche divergence? A test using maritime pine ( P inus pinaster A it.)
Author(s) -
SerraVarela M. J.,
Grivet D.,
Vincenot L.,
Broennimann O.,
GonzaloJiménez J.,
Zimmermann N. E.
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
global ecology and biogeography
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.164
H-Index - 152
eISSN - 1466-8238
pISSN - 1466-822X
DOI - 10.1111/geb.12369
Subject(s) - clade , phylogenetic tree , niche , ecology , subspecies , biology , ecological niche , mantel test , geography , evolutionary biology , genetic variation , habitat , biochemistry , gene
Aim To disentangle the effects of environmental and geographical processes driving phylogenetic distances among clades of maritime pine ( P inus pinaster ). To assess the implications for conservation management of combining molecular information with species distribution models ( SDMs ; which predict species distribution based on known occurrence records and on environmental variables). Location W estern M editerranean B asin and E uropean A tlantic coast. Methods We undertook two cluster analyses for eight genetically defined pine clades based on climatic niche and genetic similarities. We assessed niche similarity by means of a principal component analysis and S choener's D metric. To calculate genetic similarity, we used the unweighted pair group method with arithmetic mean based on N ei's distance using 266 single nucleotide polymorphisms. We then assessed the contribution of environmental and geographical distances to phylogenetic distance by means of Mantel regression with variance partitioning. Finally, we compared the projection obtained from SDMs fitted from the species level ( SDMsp ) and composed from the eight clade‐level models ( SDMcm ). Results Genetically and environmentally defined clusters were identical. Environmental and geographical distances explained 12.6% of the phylogenetic distance variation and, overall, geographical and environmental overlap among clades was low. Large differences were detected between SDMsp and SDMcm (57.75% of disagreement in the areas predicted as suitable). Main conclusions The genetic structure within the maritime pine subspecies complex is primarily a consequence of its demographic history, as seen by the high proportion of unexplained variation in phylogenetic distances. Nevertheless, our results highlight the contribution of local environmental adaptation in shaping the lower‐order, phylogeographical distribution patterns and spatial genetic structure of maritime pine: (1) genetically and environmentally defined clusters are consistent, and (2) environment, rather than geography, explained a higher proportion of variation in phylogenetic distance. SDMs , key tools in conservation management, better characterize the fundamental niche of the species when they include molecular information.