FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1968621127> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1968621127 abstract "In his letter to TREE [1xSee all References[1], Lundmark emphasizes that polyploidy per se might have an important influence on the ecological success and geographical patterns of parthenogenetic organisms, independent of the effects of hybridization. In support of this, he cites several cases of apparent autopolyploidy in sexual and asexual organisms that exhibit similar geographical tendencies to those described under the umbrella of geographical parthenogenesis. Although this might apply to some situations, I see two difficulties in attributing polyploidy to the geographical patterns of parthenogenesis. One lies in excluding some level of hybridization within cases of ‘autopolyploid’ parthenogenesis, and the other in explaining mechanistically how hybridization and polyploidy could independently lead to similar geographical patterns.The first problem relates to the exclusion of hybridization as a hypothesis. In its broadest sense, hybridization can be considered as the interbreeding of two populations that are distinct on the basis of one or more heritable characters [2xNatural Hybridization and Evolution. Arnold, M.J. See all References, 3xChromosome Evolution in Higher Plants. Stebbins, G.L. See all References]. Given that the term ‘autopolyploid’ is typically used to refer to cases of polyploidy arising within species, this leads to the possibility of a hybrid ‘autopolyploid’ if polyploidy arises from a cross between ecologically differentiated races [2xNatural Hybridization and Evolution. Arnold, M.J. See all References[2]. Indeed, apparent cases of ‘autopolyploid’ parthenogenesis can exhibit higher genetic diversity within and between individuals than expected based on local sexual populations, suggesting secondary contact and hybridization (e.g. [4xPhylogeography of competing sexual and parthenogenetic forms of a freshwater flatworm: patterns and explanations. Pongratz, N. et al. BMC Evol. Biol. 2003; 3Crossref | PubMed | Scopus (48)See all References[4]). Thus, the key issue is whether we can find geographical parthenogenesis in polyploids that have clearly arisen from genome duplications within a particular individual, population or race, rather than from crosses between distinct populations or races. Only in the former case would there be a strong argument that an increase in chromosome number itself is providing an advantage. Otherwise, the hybrid state could be driving the advantage, and the polyploid state could merely represent the fact that a parthenogen cannot normally ‘hybridize’ with a sexual lineage without gaining an additional genome. The same arguments also apply to cases of sexual autopolyploids exhibiting similar patterns to geographical parthenogenesis. The significance of polyploidy in sexual cases, however, would be its capacity to buffer and preserve advantageous gene combinations acquired via hybridization [5xPolyploidy, hybridization, and the invasion of new habitats. Stebbins, G.L. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. 1985; 72: 824–832CrossrefSee all References[5]. Unfortunately, hybridization, even between species, is often difficult to detect (e.g. [6xPhylogenetic evidence for hybrid origins of asexual lineages in an aphid species. Delmotte, F. et al. Evolution. 2003; 57: 1291–1303PubMedSee all References[6]).If there were cases of geographical parthenogenesis in truly non-hybrid autopolyploids, this would suggest that hybridization and polyploidy can both result independently in similar ecological and geographical patterns. This leads to the second difficulty: what effects do hybridization and polyploidy have in common that could lead to these similar patterns? I emphasized that an advantage provided by hybridization in open, novel environments could arise either through the generation of phenotypic novelty, or through the enhancement of genetic diversity [7xHybridization, glaciation and geographical parthenogenesis. Kearney, M. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2005; 20: 495–502Abstract | Full Text | Full Text PDF | PubMed | Scopus (148)See all References[7]. There is some evidence that polyploidy can also lead to phenotypic novelty by triggering changes in gene expression, although hybridization is also often involved in these cases [8xGenes duplicated by polyploidy show unequal contributions to the transcriptome and organ-specific reciprocal silencing. Adams, K.L. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2003; 100: 4649–4654Crossref | PubMed | Scopus (498)See all References[8]. Another possibility is that polyploidy and hybridization are both acting principally to mask deleterious alleles, via polysomic inheritance or dominance complementation, respectively. If this is true, we would expect to see polyploidy and hybridization associated with the invasion of open environments in species that are prone to significant genetic loads or inbreeding levels, perhaps resulting from patchy and fragmented distributions, as often occurs for instance in Daphnia [9xBiogeography of parthenogenetic animals. Cuellar, O. Biogeographica. 1994; 70: 1–13See all References[9]. From this point of view, it is interesting that many parthenogenetic organisms exhibiting geographical parthenogenesis have low vagility, with many insect examples being wingless [10xA new hypothesis to explain geographic parthenogenesis. Haag, C. and Ebert, D. Ann. Zool. Fenn. 2004; 41: 539–544See all References[10], including the grasshopper Warramaba virgo, moths of the genus Dahlica (formerly Solenobia), and weevils of the genus Otiorhynchus." @default.
• W1968621127 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1968621127 creator A5066939927 @default.
• W1968621127 date "2006-01-01" @default.
• W1968621127 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W1968621127 title "Response to Lundmark: Polyploidization, hybridization and geographical parthenogenesis" @default.
• W1968621127 cites W1493899324 @default.
• W1968621127 cites W1972429283 @default.
• W1968621127 cites W2065896944 @default.
• W1968621127 cites W2113833050 @default.
• W1968621127 cites W2122689804 @default.
• W1968621127 cites W2135344306 @default.
• W1968621127 cites W2150713691 @default.
• W1968621127 cites W2178138645 @default.
• W1968621127 cites W2496018053 @default.
• W1968621127 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2005.10.013" @default.
• W1968621127 hasPublicationYear "2006" @default.
• W1968621127 type Work @default.
• W1968621127 sameAs 1968621127 @default.
• W1968621127 citedByCount "19" @default.
• W1968621127 countsByYear W19686211272016 @default.
• W1968621127 countsByYear W19686211272018 @default.
• W1968621127 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1968621127 hasAuthorship W1968621127A5066939927 @default.
• W1968621127 hasConcept C103725303 @default.
• W1968621127 hasConcept C104317684 @default.
• W1968621127 hasConcept C143191323 @default.
• W1968621127 hasConcept C171902525 @default.
• W1968621127 hasConcept C196843134 @default.
• W1968621127 hasConcept C48189365 @default.
• W1968621127 hasConcept C54355233 @default.
• W1968621127 hasConcept C59822182 @default.
• W1968621127 hasConcept C78458016 @default.
• W1968621127 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W1968621127 hasConceptScore W1968621127C103725303 @default.
• W1968621127 hasConceptScore W1968621127C104317684 @default.
• W1968621127 hasConceptScore W1968621127C143191323 @default.
• W1968621127 hasConceptScore W1968621127C171902525 @default.
• W1968621127 hasConceptScore W1968621127C196843134 @default.
• W1968621127 hasConceptScore W1968621127C48189365 @default.
• W1968621127 hasConceptScore W1968621127C54355233 @default.
• W1968621127 hasConceptScore W1968621127C59822182 @default.
• W1968621127 hasConceptScore W1968621127C78458016 @default.
• W1968621127 hasConceptScore W1968621127C86803240 @default.
• W1968621127 hasLocation W19686211271 @default.
• W1968621127 hasOpenAccess W1968621127 @default.
• W1968621127 hasPrimaryLocation W19686211271 @default.
• W1968621127 hasRelatedWork W1985002315 @default.
• W1968621127 hasRelatedWork W2024773576 @default.
• W1968621127 hasRelatedWork W2027314937 @default.
• W1968621127 hasRelatedWork W2060548024 @default.
• W1968621127 hasRelatedWork W2113435435 @default.
• W1968621127 hasRelatedWork W2152249927 @default.
• W1968621127 hasRelatedWork W2319716917 @default.
• W1968621127 hasRelatedWork W2327241505 @default.
• W1968621127 hasRelatedWork W2558258461 @default.
• W1968621127 hasRelatedWork W3216769055 @default.
• W1968621127 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1968621127 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1968621127 magId "1968621127" @default.
• W1968621127 workType "article" @default.