Utility of multilocus genotypes for taxon assignment in stands of closely related European white oaks from Switzerland.
OBJECTIVE
European white oaks (Quercus petraea, Q. pubescens, Q. robur) have long puzzled plant biologists owing to disputed species differentiation. Extensive hybridization or shared ancestry have been proposed as alternative hypotheses to explain why genetic differentiation between these oak species is low. Species delimitation is usually weak and often shows gradual transitions in leaf morphology. Hence, individual identification may be difficult, but remains a critical step for both scientific work and practical management.


METHODS
Multilocus genotype data (five nuclear microsatellites) were used from ten Swiss oak stands for taxon identification without a priori grouping of individuals or populations, using model-based Bayesian assignment tests.


RESULTS
Three groups best structured the data, indicating that the taxonomical signal was stronger than the spatial signal. Most individuals showed high posterior probabilities for either of three genetic groups that were best circumscribed as taxonomical units. The assignment of a subset of trees, whose taxonomic status had been previously characterized in detail, supported this classification scheme.


CONCLUSIONS
Molecular-genetic assignment tests are useful in the identification of species status in critical taxon complexes such as the European white oaks. Such an approach is of practical importance for forest management, e.g. for stand certification or in seed trade to trace the origin of forest products.
Gugerli
Felix
F
WSL Swiss Federal Research Institute, Ecological Genetics and Evolution, Zürcherstrasse 111, CH-8903 Birmensdorf, Switzerland. gugerli@wsl.ch
Brodbeck
Sabine
S
Holderegger
Rolf
R
D005838:Genotype; D005843:Geography; D018895:Microsatellite Repeats / Q000235:genetics; D029963:Quercus / Q000145:classification* / Q000235:genetics*; D013557:Switzerland; D014197:Trees / Q000145:classification / Q000235:genetics
Genetics. 2001 Oct;159(2):699-713
11606545
Nature. 2000 Jun 29;405(6790):1016
10890434
Mol Ecol. 2007 Jul;16(13):2807-15
17594449
Am J Bot. 2002 Nov;89(11):1792-8
21665607
Trends Ecol Evol. 1998 Feb 1;13(2):43-4
21238195
Ann Bot. 2007 May;99(5):959-64
17409100
Evolution. 1997 Jun;51(3):747-755
28568593
Genetics. 2004 Nov;168(3):1615-26
15579711
Mol Ecol. 2005 Feb;14(2):549-61
15660945
Evolution. 1996 Apr;50(2):900-908
28568948
Mol Ecol. 2006 Jan;15(1):63-72
16367830
Theor Appl Genet. 2004 Feb;108(3):558-66
14564395
Genetics. 1997 Dec;147(4):1943-57
9409849
Mol Ecol. 2006 Jul;15(8):2301-4
16780442
Mol Ecol. 2002 Dec;11(12):2571-81
12453240
Theor Appl Genet. 2003 Jan;106(2):346-52
12582862
Genetics. 2002 Mar;160(3):1217-29
11901135
Theor Appl Genet. 1995 Jul;91(1):137-41
24169679
Evol Bioinform Online. 2007 Feb 23;1:47-50
19325852
Mol Ecol. 2006 Jun;15(7):2007-12
16689915
Tree Physiol. 2002 Apr;22(6):413-22
11960766
Am J Bot. 2003 May;90(5):769-76
21659174
Ann Bot. 2007 Apr;99(4):713-22
17337481
Mol Ecol. 2002 Jul;11(7):1145-56
12074722
Heredity (Edinb). 2004 Jan;92(1):20-30
14508500
Am J Bot. 2004 Sep;91(9):1352-63
21652368
Genetics. 2000 Jun;155(2):945-59
10835412
Plant Mol Biol. 1997 Apr;33(6):1093-6
9154990
Trends Ecol Evol. 2005 Mar;20(3):136-42
16701357
Genetics. 2003 Aug;164(4):1567-87
12930761