title: The relative influence of habitat amount and configuration on genetic structure across multiple spatial scales.
abstract: Despite strong interest in understanding how habitat spatial structure shapes the genetics of populations, the relative importance of habitat amount and configuration for patterns of genetic differentiation remains largely unexplored in empirical systems. In this study, we evaluate the relative influence of, and interactions among, the amount of habitat and aspects of its spatial configuration on genetic differentiation in the pitcher plant midge, Metriocnemus knabi. Larvae of this species are found exclusively within the water-filled leaves of pitcher plants (Sarracenia purpurea) in a system that is naturally patchy at multiple spatial scales (i.e., leaf, plant, cluster, peatland). Using generalized linear mixed models and multimodel inference, we estimated effects of the amount of habitat, patch size, interpatch distance, and patch isolation, measured at different spatial scales, on genetic differentiation (F ST) among larval samples from leaves within plants, plants within clusters, and clusters within peatlands. Among leaves and plants, genetic differentiation appears to be driven by female oviposition behaviors and is influenced by habitat isolation at a broad (peatland) scale. Among clusters, gene flow is spatially restricted and aspects of both the amount of habitat and configuration at the focal scale are important, as is their interaction. Our results suggest that both habitat amount and configuration can be important determinants of genetic structure and that their relative influence is scale dependent.
authors: Department of Biology, Western University London, Ontario, Canada, N6A 5B7.
authors: Katie L
authors: KL
authors: Millette
authors: Department of Biology, Western University London, Ontario, Canada, N6A 5B7.
authors: Nusha
authors: N
authors: Keyghobadi
keywords: Dispersal; gene flow; habitat structure; isolation; landscape genetics
references: Trends Ecol Evol. 2004 Jul;19(7):379-84
references: 16701289
references: Genetics. 1943 Mar;28(2):114-38
references: 17247074
references: BMC Bioinformatics. 2008 Jul 28;9:323
references: 18662398
references: Am Nat. 2002 Jan;159(1):40-56
references: 18707400
references: Mol Ecol. 2010 Sep;19(17):3679-91
references: 20618895
references: Mol Ecol. 2010 Sep;19(17):3565-75
references: 20723051
references: Mol Ecol. 2010 Oct;19(19):4179-91
references: 20819159
references: Mol Ecol Resour. 2009 Sep;9(5):1388-91
references: 21564915
references: Mol Ecol Resour. 2010 Mar;10(2):304-13
references: 21565025
references: Mol Ecol Resour. 2010 Sep;10(5):831-44
references: 21565094
references: Mol Ecol Resour. 2008 Nov;8(6):1219-29
references: 21586009
references: Am J Bot. 2002 Jun;89(6):1024-6
references: 21665703
references: Ecology. 2011 Jul;92(7):1503-12
references: 21870624
references: Mol Ecol. 2012 Jan;21(2):223-36
references: 21929541
references: Bioinformatics. 2012 Oct 1;28(19):2537-9
references: 22820204
references: PLoS One. 2012;7(8):e42651
references: 22880069
references: Ann Eugen. 1951 Mar;15(4):323-54
references: 24540312
references: Evolution. 1984 Nov;38(6):1358-1370
references: 28563791
references: Heredity (Edinb). 1997 Mar;78 ( Pt 3):311-27
references: 9119706