Genetic introgression from distant provenances reduces fitness in local weed populations

By Michael Keller, J. Kollmann, P. Edwards. 2000

220 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Genetics, Plant Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/769ac6de148e14c95c6bcea76e23af3ecdad6fba

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

1. A. Bucharova
2. John K. McKay
3. T. Ings
4. Lars Chittka
5. A. Hoffmann
6. C. Sgrò
7. M. Bañuelos
8. A. Young

In Genetics

1. A. Bucharova
2. Andrew Lowe
3. A. Hoffmann
4. R. Frankham
5. M. Byrne
6. John K. McKay
7. C. Sgrò
8. Lars Chittka

In Plant Science

1. A. Bucharova
2. Andrew Lowe
3. M. Byrne
4. C. Yates
5. S. Cunningham
6. A. Hoffmann
7. A. Young
8. M. Mcdonald

Citations in the corpus

• Can commercially imported bumble bees out‐compete their native conspecifics? (2006, background): “the UK). While we know little about the risks posed by introducing non-native subspecies, negative impacts have been associated with the introduction of non-native honey bee subspecies (Schneider, Hoffman & Smith 2004; Moritz, Hartel & Neumann 2005), geographically isolated plant populations ( Kelle”
• “How Local Is Local?”—A Review of Practical and Conceptual Issues in the Genetics of Restoration (2005, background): “Keller et al. (2000) found that local adaptation was the main cause of outbreeding depression but found evidence for coadapted gene complexes manifested as a reduction in fitness in subsequent generations (i.e., F2 generation plants).”
• Assessing the benefits and risks of translocations in changing environments: a genetic perspective (2011, background): “…a risk to the success of translocations, and the focus has been on using local source populations (or provenances) when making decisions about which germplasm to source for restoration and reintroduction programmes (Callaham 1964; Keller et al. 2000; McKay et al. 2005; O’Brien et al. 2007).”
• Seed supply for broadscale restoration: maximizing evolutionary potential (2008, background): “The effects of outbreeding depression in generations beyond initial crosses also varies from strong hybrid breakdown to progeny being as fit as parental types (Hufford and Mazer 2003; Edmands 2007).”
• Latitudinal trends in growth and phenology of the invasive alien plant Impatiens glandulifera (Balsaminaceae) (2004, background): “…cannot tell whether or not variation in seed mass and plant performance are the result of different genotypes or phenotypic plasticity (cf. Winn & Gross, 1993), they will translate into differential reproductive output in case of largedistance seed dispersal as in the study by Keller et al. (2000).”
• Building evolutionary resilience for conserving biodiversity under climate change (2010, background): “Because local adaptation is recognized as being commonplace (Hereford 2009), the focus has been on local provenance when making decisions about which seed to source for restoration and reintroduction programmes (Callaham 1964; Keller et al. 2000; McKay et al. 2005; O’Brien et al. 2007).”
• Assisted migration within species range ignores biotic interactions and lacks evidence (2017, background): “Local or regional provenancing is based on a large body of evidence that plants are adapted to the local or regional environmental conditions, such as soil, climate, and biotic interactions (Keller et al. 2000).”
• Is local provenance important in habitat creation (2001, background): “Evidence for an epistatic effect has recently been found in three weed species, Agrostemma githago , Papaver rhoeas and Silena latifolia ( Keller, Kollmann & Edwards 2000 ), all of which are insect pollinated (Firbank 1988; Proctor, Yeo & Lack 1996).”