Back

Polygenic adaptation and negative selection across traits, years and environments in a long-lived plant species (Pinus pinaster Ait.)

de Miguel, M.; Rodriguez-Quilon, I.; Heuertz, M.; Hurel, A.; Grivet, D.; Jaramillo-Correa, J. P.; Vendramin, G. G.; Plomion, C.; Majada, J.; Alia, R.; Eckert, A. J.; Gonzalez-Martinez, S. C.

2020-03-04 genetics
10.1101/2020.03.02.974113 bioRxiv
Show abstract

A decade of association studies in multiple organisms suggests that most complex traits are polygenic; that is, they have a genetic architecture determined by numerous loci distributed across the genome, each with small effect-size. Thus, determining the degree of polygenicity and its variation across traits, environments and years is useful to understand the genetic basis of phenotypic variation. In this study, we applied multilocus approaches to estimate the degree of polygenicity of fitness-related traits in a long-lived plant (Pinus pinaster Ait., maritime pine) and to analyze how polygenicity changes across environments and years. To do so, we evaluated five categories of fitness-related traits (survival, height, phenology-related, functional, and biotic-stress response traits) in a clonal common garden network, planted in contrasted environments (over 12,500 trees). First, most of the analyzed traits showed evidence of local adaptation based on QST-FST comparisons. Second, we observed a remarkably stable degree of polygenicity, averaging 6% (range of 0-27%), across traits, environments and years. As previously suggested for humans, some of these traits showed also evidence of negative selection, which could explain, at least partially, the high degree of polygenicity. The observed genetic architecture of fitness-related traits in maritime pine supports the polygenic adaptation model. Because polygenic adaptation can occur rapidly, our study suggests that current predictions on the capacity of natural forest tree populations to adapt to new environments should be revised, which is of special relevance in the current context of climate change.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Molecular Ecology
304 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
25.8%
2
New Phytologist
309 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
7.2%
3
Heredity
53 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.3%
4
PLOS Genetics
756 papers in training set
Top 2%
6.3%
5
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 24%
4.8%
50% of probability mass above
6
Journal of Experimental Botany
195 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.6%
7
Frontiers in Plant Science
240 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.6%
8
Genetics
225 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.6%
9
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 46%
2.4%
10
Evolutionary Applications
91 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.4%
11
Frontiers in Genetics
197 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.4%
12
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 42%
1.7%
13
Molecular Biology and Evolution
488 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
14
The American Naturalist
114 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
15
GENETICS
189 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.5%
16
Peer Community Journal
254 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
17
Plant, Cell & Environment
78 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.3%
18
BMC Genomics
328 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
19
The Plant Journal
197 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
20
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
341 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.2%
21
Forest Ecology and Management
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
22
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 17%
0.9%
23
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
24
Evolution
199 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
25
Global Change Biology
69 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
26
BMC Plant Biology
47 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.7%
27
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 64%
0.7%
28
Journal of Evolutionary Biology
98 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
29
Science of The Total Environment
179 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
30
Tree Physiology
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.6%