Back

Selection leads to remarkable variability in the outcomes of hybridization across replicate hybrid zones

McFarlane, S. E.; Jahner, J. P.; Lindtke, D.; Buerkle, C. A.; Mandeville, E. G.

2022-09-26 evolutionary biology
10.1101/2022.09.23.509250 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Hybrid zones have been viewed as an opportunity to see speciation in action. When hybrid zones are replicated, it is assumed that if the same genetic incompatibilities are maintaining reproductive isolation across all instances of secondary contact, those incompatibilities should be identifiable by consistent patterns in the genome. In contrast, changes in allele frequencies due to genetic drift should be idiosyncratic for each hybrid zone. To test this assumption, we simulated 20 replicates of each of 12 hybrid zone scenarios with varied genetic incompatibilities, rates of migration, selection and different starting population size ratios of parental species. We found remarkable variability in the outcomes of hybridization in replicate hybrid zones, particularly with Bateson-Dobzhansky-Muller incompatibilities and strong selection. We found substantial differences among replicates in the overall genomic composition of individuals, including admixture proportions, inter-specific ancestry complement, and number of ancestry junctions. Additionally, we found substantial variation in genomic clines among replicates at focal loci, regardless of locus-specific selection. We conclude that processes other than selection are responsible for some consistent outcomes of hybridization, whereas selection on incompatibilities can lead to genomically widespread and highly variable outcomes. We highlight the challenge of mapping between pattern and process in hybrid zones and call attention to how selection against incompatibilities will commonly lead to variable outcomes. We hope that this study informs future research on replicate hybrid zones and encourages further development of statistical techniques, theoretical models, and exploration of additional axes of variation to understand reproductive isolation.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Evolution
199 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
36.5%
2
Molecular Ecology
304 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
18.2%
50% of probability mass above
3
The American Naturalist
114 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
7.0%
4
Evolution Letters
71 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.2%
5
Journal of Evolutionary Biology
98 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.3%
6
PLOS Genetics
756 papers in training set
Top 5%
3.0%
7
BMC Ecology and Evolution
49 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.7%
8
GENETICS
189 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.8%
9
Genetics
225 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
10
Journal of Heredity
35 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
11
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.5%
12
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
341 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.3%
13
Peer Community Journal
254 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
14
American Journal of Botany
41 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.2%
15
G3 Genes|Genomes|Genetics
351 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
16
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
17
Genome Biology and Evolution
280 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
18
Evolutionary Applications
91 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
19
New Phytologist
309 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
20
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 59%
0.7%
21
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 48%
0.6%
22
Molecular Biology and Evolution
488 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%