Back

Combining RADseq and contact zone analysis to decipher cryptic diversification in reptiles: insights from Acanthodactylus erythrurus (Reptilia: Lacertidae)

Doniol-Valcroze, P.; Rancilhac, L.; Brito, J. C.; Miralles, A.; Geniez, P.; Benoit, L.; Loiseau, A.; Leblois, R.; Dufresnes, C.; Crochet, P.-A.

2022-10-01 genomics
10.1101/2022.09.30.510260 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Linnaean and Wallacean shortfalls (Uncertainties on species taxonomy and distribution, respectively) are major factors hampering efficient conservation planning in the current context of biodiversity erosion. These shortfalls concern even widespread and abundant species in relatively well-studied regions such as the Mediterranean biodiversity hotspot which still hosts a large fraction of unrecognised biodiversity, notably in small vertebrates. Species delimitations have long been based on phylogenetic analyses of a small number of standard markers, but accurate lineage identification in this context can be obscured by incomplete lineage sorting, introgression or isolation by distance. Recently, integrative approaches coupling various sets of characters or analyses of contact zones aiming at estimating reproductive isolation (RI) have been advocated instead. Analyses of introgression patterns in contact zone with genomic data represent a powerful way to confirm the existence of independent lineages and estimate the strength of their RI at the same time. The Spiny-footed Lizard Acanthodactylus erythrurus (Schinz, 1833) is widespread in the Iberian Peninsula and the Maghreb and exhibits a large amount of genetic diversity, although the precise number and distribution of its genetic lineages remain poorly understood. We applied a RADseq approach to obtain a genome wide SNPs dataset on a contact zone in central Morocco between the previously described Rif and Middle-Atlas lineages. We show that these two lineages exhibit strong RI across this contact zone, as shown by the limited amount and restricted spatial extant of gene flow. We interpret these results as evidence for species-level divergence of these two lineages. Our study confirms the usefulness of RADseq approaches applied on contact zones for cryptic diversity studies and therefore to resolve Linnaean and Wallacean shortfalls.

Matching journals

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

1
Molecular Ecology
304 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
14.2%
2
Biodiversity and Conservation
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.4%
3
Conservation Genetics
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.0%
4
Molecular Ecology Resources
161 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.8%
5
Conservation Biology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.8%
50% of probability mass above
6
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 14%
6.8%
7
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
4.3%
8
Peer Community Journal
254 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
4.3%
9
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 30%
2.9%
10
Evolutionary Applications
91 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.4%
11
Diversity and Distributions
26 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
12
Global Change Biology
69 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
13
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 59%
1.3%
14
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 55%
1.3%
15
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 22%
1.2%
16
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
160 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
17
Global Ecology and Conservation
25 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.9%
18
Biological Conservation
43 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
19
Genes
126 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
20
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
21
PLANTS, PEOPLE, PLANET
21 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
22
Heredity
53 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%
23
Molecular Biology and Evolution
488 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
24
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
60 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
25
GigaScience
172 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
26
Journal of Biogeography
37 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%
27
Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution
61 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
28
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 18%
0.6%
29
Biological Journal of the Linnean Society
20 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.6%
30
BMC Genomics
328 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.6%