Back

Mating systems and recombination landscape strongly shape genetic diversity and selection in wheat relatives

Burgarella, C.; Bremaud, M.-F.; Von Hirschheydt, G.; Viader, V.; Ardisson, M.; Santoni, S.; Ranwez, V.; David, J.; Glemin, S.

2023-03-20 evolutionary biology
10.1101/2023.03.16.532584 bioRxiv
Show abstract

How and why genetic diversity varies among species is a long-standing question in evolutionary biology. Life history traits have been shown to explain a large part of observed diversity. Among them, mating systems have one of the strongest impacts on genetic diversity, with selfing species usually exhibiting much lower diversity than outcrossing relatives. Theory predicts that a high rate of selfing amplifies selection at linked sites, reducing genetic diversity genome wide, but frequent bottlenecks and rapid population turn-over could also explain low genetic diversity in selfers. However, how linked selection varies with mating systems and whether it is sufficient to explain the observed difference between selfers and outcrossers has never been tested. Here, we used the Aegilops/Triticum grass species, a group characterized by contrasted mating systems (from obligate out-crossing to high selfing) and marked recombination rate variation across the genome, to quantify the effects of mating system and linked selection on patterns of neutral and selected polymorphism. By analyzing phenotypic and transcriptomic data of 13 species, we show that selfing strongly affects genetic diversity and the efficacy of selection by amplifying the intensity of linked selection genome wide. In particular, signatures of adaptation were only found in the highly recombining regions in outcrossing species. These results bear implications for the evolution of mating systems and more generally for our understanding of the fundamental drivers of genetic diversity.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.