Back

Cytogenomic signatures of hybridisation in the genus Carpobrotus reveal biased parental dominance

Pascual-Diaz, J. P.; Torres, M.; Bacovsky, V.; Horakova, L.; Kruzlicova, J.; Novotna, P.; Novoa, A.; Vitales, D.; Garcia, S.

2026-07-09 plant biology
10.64898/2026.07.03.736328 bioRxiv
Show abstract

O_LIHybridisation is frequently associated with plant invasions; however, its consequences for genome organisation and chromosome evolution remain poorly understood in invasive species. We investigated the extent of hybridisation in the invasive Carpobrotus edulis--acinaciformis hybrid complex and determined the cytogenomic contribution of parental species in hybrid accessions. C_LIO_LIWe combined whole-genome sequencing, population genomic analyses, genome size estimation, repeatome characterisation, chromosome counting and fluorescence in situ hybridisation to compare parental species and hybrid accessions from South Africa and the Mediterranean Basin. C_LIO_LIPopulation genomic analyses revealed widespread hybridisation and introgression, with most invasive accessions showing admixed ancestries. Pattersons D-statistic supported asymmetric allele sharing towards C. edulis. Hybrid accessions displayed genome sizes indistinguishable from C. edulis, whereas C. acinaciformis possessed significantly larger genomes. Repeatome analyses identified marked differences in repetitive DNA composition, particularly in satellite DNA abundance and chromosomal distribution. A newly identified satellite repeat (CarpoSat) showed contrasting chromosomal patterns between parental species, whereas hybrids resembled C. edulis satellite pattern. C_LIO_LIOur results demonstrate that Carpobrotus hybrid accessions are a swarm of later-generation hybrids and backcrosses showing a strong bias towards C. edulis, indicating asymmetric introgression. These findings highlight the value of integrating cytogenetic and genomic approaches to understand genome evolution in invasive hybrid complexes. C_LI

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Annals of Botany
50 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.7%
2
New Phytologist
346 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
10.5%
3
The Plant Journal
215 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
7.8%
4
Frontiers in Plant Science
256 papers in training set
Top 1%
6.6%
5
Genome Biology and Evolution
338 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
6.6%
6
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 29%
5.1%
7
Plants
43 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.3%
50% of probability mass above
8
BMC Genomics
406 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.0%
9
BMC Plant Biology
57 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.2%
10
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 40%
2.6%
11
Molecular Biology and Evolution
542 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.1%
12
Journal of Experimental Botany
219 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
13
Journal of Heredity
42 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
14
Molecular Ecology
336 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
15
Communications Biology
993 papers in training set
Top 14%
1.7%
16
BMC Biology
265 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
17
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 50%
1.7%
18
Theoretical and Applied Genetics
49 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.4%
19
G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics
252 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
20
PLANTS, PEOPLE, PLANET
27 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.3%
21
Horticulture Research
47 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.1%
22
PLOS Genetics
862 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.1%
23
Evolutionary Applications
108 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
24
Plant Physiology
238 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
25
Plant Biotechnology Journal
64 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
26
Plant Biology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.8%
27
Scientific Data
209 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
28
Genes
144 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
29
Frontiers in Genetics
230 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.6%
30
Genome Biology
637 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.6%