Sibling competition does not magnify inbreeding depression in North American Arabidopsis lyrata

Abstract

About half of all angiosperms have some form of molecular self-incompatibility to promote outcrossing. If self-incompatibility breaks down, inbreeding depression (δ) is the main barrier to the evolution of self-fertilisation (selfing). If inbreeding depression is lower than 50% (δ < 0.5), the inherent transmission advantage of selfers should theoretically drive the evolution of selfing. However, this does not always happen in practice. For example, despite frequent breakdowns of self-incompatibility in North American Arabidopsis lyrata, selfing has only evolved in few populations. This is surprising given that previous inbreeding-depression estimates were well below the 0.5 threshold. Here, we test whether this could be due to underestimation of true inbreeding depression in competition-free environments. Specifically, we tested whether direct competition between crossed and selfed siblings magnified inbreeding-depression estimates in A. lyrata. We found that this was neither the case for belowground nor for aboveground biomass. For reproductive traits, there was hardly any significant inbreeding depression regardless of competition. Combined with previous findings that drought stress and inducing defence also did not magnify inbreeding depression, our results suggest that the relatively low estimates of inbreeding depression for biomass are indeed realistic estimates of the true inbreeding depression in North American A. lyrata.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. Agrawal AF, Whitlock MC (2010) Environmental duress and epistasis: how does stress affect the strength of selection on new mutations? Trends Ecol Evol 25:450–458

  2. Ågren J, Schemske DW (1993) Outcrossing rate and inbreeding depression in two annual monoecious herbs, Begonia hirsuta and B. semiovata. Evolution 47:125–135

  3. Antonovics J (1968) Evolution of closely adjacent plant populations V. Evolution of self-fertility. Heredity 23:219–238

  4. Barabás G, Michalska-Smith MJ, Allesina S (2016) The effect of intra- and interspecific competition on coexistence in multispecies communities. Am Nat 188:E1–E12

  5. Barrett SCH (2002) The evolution of plant sexual diversity. Nat Rev Genet 3:274–284

  6. Bates D, Machler M, Bolker BM, Walker SC (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw 67:1–48

  7. Bellanger S, Guillemin JP, Touzeau S, Darmency H (2015) Variation of inbreeding depression in Centaurea cyanus L., a self-incompatible species. Flora 212:24–29

  8. Busch JW, Joly S, Schoen DJ (2010) Does mate limitation in self-incompatible species promote the evolution of selfing? The case of Leavenworthia alabamica. Evolution 64:1657–1670

  9. Busch JW, Delph LF (2012) The relative importance of reproductive assurance and automatic selection as hypotheses for the evolution of self-fertilization. Ann Bot 109:553–562

  10. Busch JW, Schoen DJ (2008) The evolution of self-incompatibility when mates are limiting. Trends Plant Sci 13:128–136

  11. Carleial S, van Kleunen M, Stift M (2017) Small reductions in corolla size and pollen: ovule ratio, but no changes in flower shape in selfing populations of the North American Arabidopsis lyrata . Oecologia 183:401–413

  12. Carr DE, Dudash MR (1995) Inbreeding depression under a competitive regime in Mimulus guttatus: consequences for potential male and female function. Heredity 75:437–445

  13. Case TJ (2000) An illustrated guide to theoretical ecology. Oxford University Press, New York, NY(USA)

  14. Charlesworth D (2006) Evolution of plant breeding systems. Curr Biol 16:R726–R735

  15. Charlesworth D, Charlesworth B (1987) Inbreeding depression and its evolutionary consequences. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 18:237–268

  16. Charlesworth D, Willis JH (2009) The genetics of inbreeding depression. Nat Rev Genet 10:783–796

  17. Cheptou PO, Lepart J, Escarre J (2001) Inbreeding depression under intraspecific competition in a highly outcrossing population of Crepis sancta (Asteraceae): evidence for frequency-dependent variation. Am J Bot 88:1424–1429

  18. Connell JH (1983) On the prevalence and relative importance of interspecific competition: evidence from field experiments. Am Nat 122:661–696

  19. deVillemereuil PB, Lopez-Sepulcre A (2011) Consumer functional responses under intra-and inter-specific interference competition. Ecol Model 222:419–426

  20. Fisher RA (1941) Average excess and average effect of a gene substitution. Ann Eugen 11:53–63

  21. Foxe JP, Stift M, Tedder A, Haudry A, Wright SI, Mable BK (2010) Reconstructing origins of loss of self-incompatibility and selfing in north american Arabidopsis lyrata: a population genetic context. Evolution 64:3495–3510

  22. Koelewijn HP (2004) Sibling competition, size variation and frequency-dependent outcrossing advantage in Plantago coronopus. Evol Ecol 18:51–74

  23. Igic B, Lande R, Kohn JR (2008) Loss of self-incompatibility and its evolutionary consequences. Int J Plant Sci 169:93–104

  24. Kondrashov AS (1985) Deleterious mutations as an evolutionary factor.II. Facultative apomixis and selfing. Genetics 111:635–653

  25. Lande R, Schemske DW (1985) The evolution of self-fertilization and inbreeding depression in plants. I. Genetic models. Evolution 39:24–40

  26. Levin DA (1984) Inbreeding depression and proximity-dependent crossing success in Phlox drummondii . Evolution 38:116–127

  27. Levin DA, Bulinska-Radomska Z (1988) Effects of hybridization and inbreeding on fitness in Phlox. Am J Bot 75:1632–1639

  28. Lhamo N, Ramsey M, Vaughton G (2006) Density- and frequency-dependent inbreeding depression in the Australian annual Hibiscus trionum var. vesicarius. Evol Ecol Res 8:717–730

  29. Li Y, van Kleunen M, Stift M (2019) Data from: Sibling competition does not magnify inbreeding depression in North American Arabidopsis lyrata. Dryad Digital Repository. https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.6474895

  30. Løe G (2006). Ecology and evolution of resistance to herbivory: trichome production in Arabidopsis lyrata. Acta Univ. Ups.

  31. Lynch M, Conery J, Burger R (1995) Mutational meltdowns in sexual populations. Evolution 49:1067–1080

  32. Mable BK, Robertson AV, Dart S, Di Berardo C, Witham L (2005) Breakdown of self-incompatibility in the perennial Arabidopsis lyrata (Brassicaceae) and its genetic consequences. Evolution 59:1437–1448

  33. Mable BK, Adam A (2007) Patterns of genetic diversity in outcrossing and selfing populations of Arabidopsis lyrata . Mol Ecol 16:3565–3580

  34. Mable BK, Hagmann J, Kim S, Adam A, Kilbride E, Weigel D et al. (2017) What causes mating system shifts in plants? Arabidopsis lyrata as a case study. Heredity 118:52

  35. Nakanishii T, Esashi Y, Hinata K (1969) Control of self-incompatibility by CO2 gas in Brassica. Plant Cell Physiol 10:925–927

  36. Porcher E, Lande R (2005) The evolution of self-fertilization and inbreeding depression under pollen discounting and pollen limitation. J Evolution Biol 18:497–508

  37. Pujol B, Zhou SR, Vilas JS, Pannell JR (2009) Reduced inbreeding depression after species range expansion. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:15379–15383

  38. R Core Team (2017) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria

  39. Ross-Ibarra J, Wright SI, Foxe JP, Kawabe A, DeRose-Wilson L, Gos G et al. (2008) Patterns of polymorphism and demographic history in natural populations of Arabidopsis lyrata . Plos ONE 3:10.1371

  40. Sandring S, Ågren J (2009) Pollinator-mediated selection on floral display and flowering time in the perennial herb Arabidopsis lyrata . Evolution 63:1292–1300

  41. Schoener TW (1973) Population growth regulated by intraspecific competition for energy or time: some simple representations. Theor Popul Biol 4:56–84

  42. Shimizu KK, Tsuchimatsu T (2015) Evolution of selfing: recurrent patterns in molecular adaptation. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 46:593–622

  43. Sletvold N, Mousset M, Hagenblad J, Hansson B, Agren J (2013) Strong inbreeding depression in two scandinavian populations of the self-incompatible perennial herb Arabidopsis lyrata . Evolution 67:2876–2888

  44. Stift M, Hunter BD, Shaw B, Adam A, Hoebe PN, Mable BK (2013) Inbreeding depression in self-incompatible North-American Arabidopsis lyrata: disentangling genomic and S-locus-specific genetic load. Heredity 110:19–28

  45. Stone JL, VanWyk EJ, Hale JR (2014) Transmission advantage favors selfing allele in experimental populations of self‐incompatible Witheringia solanacea (Solanaceae). Evolution 68:1845–1855

  46. Tsukamoto T, Ando T, Takahashi K, Omori T, Watanabe H, Kokubun H, Marchesi E, Kao T-h (2003) Breakdown of self-incompatibility in a natural population of Petunia axillaris caused by loss of pollen function. Plant Physiol 131:1903–1912

  47. Vogler DW, Filmore K, Stephenson AG (2001) Inbreeding depression in Campanula rapunculoides L. I. A comparison of inbreeding depression in plants derived from strong and weak self-incompatibility phenotypes. J Evolution Biol 12:483–494

  48. Weiner J, Thomas SC (1986) Size variability and competition in plant monocultures. Oikos 47:211–222

  49. Willi Y, Dietrich S, van Kleunen M, Fischer M (2007) Inter-specific competitive stress does not affect the magnitude of inbreeding depression. Evol Ecol Res 9:959–974

  50. Wright SI, Kalisz S, Slotte T (2013) Evolutionary consequences of self-fertilization in plants. Proc R Soc Lond B Bio 280:20130133

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Samuel Fernandes for help with the crossings, and Claudia Martin, Dominika Kundel, Katya Mamonova, Timo Scheu, Otmar Ficht and Yanjie Liu for help with the experiment. YL was funded by a scholarship from the China Scholarship Council. This project was partly funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation)—project number 388824194 to MS.

Author information

Correspondence to Yan Li.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, Y., van Kleunen, M. & Stift, M. Sibling competition does not magnify inbreeding depression in North American Arabidopsis lyrata. Heredity 123, 723–732 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41437-019-0268-1

Download citation