Vlaanderen.be

Research output

Human impact on the genetic diversity of Dutch field elm (Ulmus minor) populations in the Netherlands: implications for conservation

Research output: Contribution to journalA1: Web of Science-article

Standard

Human impact on the genetic diversity of Dutch field elm (Ulmus minor) populations in the Netherlands: implications for conservation. / Buiteveld, Joukje; Vanden Broeck, An; Cox, Karen; Collin, Eric.

In: Plant Ecology and Evolution, Vol. 149, No. 2, 2016, p. 165-176.

Research output: Contribution to journalA1: Web of Science-article

Harvard

APA

Author

Bibtex

@article{ec09c8ad06e741c9b640ae00471a6cc3,
title = "Human impact on the genetic diversity of Dutch field elm (Ulmus minor) populations in the Netherlands: implications for conservation",
abstract = "Background and aims – Field elms (Ulmus minor Mill.) can easily reproduce vegetatively by root suckers or sprouting. They also have a long history of propagation and planting in the Netherlands. Both natural vegetative reproduction and cultivation may significantly influence the genetic structure of U. minor populations and insight in these phenomena is of utmost importance for appropriate conservation management of this species. In this study we examined the presence and extent of clonality and patterns of genetic variability within and among field elm populations in the Netherlands.Methods – We used microsatellites (SSRs) to describe the clonal diversity and structure and to calculate genetic diversity parameters in the Dutch U. minor populations. Additionally, we compared Dutch populations with two U. minor reference collections from Belgium and France. Key results – We found high levels of clonality in the Dutch field elm populations. Out of the 159 Dutch trees analysed for clonal structure only 66 multilocus genotypes were identified. Clonal richness (R = 0.06–0.96) and diversity (D = 0.44–1.0) varied considerably among locations. Six genotypes were shared between locations indicating human-mediated translocations. We revealed a low to moderate genetic diversity in the populations (He = 0.483–0.628 and Ar = 2.4–2.9). At four locations some individuals were found that differed in assignment probabilities based on the STRUCTURE clustering analysis including parental species, suggesting that these might be hybrids or at least not pure U. minor specimens. This also indicates that morphological identification is difficult. When omitting these individuals genetic structure analyses still indicated the presence of two genetic clusters.Conclusions – However artificial establishment has played a major role in the distribution of the species and its current genetic diversity in the Netherlands. These findings help facilitate Dutch gene conservation management programs for U. minor, in particular, the identification of high priority clones for ex situ conservation and efforts to restore remnant populations and hedgerows.",
author = "Joukje Buiteveld and {Vanden Broeck}, An and Karen Cox and Eric Collin",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.5091/plecevo.2016.977",
language = "English",
volume = "149",
pages = "165--176",
journal = "Plant Ecology and Evolution",
issn = "2032-3913",
publisher = "Societe Royale de Botanique de Belgique",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Human impact on the genetic diversity of Dutch field elm (Ulmus minor) populations in the Netherlands: implications for conservation

AU - Buiteveld, Joukje

AU - Vanden Broeck, An

AU - Cox, Karen

AU - Collin, Eric

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - Background and aims – Field elms (Ulmus minor Mill.) can easily reproduce vegetatively by root suckers or sprouting. They also have a long history of propagation and planting in the Netherlands. Both natural vegetative reproduction and cultivation may significantly influence the genetic structure of U. minor populations and insight in these phenomena is of utmost importance for appropriate conservation management of this species. In this study we examined the presence and extent of clonality and patterns of genetic variability within and among field elm populations in the Netherlands.Methods – We used microsatellites (SSRs) to describe the clonal diversity and structure and to calculate genetic diversity parameters in the Dutch U. minor populations. Additionally, we compared Dutch populations with two U. minor reference collections from Belgium and France. Key results – We found high levels of clonality in the Dutch field elm populations. Out of the 159 Dutch trees analysed for clonal structure only 66 multilocus genotypes were identified. Clonal richness (R = 0.06–0.96) and diversity (D = 0.44–1.0) varied considerably among locations. Six genotypes were shared between locations indicating human-mediated translocations. We revealed a low to moderate genetic diversity in the populations (He = 0.483–0.628 and Ar = 2.4–2.9). At four locations some individuals were found that differed in assignment probabilities based on the STRUCTURE clustering analysis including parental species, suggesting that these might be hybrids or at least not pure U. minor specimens. This also indicates that morphological identification is difficult. When omitting these individuals genetic structure analyses still indicated the presence of two genetic clusters.Conclusions – However artificial establishment has played a major role in the distribution of the species and its current genetic diversity in the Netherlands. These findings help facilitate Dutch gene conservation management programs for U. minor, in particular, the identification of high priority clones for ex situ conservation and efforts to restore remnant populations and hedgerows.

AB - Background and aims – Field elms (Ulmus minor Mill.) can easily reproduce vegetatively by root suckers or sprouting. They also have a long history of propagation and planting in the Netherlands. Both natural vegetative reproduction and cultivation may significantly influence the genetic structure of U. minor populations and insight in these phenomena is of utmost importance for appropriate conservation management of this species. In this study we examined the presence and extent of clonality and patterns of genetic variability within and among field elm populations in the Netherlands.Methods – We used microsatellites (SSRs) to describe the clonal diversity and structure and to calculate genetic diversity parameters in the Dutch U. minor populations. Additionally, we compared Dutch populations with two U. minor reference collections from Belgium and France. Key results – We found high levels of clonality in the Dutch field elm populations. Out of the 159 Dutch trees analysed for clonal structure only 66 multilocus genotypes were identified. Clonal richness (R = 0.06–0.96) and diversity (D = 0.44–1.0) varied considerably among locations. Six genotypes were shared between locations indicating human-mediated translocations. We revealed a low to moderate genetic diversity in the populations (He = 0.483–0.628 and Ar = 2.4–2.9). At four locations some individuals were found that differed in assignment probabilities based on the STRUCTURE clustering analysis including parental species, suggesting that these might be hybrids or at least not pure U. minor specimens. This also indicates that morphological identification is difficult. When omitting these individuals genetic structure analyses still indicated the presence of two genetic clusters.Conclusions – However artificial establishment has played a major role in the distribution of the species and its current genetic diversity in the Netherlands. These findings help facilitate Dutch gene conservation management programs for U. minor, in particular, the identification of high priority clones for ex situ conservation and efforts to restore remnant populations and hedgerows.

U2 - 10.5091/plecevo.2016.977

DO - 10.5091/plecevo.2016.977

M3 - A1: Web of Science-article

VL - 149

SP - 165

EP - 176

JO - Plant Ecology and Evolution

JF - Plant Ecology and Evolution

SN - 2032-3913

IS - 2

ER -

Research output (related by authors)
Shopping cart
Add to cart Saved citations

Copy the text from this field...

Documents

Documents

  • Buiteveld et al. PlEcolEvol 2016

    Final published version, 2.46 MB, PDF document

DOI

Relations
View graph of relations