- THIS ARTICLE
-
Abstract
- Full Text (PDF)
- Alert me when this article is cited
- Alert me if a correction is posted
- SERVICES
- Email this article to a friend
- Similar articles in this journal
- Similar articles in PubMed
- Alert me to new issues of the journal
- Download to citation manager
- Reprints & Permissions
- CITING ARTICLES
- Citing Articles via HighWire
- Citing Articles via Google Scholar
- GOOGLE SCHOLAR
- Articles by Kliman, R. M.
- Articles by Hey, J.
- Search for Related Content
- PUBMED
- PubMed Citation
- Articles by Kliman, R. M.
- Articles by Hey, J.
The Population Genetics of the Origin and Divergence of the Drosophila simulans Complex Species
Richard M. Kliman1,a, Peter Andolfatto2,b, Jerry A. Coyne3,c, Frantz Depaulis2,d, Martin Kreitman3,c, Andrew J. Berry4,c, James McCarter5,c, John Wakeley4,e, and Jody Heyaa Department of Genetics, Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey 08854-8082,
b Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60637,
c Department of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08544,
d Laboratoire d'Ecologie, Université Paris 6, CNRS-UMR 7625 Case 237, 75252 Paris Cedex 05, France
e Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138
Corresponding author: Jody Hey, Department of Genetics, Rutgers University, 604 Allison Rd., Piscataway, NJ 08854-8082., jhey{at}mbcl.rutgers.edu (E-mail)
Communicating editor: W. F. EANES
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
The origins and divergence of Drosophila simulans and close relatives D. mauritiana and D. sechellia were examined using the patterns of DNA sequence variation found within and between species at 14 different genes. D. sechellia consistently revealed low levels of polymorphism, and genes from D. sechellia have accumulated mutations at a rate that is
50% higher than the same genes from D. simulans. At synonymous sites, D. sechellia has experienced a significant excess of unpreferred codon substitutions. Together these observations suggest that D. sechellia has had a reduced effective population size for some time, and that it is accumulating slightly deleterious mutations as a result. D. simulans and D. mauritiana are both highly polymorphic and the two species share many polymorphisms, probably since the time of common ancestry. A simple isolation speciation model, with zero gene flow following incipient species separation, was fitted to both the simulans/mauritiana divergence and the simulans/sechellia divergence. In both cases the model fit the data quite well, and the analyses revealed little evidence of gene flow between the species. The exception is one gene copy at one locus in D. sechellia, which closely resembled other D. simulans sequences. The overall picture is of two allopatric speciation events that occurred quite near one another in time.
SEVERAL hundred thousand years ago one species of Drosophila gave rise to three that today we call Drosophila simulans, D. mauritiana, and D. sechellia. Today the three species are morphologically distinct (primarily on the basis of male genitalia), partially intersterile (male hybrids are sterile, female hybrids fertile), and largely allopatric (D. simulans is a nearly cosmopolitan human commensal, while the other two are island endemics). The combination of clear phenotypic distinction, partial infertility, and recent coancestry (not to mention their evolutionary proximity to D. melanogaster) has made this little species complex our most thoroughly studied speciation model system (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Historically there have been two main approaches to the genetic study of species divergence. The classical approach is to genetically map traits that are thought to be important in speciation. Such traits tend to fall into one of three categories.
- The most straightforward are those for which the species exhibit characteristic differences and that probably represent species-specific adaptations. Major lifestyle or life history adaptations can, in principle, play a large direct role in speciation, particularly if those changes arise first as polymorphisms within the ancestral species (
BUSH 1969 ;
RICE and HOSTERT 1993 ). For example, the preferred host of D. sechellia, Morinda citrifolia, is toxic to the other species of the D. melanogaster complex, and the genes that confer resistance can be mapped in the species hybrids (
JONES 1998 ).
- A second class of "speciation" traits are those that are features of mating pairs of organisms. In recent years, a host of interesting Drosophila mating phenotypes have come under focus, including species-specific mate detection pheromones (
COYNE et al. 1994 ;
COYNE and CHARLESWORTH 1997 ), sperm competition (
SNOOK et al. 1994 ;
PRICE et al. 1999 ), and female mediation of sperm competition (
PRICE 1997 ).
- The third class of speciation traits are those that appear almost exclusively in species hybrids. Examples of these are hybrid inviability and hybrid sterility. In general such traits can be genetically studied only in species where postzygotic isolation is incomplete, which is necessary for the production of F2s or backcrosses.
A different genetic approach to understanding speciation is to study the history of species divergence as it is revealed in the polymorphism pattern at randomly selected genes. In recent years, comparative DNA sequence data (especially mitochondrial) have been frequently used to address basic questions about the relatedness of close sister taxa and populations (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
The two approaches (the mapping of speciation phenotypes and DPG) have historically been directed at very different questions. The gene mapping studies address the genetic architecture of phenotypes that may have been important in speciation; however, these maps bear no direct connection to the demographic factors that have caused species, and they may not have a direct connection to the selective factors that have actually caused species. All of the speciation phenotypes listed above can arise during or following speciation that is primarily caused by selection on other phenotypes. Thus, for example, hybrid sterility and inviability may arise as epistatic by-products of independent adaptations in the separate incipient species (![]()
![]()
The two approaches can greatly complement one another, such as when interpretations of the evolution of phenotypic traits are laid upon an understanding of phylogenetic history. For example, recent attempts to demonstrate sympatric speciation and assess its frequency have strongly relied upon accurate branching phylogenies (![]()
![]()
![]()
This report brings together the efforts of several investigators interested in the speciation events that have led to our current simulans complex species. To date, DPG studies on the simulans complex have been done for five different nuclear loci (![]()
![]()
![]()
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
The data for five loci, per, yp2, z, ase, and ci, have previously been described (![]()
![]()
![]()
Zw, Adh, and est-6:
DNA sequences had previously been reported for D. melanogaster and D. simulans for these genes (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
janus:
Two loci, janus-A and janus-B, are overlapping and related by an ancient duplication (![]()
![]()
hb, mt:ND5, Sxl, and w:
Portions of each of these loci were sequenced from single flies drawn from inbred lines of each species that were collected or obtained from others. For D. mauritiana, 1 line was obtained from H. Robertson and 9 from O. Kitagawa. For D. sechellia, 8 isofemale lines were collected from the Seychelles in 1985. These 8 lines were sequenced for each of these genes. In addition, 6 lines of D. sechellia were collected from the Seychelles in 1989. These lines were sequenced only for the Sxl locus. For D. simulans, 3 lines (from France, Tunisia, and Kenya) were obtained from the Drosophila species stock center, and 13 lines were collected from diverse locations, including Florida City, FL; Beltsville, MD; Murakata City, Japan; Palmer Island, Australia; Ottawa, Canada; Cairns, Australia; Capetown, South Africa; Brazzaville, Congo; Morven, GA; and Praslin, Seychelles.
DNA sequencing was done using templates generated via PCR on genomic DNA. PCR was done using a kinased primer and was followed by treatment with
exonuclease to degrade one strand (![]()
![]()
For hb (hunchback), the sequenced region corresponds to intronic sequence from positions 77698052 of D. melanogaster GenBank record U17742. For mt:ND5 (mitochondrial NADH-ubiquinone oxidoreductase chain 5), the sequenced region corresponds to positions 72567472 of D. melanogaster GenBank record U37541. For Sxl (Sex Lethal), the sequenced region corresponds to intronic sequence from positions 241722241977 of D. melanogaster GenBank record AE003439. For w (white), the sequenced region corresponds to intronic sequence from positions 1226012478 of D. melanogaster GenBank record X02974.
In(2L)t:
In(2L)t refers to the D. simulans/D. mauritiana/D. sechellia homologue of the proximal breakpoint site of the In(2L)t inversion that segregates in natural populations of D. melanogaster (![]()
![]()
![]()
GenBank accession numbers:
Accession numbers are as follows: for Zw, Adh, and est-6,
AF284474,
AF284475,
AF284476,
AF284477,
AF284478,
AF284479,
AF284480,
AF284481,
AF284482,
AF284483,
AF284484,
AF284485,
AF284486,
AF284487,
AF284488,
AF284489,
AF284490,
AF284491,
AF284492,
AF284493,
AF284494,
AF284495,
AF284496,
AF284497; janus,
AF284453,
AF284454,
AF284455,
AF284456,
AF284457,
AF284458,
AF284459; hb,
AF295808,
AF295809,
AF295810,
AF295811,
AF295812,
AF295813,
AF295814,
AF295815,
AF295816,
AF295817,
AF295818,
AF295819,
AF295820,
AF295821,
AF295822,
AF295823,
AF295824,
AF295825,
AF295826,
AF295827,
AF295828,
AF295829,
AF295830,
AF295831,
AF295832,
AF295833,
AF295834,
AF295835; mt:ND5,
AF295836,
AF295837,
AF295838,
AF295839,
AF295840,
AF295841,
AF295842,
AF295843,
AF295844,
AF295845,
AF295846,
AF295847,
AF295848,
AF295849,
AF295850,
AF295851,
AF295852,
AF295853,
AF295854,
AF295855,
AF295856,
AF295857,
AF295858,
AF295859,
AF295860,
AF295861; Sxl and w,
AF295862,
AF295863,
AF295864,
AF295865,
AF295866,
AF295867,
AF295868,
AF295869,
AF295870,
AF295871,
AF295872,
AF295873,
AF295874,
AF295875,
AF295876,
AF295877,
AF295878,
AF295879,
AF295880,
AF295881,
AF295882,
AF295883,
AF295884,
AF295885,
AF295886,
AF295887,
AF295888,
AF295889,
AF295890,
AF295891,
AF295892,
AF295893,
AF295894,
AF295895,
AF295896,
AF295897,
AF295898,
AF295899,
AF295900,
AF295901,
AF295902,
AF295903,
AF295904,
AF295905,
AF295906,
AF295907,
AF295908,
AF295909,
AF295910,
AF295911,
AF295912,
AF295913,
AF295914,
AF295915,
AF295916,
AF295917,
AF295918,
AF295919,
AF295920,
AF295921; In(2L)t,
AF294398,
AF294399,
AF294400,
AF294401,
AF294402,
AF294403,
AF294404,
AF294405,
AF294406,
AF294407,
AF294408,
AF294409 and
AF217926, AF21791.
| RESULTS |
|---|
Polymorphism summaries:
Sample sizes and basic statistics of the loci studied are listed in Table 1. DNA sequence variation is summarized in Table 2. A simple weighted average of nucleotide diversity per base pair shows D. simulans to be the most variable, followed by D. mauritiana and D. sechellia. For the autosomal loci the weighted average values of
/bp were 0.015, 0.011, and 0.003 for these three species, respectively. The corresponding X chromosome values were slightly less than one-half of the autosomal values, at 0.007, 0.005, and 0.001. The rankings are unchanged from those originally reported for fewer loci (![]()
![]()
![]()
|
|
Tests of selective neutrality:
To focus on demographic factors associated with the divergence of species, we first addressed whether the data show evidence that natural selection has shaped levels of variation. Table 3 shows the results of contingency table tests in which variable sites are classified both with respect to whether they are polymorphisms within species or fixed differences between species and whether they occurred at synonymous or replacement sites within the protein-coding regions. Under a model in which all mutations are either deleterious or neutral, the expected ratio of synonymous to amino acid replacement variation should be the same for polymorphisms and for fixed differences between species. Three loci (est6, janus, and Zw) revealed a poor fit to the neutral model (Table 3), and in each case the direction is the same as had previously been reported for Adh (![]()
![]()
|
Similar in principle to the McDonald-Kreitman tests in Table 3, the Hudson-Kreitman-Aguadé (HKA) test examines whether the relative levels of observed polymorphism and divergence are consistent across multiple loci. Fig 1 shows the results of HKA tests (![]()
2 distribution (![]()
2 = 25.31, P = 0.0010; D. mauritiana,
2 = 18.61, P = 0.0390; and D. sechellia,
2 = 52.84, P = 0.0010. For D. simulans, Fig 1 shows how ase and ci make large contributions to the test statistic, as expected from previous reports (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
|
The HKA test was repeated with the exclusion of just those loci that showed the strongest departures from expectations. As expected, the value of the overall test statistics dropped markedly, though that for D. sechellia was still significant (D. simulans,
2 = 10.77, P = 0.1308; D. mauritiana,
2 = 13.92, P = 0.1520; D. sechellia,
2 = 21.90, P = 0.0459*). In the case of D. sechellia the still significant departure is primarily due to two loci (mt:ND5 and w) that revealed two polymorphisms where none were expected.
We also considered Tajima's D statistic (Table 2) of the difference between different estimators of the population mutation rate,
= 2Gu, where G is the effective number of gene copies and u is the mutation rate (![]()
for an X-linked locus; and G =
for a sex-limited, effectively haploid locus found on the mitochondria or the Y chromosome. Under a neutral model of constant population size, the expected value of D is very near zero (![]()
for each locus that were generated from the observed polymorphism and divergence levels. For each simulation, we noted whether the absolute value of the observation was greater than the absolute value of the simulated value (two-tailed test). For D. mauritiana, the weighted average of D was -0.677 and only 2% (P = 0.020) of the simulations generated a more extreme value. For D. simulans and D. sechellia, the same analysis revealed a weighted value of D that fell near the middle of the simulated distribution (results available upon request). The overall negative pattern of D values from D. mauritiana suggests that recent population demographics have shaped the polymorphism pattern, with the simplest explanation being recent population size expansion (![]()
Divergence of genes:
The three species of the simulans complex are closely related to one another, and much of the history of gene samples drawn from the simulans complex predates the origins of the three species (![]()
Relative rate tests were conducted for pairs of simulans complex sequences, rooted by a D. melanogaster sequence, using the method of ![]()
columns in Table 4). In the comparisons between D. simulans and D. mauritiana the direction of departure varied evenly among genes.
|
The second method of summarizing was applied to the data, prior to the relative rate tests, so as to have results that are not complicated by so many multiple comparisons. This analysis employed just one single constructed sequence from each species. The following genes have been sequenced, at least in part, from at least one individual from each of the three simulans complex species, as well as D. melanogaster: the proximal Amylase gene (Amy-P; ![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
; ![]()
50% more quickly than have genes in D. simulans and that genes in D. mauritiana have an average rate of mutation accumulation that is in between that of the other species. Put another way, if we consider just the 112 Mb of DNA sequence recently reported for the D. melanogaster genome project, then a random copy of the D. sechellia genome had >500,000 more mutations accumulate than a comparable copy of the D. simulans genome since the various times at which the different genes had common ancestors.
The ranking of mutation accumulation rates inversely mirrors the ranking of estimated effective population sizesthe larger the effective population size, the lower the rate of mutation accumulation. This pattern is consistent with the slightly deleterious model of mutation accumulation, in which more mutations are effectively neutral when population sizes are smaller (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
|
The evidence of reduced effective population size and reduced efficiency of natural selection, in D. sechellia relative to the other species, is also consistent with the finding that D. sechellia bears many fewer genes that contribute to hybrid sterility in crosses with D. simulans than does D. mauritiana. Though this pattern was once interpreted as evidence that D. simulans and D. sechellia are the most closely related species pair (![]()
Divergence of species:
As incipient species begin to diverge from one another they can be expected to share genetic variation that was common to their ancestral species. If neither incipient species experiences a strong population bottleneck, then these shared polymorphisms may persist for a long period of time, particularly at those genes that are not associated with adaptive divergence (and are not linked to such genes). Table 6 shows the numbers of shared polymorphisms and fixed differences found between each species pair. Both D. simulans and D. mauritiana are highly polymorphic, and even though the number of sequences sampled is small, we find that the two species share polymorphisms at a majority of the loci. In contrast, species comparisons that involve D. sechellia generally revealed no shared polymorphisms, as expected given the low level of polymorphism found within this species. The exceptions involving D. sechellia are a single shared polymorphism between D. simulans and D. sechellia at per and the abundance of shared polymorphisms at In(2L)t due to a single D. sechellia sequence (see above).
|
To assess how many of the shared polymorphisms could be expected to arise just by recurrent mutation, we conducted a simple calculation under the assumption that mutations occur randomly and independently with equal probability at all sites. If s1 and s2 polymorphic sites were observed in each of two historically independent species over a common region of length L, then the probability that exactly ss of those polymorphisms fall on the same base positions in the two samples is given by the hypergeometric probability
![]() |
(1) |
(![]()
![]() |
(2) |
In the case of the simulans complex data, the expected values of shared polymorphisms are quite low, generally near zero, and even when the values are >1, they are still a small fraction of the observed number (Table 6). The reasons for this are simply that mutations are rare and that there are a very large number of available sites. This method assumes that all sites are equally likely to mutate, and so it is likely to underestimate shared polymorphisms that arise via multiple mutations. However, even if the analysis is repeated by first breaking down the observed values of L, s1, and s2 into components due to replacement, synonymous, and intron sites, the overall expected values do not approach the observations for those cases when shared polymorphisms were observed (results available upon request).
Another way to check whether mutations are occurring randomly and fairly uniformly across sites is to compare observations with a Poisson distribution. An approximate check can be made by asking whether the number of sites that support a 2-, 3-, or 4-base polymorphism is consistent with a Poisson distribution, given the number of sites that revealed no polymorphic sites. Fitting a Poisson distribution to the D. simulans data set returned expected values of 12,271, 275, 3, and 0 positions with 1, 2, 3, and 4 segregating bases, respectively (sites with 1 segregating base are invariant). The observed values were 12,271, 271, 7, and 0. The good fit of the Poisson distribution suggests that overall the data set has just a small number of sites where recurrent mutations have occurred.
Also revealed in the comparison between D. simulans and D. mauritiana is the negative correlation, across loci, that is expected between fixed differences and shared polymorphisms. In the absence of recombination and recurrent mutation, a gene tree for one locus can support either fixed differences or shared polymorphisms, but not both (neither may occur as well), as a simple byproduct of the possible gene tree topologies (![]()
Fig 2 shows the results of cluster analyses for most of the genes (similar diagrams for the remaining genes were reported previously). These diagrams should not be equated with gene tree estimates, as most loci showed evidence of recombination and thus do not have a bifurcating gene tree history. However, these diagrams do serve to show the variable patterns of similarity that are found among genes and how those patterns are not consistent with simple phylogenetic relationships among species. As in the case of the original studies on ase, ci, per, yp2, and z (![]()
![]()
![]()
|
The frequent tendency for genes from D. simulans and D. mauritiana to cluster with those from the other species is entirely consistent with the presence of a large number of shared polymorphisms between these species (Table 6). These patterns are expected if multiple gene lineages persist in both species since the time of speciation (![]()
![]()
Fitting a speciation model:
We compared the data to what would be expected under a simple speciation model, called an "isolation model," in which an ancestral constant size population splits over a very short period of time into two populations, each of constant size. There are four primary parameters to the model, including three
's, or population mutation rates (one for the ancestral population and one for each descendant), and a time since the splitting event. The model fitting requires the counts of shared polymorphisms and fixed differences, as well as counts of the numbers of unique polymorphisms. The method is outlined in ![]()
![]()
Table 7 shows the results of fitting the isolation model to four different data sets. The first case includes D. simulans and D. mauritiana and, as in the original application of the method for this species pair, the ancestral species appears to have had a size intermediate between the descendants and to have occurred not very long ago (![]()
, while the ancestral species estimate is considerably larger than that for either descendant species. The reason for the similarities, with and without the In(2L)t sequence, is that this sequence is not the only locus where a shared polymorphism was found (one also occurred at per; Table 6). Thus, in both applications, the model must still reconcile the presence of divergence between the taxa, low polymorphism within D. sechellia, and the presence of shared polymorphism. The combined effect of all three is to drive up the estimate of the size of the ancestral species (![]()
|
We also performed statistical tests of the quality of fit between the expected levels of polymorphism under the isolation model and the observed values (![]()
estimate of the population recombination rate (![]()
We considered two test statistics. One was a simple
2 statistic that summed the discrepancies between observations and expectations for each locus and each polymorphism type. If we denote the counts of the four types of polymorphisms for locus i as Si, j, with j = 1 ... 4, and if there are L loci, then
![]() |
(3) |
The second test statistic was that used by ![]()
From comparison of the first two rows of Table 7, it is clear that adjusting the observed numbers of shared polymorphism by the number expected by chance has little effect on the parameter estimates or the quality of the fit of the isolation model. Similarly, from rows three and four, we see that the effect of including the unusual sequence of In(2L)t within the D. sechellia sample has little effect on the parameter estimates. There is an effect on the fit between the model and the data (the model fits better when the sequence is excluded), but in neither case is the model rejected.
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
Our basic approach has been to extend DNA sequence-based population genetics to questions associated with relatively ancient speciation events. The divergence of the simulans complex species probably began hundreds of thousands of years ago (![]()
![]()
![]()
Departures from the neutral model:
The major assumptions of the basic null model that is used as a heuristic guide for many analyses, and as an explicit baseline in the statistical tests, are that mutations are neutral and that population sizes are constant (the McDonald-Kreitman test does not rely upon the latter). We observed four distinct kinds of departures from null expectations: an overall negative value of Tajima's D for D. mauritiana (Table 2), suggestive of a recently expanding population size in this species (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Speciation:
Throughout this report, the three simulans complex species are considered to be biological entities within which evolutionary forces of natural selection and genetic drift play out amid a recombining gene pool, and between which there is a near absence of gene exchange (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
When simulans taxa are considered from the standpoint of just one single locus, then we often do find that taxa are poorly reflected by the patterns of similarity among individual gene copies. Pairs of gene copies drawn from D. simulans and D. mauritiana vary widely in the degree to which they differ, and gene tree estimates for individual genes show that these taxa are highly paraphyletic when represented by multiple gene copies for a single locus (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
At the crux of many speciation discussions is the question of whether or not natural selection plays a direct creative role in forming species. In the simplest models of allopatric speciation it does not, and speciation is a byproduct of the evolution that proceeds in physically separated populations. Thus, for example, in the classic speciation model of Dobzhansky and Muller, each of two separate populations accumulates adaptations one by one. However, it turns out that when given the chance to hybridize, the mutations fixed in one species are incompatible with the novel genome of the other species. In other words, they are epistatic and deleterious when expressed in a genetic background other than the one in which they arose (![]()
![]()
Whether or not natural selection promotes species formation directly or indirectly depends on whether or not gene exchange was occurring among incipient species. Thus, research on the historical demographic processes associated with species divergence may reveal evidence of ancient gene flow and, therefore, illuminate the kinds of natural selection and the kinds of phenotypes that might have existed during the beginning stages of species formation. Of course, if gene flow and natural selection were important factors for just a short period of time at the beginning of speciation, then patterns of variation may not be indistinguishable from those expected under the isolation model, particularly if those events were long ago. However, population genetic methods can sometimes reveal recent or ongoing gene flow between species that are otherwise long diverged. With such findings our understanding of species as evolutionary entities undergoes a significant adjustment; for it is then that natural selection can be seen as having maintained the phenotype, by which we recognize the species, in the face of that gene flow.
Assessing gene flow:
Variation can be shared between species either by gene flow or by dual persistence since the time of population splitting. These historical alternatives can be difficult to distinguish, relying primarily on two kinds of observations. First, if most gene sequences suggest moderate or high divergence, but a minority are identical for two species, then the simplest explanation may be population splitting long ago and limited recent gene flow. This kind of observation is essentially one of an appearance of a sequence that is "atypical" for its taxon. An example of this pattern was found at the per locus in D. pseudoobscura and D. persimilis (![]()
![]()
![]()
Limited evidence of gene flow among these species also comes from a study of ase and ci. In this case the observation did not involve shared variation (polymorphism is nearly absent in these genes) but rather that divergence between the simulans complex species was less than expected given what had been found at other loci (![]()
Phylogeny:
As an important model system for the study of speciation, the D. simulans complex has been the subject of many efforts to infer phylogeny. Indeed, all three possible pairs of taxa have been proposed as the most closely related species pair, including simulans/sechellia (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
The difficulty of the phylogeny problem can be seen both from the standpoint of the data and from the standpoint of theory. Regarding data, a simple appraisal of the cluster diagrams for the 14 genes shows how difficult it could be to try to discern an overall species branching history. Thus consider from the standpoint of D. sechellia sequences, which always cluster together [excepting In(2L)t], and ask whether the next most similar sequence is from D. simulans, or D. mauritiana, or whether it is a node that joins sequences from both of these species. A plurality of genes pair the D. sechellia cluster with a mix of simulans and mauritiana gene copies, including ase and ci (![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
It is noteworthy that what appears to be the most unlikely pairing for the most recent speciation event, on the basis of these cluster analyses and on biogeographic grounds (D. sechellia and D. mauritiana), was the favored topology in a study that brought together multiple comparative DNA sequence data sets (![]()
It is worth noting that the difficulty of inferring a branching species history is probably not a simple byproduct of too little data. The 14-locus data set comprises very nearly 220,000 bp of DNA sequence, not including the D. melanogaster outgroup sequences, and there are a total of 554 polymorphic sites, including 320 so-called "phylogenetically informative" polymorphisms (i.e., the rarer base occurs more than once). Also, as these are very closely related DNA sequences, only a small fraction of these polymorphisms are expected to have occurred at the same site (see RESULTS). One might suppose that a data set with just three taxa and hundreds of informative sites (with little recurrent mutation) would permit a straightforward, traditional, phylogenetic resolution, but clearly it does not.
If we consider "phylogeny" as pertaining to the genesis of phyla then we have good reasons for eschewing most analyses that impose a simple bifurcating model on the history of these species. All three species are similarly related to one another, and the data suggest that all three have been evolving as separate entities for about the same amount of time. It also appears that divergence has been accruing in a manner consistent with allopatric speciation. If that is correct then we must also consider the likelihood that there was an extended period of time when multiple separate, but nonreproductively isolated, populations existed. The isolation model used here for some analyses assumes an instantaneous population splitting event, but even if that is accurate, neither that model nor any of our data help us to think about the origins of reproductive isolation. Given the recency of these speciation events, their evident proximity in time to one another, and the biological necessity that such events encompassed some time, there seems a large chance that we could misunderstand history if we were to take "speciation event" too literally as denoting an instance in time. For example, under allopatry and the Dobzhansky/Muller model (![]()
![]()
There are also a number of ways that the demographic circumstances associated with the origin of these taxa could positively mislead any attempt to impose a bifurcating model. For example, if the ancestral species consisted of multiple populations with limited gene exchange, with differentiation and local adaptation then the divergence of multiple species out of this ancestral species could be expected to reflect this structure. Indeed, there is evidence that D. simulans once had more population structure than we find at present (![]()
A synthesis:
If we draw from the current biogeography and patterns of DNA sequence similarities, then it appears as if there were two island colonization events by flies that came from a large continental population. Given the large variation in DNA sequence similarities, particularly in the way that sequences from different species cluster, it seems nearly certain that a large amount of the variation that presently occurs among species includes samples of the variation that was present in ancestral species. If the two colonization events happened nearly at the same time, then different genes are expected to suggest different orders and topologies for these population splitting events.
Consider a model in which a large continental species gives rise to two smaller isolated populations on offshore islands, and that after formation these island populations are constant in size and exchange no genes with the mainland population (Fig 3). Then the expected amount of divergence between a gene copy from an island endemic and the mainland species can be expressed as a function of the time since splitting, the mutation rate since splitting, and the amount of variation within the mainland ancestral species. Let dim be the average number of base pair differences between the island species (i) and the mainland species (m); let t be the time of island population formation; and let ui and um be the respective mutation rates per year experienced by each. Then
![]() |
(4) |
and
![]() |
(5) |
where
m is the average number of differences between two sequences in the mainland population at t = 0. Note that under the assumption of constant population size
m can be estimated by taking the average number of differences between two sequences from our mainland species, D. simulans. This quantity, summed across the 14 loci, is 123.7. The reason for including separate mutation rates after splitting is that we have clear evidence from the relative rate tests that D. mauritiana and D. sechellia have been evolving faster than D. simulans since the time of common ancestry. From the overall difference in branch lengths, we can estimate for D. sechellia that ui = um · 1.49 (i.e., 0.0137/0.0092; see RESULTS, Divergence of genes). Similarly we can estimate for D. mauritiana that ui = um · 1.20 (i.e., 0.0122/0.0102; see RESULTS, Divergence of genes). The estimate of dim is simply the average number of pairwise differences between sequences from the island and mainland species, summed across the 14 loci; for D. sechellia it is 205.4 and for D. mauritiana it is 169.7. Substituting these quantities into expression (5) we find for the divergence between D. simulans and D. sechellia that t =
. Similarly for the divergence between D. simulans and D. mauritiana we find t =
.
|
The absolute time can be roughly assessed by assuming that um applies to the divergence between D. melanogaster and D. simulans. The average of the pairwise differences between these species, summed across these 14 loci, is 476.62. If we assume that the separation of these gene copies was
3 million years ago (![]()
= 7.94 · 10-5. Applying this rate we obtain an estimate of t, for D. sechellia, of 413,000 years and of t, for D. mauritiana, of 263,000 years. These dates scale linearly with any estimate of um, and it should be noted that the 3 million year date is very rough, as it relies upon a few amber fossils of early Drosophilids of somewhat uncertain age (![]()
![]()
![]()
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
1 Present address: Department of Biological Sciences, Kean University, 1000 Morris Ave., Union, NJ 07083. ![]()
2 Present address: ICAPB, University of Edinburgh, King's Bldg., W. Mains Rd., Edinburgh EH9 3JT, United Kingdom. ![]()
3 Present address: Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Chicago, 1101 E. 57th St., Chicago, IL 60637. ![]()
4 Present address: Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138. ![]()
5 Present address: Genome Sequencing Ctr., Box 8501, Washington University School of Medicine, 4444 Forest Park Pkwy., St. Louis, MO 63108. ![]()
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We thank Constantin Yanicostas for assistance with janus. R.M.K. and J.H. were supported by National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant R01GM58060. R.M.K. also received support from the Jeffress Memorial Trust. F.D. was supported by "Groupe de Recherche sur les Genomés" grant GREG92-392 to Michel Veuille. J.C. was supported by NIH GM 58260. J.W. was supported by National Science Foundation grant DEB-9815367.
Manuscript received April 14, 2000; Accepted for publication September 11, 2000.
| LITERATURE CITED |
|---|
AGUADÉ, M., N. MIYASHITA, and C. H. LANGLEY, 1992 Polymorphism and divergence in the Mst26A male accessory gland gene region in Drosophila. Genetics 132:755-770[Abstract].
AKASHI, H., 1994 Synonymous codon usage in Drosophila melanogaster: natural selection and translational accuracy. Genetics 136:927-935[Abstract].
AKASHI, H., 1995 Inferring weak selection from patterns of polymorphism and divergence at "silent" sites in Drosophila DNA. Genetics 139:1067-1076[Abstract].
ANDOLFATTO, P., J. D. WALL, and M. KREITMAN, 1999 Unusual haplotype structure at the proximal breakpoint of In(2L)t in a natural population of Drosophila melanogaster.. Genetics 153:1297-1311
AVISE, J. C., 1989 Gene trees and organismal histories: a phylogenetic approach to population biology. Evolution 43:1192-1208.
BARRACLOUGH, T. G. and A. P. VOGLER, 2000 Detecting the geographical pattern of speciation from species-level phylogenies. Am. Nat. 155:419-434[Medline].
BEGUN, D. J. and C. F. AQUADRO, 1992 Levels of naturally occurring DNA polymorphism correlate with recombination rates in D. melanogaster.. Nature 356:519-520[Medline].
BERRY, A. J., J. W. AJIOKA, and M. KREITMAN, 1991 Lack of polymorphism on the Drosophila fourth chromosome resulting from selection. Genetics 129:1111-1117[Abstract].
BRIDGES, C. B., 1938 A revised map of the salivary gland X-chromosome of Drosophila melanogaster.. J. Hered. 29:11-13
BUSH, G. L., 1969 Sympatric host race formation and speciation in frugivorous flies of the genus Rhagoletis (Diptera, Tephritidae). Evolution 23:237-251.
CACCONE, A., G. D. AMATO, and J. R. POWELL, 1988 Rates and patterns of scnDNA and mtDNA divergence within the Drosophila melanogaster subgroup. Genetics 118:671-683
CACCONE, A., E. N. MORIYAMA, J. M. GLEASON, L. NIGRO, and J. R. POWELL, 1996 A molecular phylogeny for the Drosophila melanogaster subgroup and the problem of polymorphism data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 13:1224-1232[Abstract].
CARIOU, M. L., 1987 Biochemical phylogeny of the eight species in the Drosophila melanogaster subgroup, including D. sechellia and D. orena.. Genet. Res. 50:181-185[Medline].
CARIOU, M. L., M. SOLIGNAC, M. MONNEROT, and J. R. DAVID, 1990 Low allozyme and mtDNA variability in the island endemic species Drosophila sechellia (Drosophila melanogaster complex). Experientia 46:101-104[Medline].
CHARLESWORTH, B., M. T. MORGAN, and D. CHARLESWORTH, 1993 The effect of deleterious mutations on neutral molecular evolution. Genetics 134:1289-1303[Abstract].
CLARK, A. G., 1997 Neutral behavior of shared polymorphisms. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94:7730-7734
COHN, V. H., M. A. THOMPSON, and G. P. MOORE, 1984 Nucleotide sequence comparison of the Adh gene in three Drosophilids. J. Mol. Evol. 20:31-37[Medline].
COOKE, P. H. and J. G. OAKESHOTT, 1989 Amino acid polymorphisms for esterase 6 in Drosophila melanogaster.. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 86:1426
COYNE, J. A., 1992 Genetics of sexual isolation in females of the Drosophila simulans species complex. Genet. Res. 60:25-31[Medline].
COYNE, J. A. and B. CHARLESWORTH, 1997 Genetics of a pheromonal difference affecting sexual isolation between Drosophila mauritiana and D. sechellia.. Genetics 145:1015-1030[Abstract].
COYNE, J. A. and M. KREITMAN, 1986 Evolutionary genetics of two sibling species, Drosophila simulans and D. sechellia.. Evolution 40:673-691.
COYNE, J. A. and T. D. PRICE, 2000 Little evidence for sympatric speciation in birds. Evolution in press.
COYNE, J. A., A. P. CRITTENDEN, and K. MAH, 1994 Genetics of a pheromonal difference contributing to reproductive isolation in Drosophila. Science 265:1461-1464
DA LAGE, J. L., E. RENARD, F. CHARTOIS, F. LEMEUNIER, and M. L. CARIOU, 1998 Amyrel, a paralogous gene of the amylase gene family in Drosophila melanogaster and the Sophophora subgenus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95:6848-6853
DOBZHANSKY, T., 1936 Studies of hybrid sterility. II. Localization of sterility factors in Drosophila pseudoobscura hybrids. Genetics 21:113-135
DOBZHANSKY, T., 1937 Genetics and the Origin of Species. Columbia University Press, New York.
DURET, L. and D. MOUCHIROUD, 1999 Expression pattern and, surprisingly, gene length shape codon usage in Caenorhabditis, Drosophila, and Arabidopsis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96:4482-4487
EANES, W. F., M. KIRCHNER, and J. YOON, 1993 Evidence for adaptive evolution of the G6pd gene in the Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila simulans lineages. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 90:7475-7479
EANES, W. F., M. KIRCHNER, J. YOON, C. H. BIERMANN, and I. N. WANG et al., 1996 Historical selection, amino acid polymorphism and lineage-specific divergence at the G6pd locus in Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans.. Genetics 144:1027-1041[Abstract].
HAMBLIN, M. T. and M. VEUILLE, 1999 Population structure among African and derived populations of Drosophila simulans: evidence for ancient subdivision and recent admixture. Genetics 153:305-317
HARR, B., S. WEISS, J. R. DAVID, G. BREM, and C. SCHLOTTERER, 1998 A microsatellite-based multilocus phylogeny of the Drosophila melanogaster species complex. Curr. Biol. 8:1183-1186[Medline].
HEY, J., 1994 Bridging phylogenetics and population genetics with gene tree models, pp. 435449 in Molecular Approaches to Ecology and Evolution, edited by B. SCHIERWATER, B. STREIT, G. WAGNER and R. DESALLE. Birkhäuser-Verlag, Basel.
HEY, J., 1999 The neutralist, the fly and the selectionist. Trends Ecol. Evol. 14:35-38[Medline].
HEY, J. and R. M. KLIMAN, 1993 Population genetics and phylogenetics of DNA sequence variation at multiple loci within the Drosophila melanogaster species complex. Mol. Biol. Evol. 10:804-822[Abstract].
HEY, J. and J. WAKELEY, 1997 A coalescent estimator of the population recombination rate. Genetics 145:833-846[Abstract].
HIGUCHI, R. G. and H. OCHMAN, 1989 Production of single-stranded DNA templates by exonuclease digestion following the polymerase chain reaction. Nucleic Acids Res. 17:5865
HILTON, H. and J. HEY, 1996 DNA sequence variation at the period locus reveals the history of species and speciation events in the Drosophila virilis group. Genetics 144:1015-1025[Abstract].
HILTON, H. and J. HEY, 1997 A multilocus view of speciation in the Drosophila virilis group reveals complex histories and taxonomic conflicts. Genet. Res. 70:185-194.
HILTON, H., R. M. KLIMAN, and J. HEY, 1994 Using hitchhiking genes to study adaptation and divergence during speciation within the Drosophila melanogaster complex. Evolution 48:1900-1913.
HUDSON, R. R., 1987 Estimating the recombination parameter of a finite population model without selection. Genet. Res. 50:245-250[Medline].
HUDSON, R. R., 1990 Gene genealogies and the coalescent process, pp. 144 in Oxford Surveys in Evolutionary Biology, edited by P. H. HARVEY and L. PARTRIDGE. Oxford University Press, New York.
HUDSON, R. R., M. KREITMAN, and M. AGUADÉ, 1987 A test of neutral molecular evolution based on nucleotide data. Genetics 116:153-159
JOLY, D., 1987 Between species divergence of cyst length distributions in the Drosophila melanogaster species complex. Jpn. J. Genet. 62:257-263.
JONES, C. D., 1998 The genetic basis of Drosophila sechellia's resistance to a host plant toxin. Genetics 149:1899-1908
KAROTAM, J., A. C. DELVES, and J. G. OAKESHOTT, 1993 Conservation and change in structural and 5' flanking sequences of esterase 6 in sibling Drosophila species. Genetica 88:11-28[Medline].
KLIMAN, R. M. and J. HEY, 1993a DNA sequence variation at the period locus within and among species of the Drosophila melanogaster complex. Genetics 133:375-387[Abstract].
KLIMAN, R. M. and J. HEY, 1993b Reduced natural selection associated with low recombination in Drosophila melanogaster.. Mol. Biol. Evol. 10:1239-1258[Abstract].
KREITMAN, M., 1983 Nucleotide polymorphism at the alcohol dehydrogenase locus of Drosophila melanogaster.. Nature 304:412-417[Medline].
KREITMAN, M., 1996 The neutral theory is dead. Long live the neutral theory. Bioessays 18:678-683[Medline].
LACHAISE, D., J. R. DAVID, F. LEMEUNIER, L. TSACAS, and M. ASHBURNER, 1986 The reproductive relationships of Drosophila sechellia with D. mauritiana, D. simulans and D. melanogaster from the Afrotropical region. Evolution 40:262-271.
LEICHT, B. G., S. V. MUSE, M. HANCZYC, and A. G. CLARK, 1995 Constraints on intron evolution in the gene encoding the myosin alkali light chain in Drosophila. Genetics 139:299-308[Abstract].
LEMEUNIER, F. and M. ASHBURNER, 1976 Relationships within the melanogaster species subgroup of the genus Drosophila II. Phylogenetic relationships between six species based upon polytene chromosome banding sequences. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 193:275-294[Medline].
MAYNARD SMITH, J. and J. HAIGH, 1974 The hitch-hiking effect of a favourable gene. Genet. Res. 23:23-35[Medline].
MCALLISTER, B. F. and B. CHARLESWORTH, 1999 Reduced sequence variability on the Neo-Y chromosome of Drosophila americana americana.. Genetics 153:221-233
MCDONALD, J. H. and M. KREITMAN, 1991 Adaptive protein evolution at the Adh Locus in Drosophila. Nature 351:652-654[Medline].
MORIYAMA, E. N. and J. R. POWELL, 1996 Intraspecific nuclear DNA variation in Drosophila. Mol. Biol. Evol. 13:261-277[Abstract].
MULLER, H. J., 1940 Bearings of the Drosophila work on systematics, pp. 185268 in The New Systematics, edited by J. HUXLEY. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK.
OHTA, T., 1972 Evolutionary rate of cistrons and DNA divergence. J. Mol. Evol. 1:150-157.
OHTA, T., 1973 Slightly deleterious mutant substitutions in evolution. Nature 246:96-98[Medline].
OHTA, T., 1996 The current significance and standing of neutral and neutral theories. Bioessays 18:673-677[Medline].
PALOPOLI, M. F., A. W. DAVIS, and C. I. WU, 1996 Discord between the phylogenies inferred from molecular vs. functional data: uneven rates of functional evolution or low levels of gene flow? Genetics 144:1321-1328[Abstract].
PRICE, C. S. C., 1997 Conspecific sperm precedence in Drosophila. Nature 388:663-666[Medline].
PRICE, C. S., K. A. DYER, and J. A. COYNE, 1999 Sperm competition between Drosophila males involves both displacement and incapacitation. Nature 400:449-452[Medline].
RAMOS-ONSINS, S. and M. AGUADÉ, 1998 Molecular evolution of the Cecropin multigene family in Drosophila. Functional genes vs. pseudogenes. Genetics 150:157-171
RICE, W. R. and E. F. HOSTERT, 1993 Laboratory experiments on speciation: what have we learned in 40 years. Evolution 47:1637-1653.
R'KHA, S., P. CAPY, and J. R. DAVID, 1991 Host-plant specialization in the Drosophila melanogaster species complex: a physiological, behavioral, and genetical analysis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 88:1835-1839
SAITOU, N. and M. NEI, 1987 The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 4:406-425[Abstract].
SANGER, F., S. NICKLEN, and A. R. COULSON, 1977 DNA sequencing with chain-terminating inhibitors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 74:5463-5467
SATTA, Y. and N. TAKAHATA, 1990 Evolution of Drosophila mitochondrial DNA and the history of the melanogaster subgroup. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 87:9558-9562
SCHLIEWEN, U. K., D. TAUTZ, and S. PAABO, 1994 Sympatric speciation suggested by monophyly of crater lake cichlids. Nature 368:629-632[Medline].
SHIBATA, H. and T. YAMAZAKI, 1995 Molecular evolution of the duplicated Amy locus in the Drosophila melanogaster species subgroup: concerted evolution only in the coding region and an excess of nonsynonymous substitutions in speciation. Genetics 141:223-236[Abstract].
SNOOK, R. R., T. A. MARKOW, and T. L. KARR, 1994 Functional nonequivalence of sperm in Drosophila pseudoobscura.. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 91:11222-11226
SOKAL, R. R., and F. J. ROHLF, 1981 Biometry. W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco.
TAJIMA, F., 1989a The effect of change in population size on DNA polymorphism. Genetics 123:597-601
TAJIMA, F., 1989b Statistical method for testing the neutral mutation hypothesis by DNA polymorphism. Genetics 123:585-595
TAKAHATA, N., 1986 An attempt to estimate the effective size of the ancestral species common to two extant species from which homologous genes are sequenced. Genet. Res. 48:187-190[Medline].
THROCKMORTON, L. H., 1975 The phylogeny, ecology and geography of Drosophila, pp. 421470 in Handbook of Genetics, Volume 3, Invertebrates of Genetic Interest, edited by R. C. KING. Plenum Publishing, New York.
TING, C. T., S. C. TSAUR, and C. I. WU, 2000 The phylogeny of closely related species as revealed by the genealogy of a speciation gene, odysseus.. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97:5313-5316
TSACAS, L. and G. BAECHLI, 1981 Drosophila sechellia, n.sp., huitieme espece du sous-goupe melanogaster des Iles Sechelles (Diptera, Drosophilidae). Rev. Fr. Entomol. 3:146-150.
WAKELEY, J., 1996 The variance of pairwise nucleotide differences in two populations with migration. Theor. Popul. Biol. 49:39-57[Medline].
WAKELEY, J. and J. HEY, 1997 Estimating ancestral population parameters. Genetics 145:847-855[Abstract].
WANG, R. L. and J. HEY, 1996 The speciation history of Drosophila pseudoobscura and close relatives: inferences from DNA sequence variation at the period locus. Genetics 144:1113-1126[Abstract].
WANG, R. L., J. WAKELEY, and J. HEY, 1997 Gene flow and natural selection in the origin of Drosophila pseudoobscura and close relatives. Genetics 147:1091-1106[Abstract].
WATTERSON, G. A., 1975 On the number of segregating sites in genetical models without recombination. Theor. Popul. Biol. 7:256-275[Medline].
WRIGHT, F., 1990 The `effective number of codons' used in a gene. Gene 87:23-29[Medline].
WU, C. I. and W. H. LI, 1985 Evidence for higher rates of nucleotide substitution in rodents than in man. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 82:1741-1745
WU, C. I. and M. F. PALOPOLI, 1994 Genetics of postmating reproductive isolation in animals. Annu. Rev. Genet. 28:283-308[Medline].
YANICOSTAS, C., A. VINCENT, and J. A. LEPESANT, 1989 Transcriptional and posttranscriptional regulation contributes to the sex-regulated expression of two sequence-related genes at the janus locus of Drosophila melanogaster.. Mol. Cell. Biol. 9:2526-2535
ZUROVCOVA, M. and W. F. EANES, 1999 Lack of nucleotide polymorphism in the Y-linked sperm flagellar dynein gene Dhc-Yh3 of Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans.. Genetics 153:1709-1715
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
M. V. Cattani and D. C. Presgraves Genetics and Lineage-Specific Evolution of a Lethal Hybrid Incompatibility Between Drosophila mauritiana and Its Sibling Species Genetics, April 1, 2009; 181(4): 1545 - 1555. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. Dworkin and C. D. Jones Genetic Changes Accompanying the Evolution of Host Specialization in Drosophila sechellia Genetics, February 1, 2009; 181(2): 721 - 736. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Maheshwari, J. Wang, and D. A. Barbash Recurrent Positive Selection of the Drosophila Hybrid Incompatibility Gene Hmr Mol. Biol. Evol., November 1, 2008; 25(11): 2421 - 2430. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L.-M. Chevin, S. Billiard, and F. Hospital Hitchhiking Both Ways: Effect of Two Interfering Selective Sweeps on Linked Neutral Variation Genetics, September 1, 2008; 180(1): 301 - 316. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Llopart and J. M. Comeron Recurrent Events of Positive Selection in Independent Drosophila Lineages at the Spermatogenesis Gene roughex Genetics, June 1, 2008; 179(2): 1009 - 1020. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Ekman, H. L. Andersen, and M. Wedin The Limitations of Ancestral State Reconstruction and the Evolution of the Ascus in the Lecanorales (Lichenized Ascomycota) Syst Biol, February 1, 2008; 57(1): 141 - 156. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Stadler, U. Arunyawat, and W. Stephan Population Genetics of Speciation in Two Closely Related Wild Tomatoes (Solanum Section Lycopersicon) Genetics, January 1, 2008; 178(1): 339 - 350. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Andolfatto Hitchhiking effects of recurrent beneficial amino acid substitutions in the Drosophila melanogaster genome Genome Res., December 1, 2007; 17(12): 1755 - 1762. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. D. Singh, V. L. Bauer DuMont, M. J. Hubisz, R. Nielsen, and C. F. Aquadro Patterns of Mutation and Selection at Synonymous Sites in Drosophila Mol. Biol. Evol., December 1, 2007; 24(12): 2687 - 2697. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. S. McBride, J. R. Arguello, and B. C. O'Meara Five Drosophila Genomes Reveal Nonneutral Evolution and the Signature of Host Specialization in the Chemoreceptor Superfamily Genetics, November 1, 2007; 177(3): 1395 - 1416. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. Y. Low, H. L. Ng, C. J. Morton, M. W. Parker, P. Batterham, and C. Robin Molecular Evolution of Glutathione S-Transferases in the Genus Drosophila Genetics, November 1, 2007; 177(3): 1363 - 1375. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Becquet and M. Przeworski A new approach to estimate parameters of speciation models with application to apes Genome Res., October 1, 2007; 17(10): 1505 - 1519. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. L. Turner and M. W. Hahn Locus- and Population-Specific Selection and Differentiation between Incipient Species of Anopheles gambiae Mol. Biol. Evol., September 1, 2007; 24(9): 2132 - 2138. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. E. Lott, M. Kreitman, A. Palsson, E. Alekseeva, and M. Z. Ludwig Canalization of segmentation and its evolution in Drosophila PNAS, June 26, 2007; 104(26): 10926 - 10931. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. A. Barbash Nup96-Dependent Hybrid Lethality Occurs in a Subset of Species From the simulans Clade of Drosophila Genetics, May 1, 2007; 176(1): 543 - 552. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. S. McBride Rapid evolution of smell and taste receptor genes during host specialization in Drosophila sechellia PNAS, March 20, 2007; 104(12): 4996 - 5001. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. A. Machado, T. S. Haselkorn, and M. A. F. Noor Evaluation of the Genomic Extent of Effects of Fixed Inversion Differences on Intraspecific Variation and Interspecific Gene Flow in Drosophila pseudoobscura and D. persimilis Genetics, March 1, 2007; 175(3): 1289 - 1306. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L.-B. Zhang and S. Ge Multilocus Analysis of Nucleotide Variation and Speciation in Oryza officinalis and Its Close Relatives Mol. Biol. Evol., March 1, 2007; 24(3): 769 - 783. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. J. Moehring, K. C. Teeter, and M. A. F. Noor Genome-Wide Patterns of Expression in Drosophila Pure Species and Hybrid Males. II. Examination of Multiple-Species Hybridizations, Platforms, and Life Cycle Stages Mol. Biol. Evol., January 1, 2007; 24(1): 137 - 145. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. C. Presgraves and W. Stephan Pervasive Adaptive Evolution among Interactors of the Drosophila Hybrid Inviability Gene, Nup96 Mol. Biol. Evol., January 1, 2007; 24(1): 306 - 314. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Glinka, D. De Lorenzo, and W. Stephan Evidence of Gene Conversion Associated with a Selective Sweep in Drosophila melanogaster Mol. Biol. Evol., October 1, 2006; 23(10): 1869 - 1878. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. P. Masly, C. D. Jones, M. A. F. Noor, J. Locke, and H. A. Orr Gene transposition as a cause of hybrid sterility in Drosophila. Science, September 8, 2006; 313(5792): 1448 - 1450. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. Haerty and R. S. Singh Gene Regulation Divergence Is a Major Contributor to the Evolution of Dobzhansky-Muller Incompatibilities between Species of Drosophila Mol. Biol. Evol., September 1, 2006; 23(9): 1707 - 1714. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. Dupanloup and H. Kaessmann Evolutionary simulations to detect functional lineage-specific genes Bioinformatics, August 1, 2006; 22(15): 1815 - 1822. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. R. Buckley, M. Cordeiro, D. C. Marshall, and C. Simon Differentiating between Hypotheses of Lineage Sorting and Introgression in New Zealand Alpine Cicadas (Maoricicada Dugdale) Syst Biol, June 1, 2006; 55(3): 411 - 425. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
X.-F. Ma, A. E. Szmidt, and X.-R. Wang Genetic Structure and Evolutionary History of a Diploid Hybrid Pine Pinus densata Inferred from the Nucleotide Variation at Seven Gene Loci Mol. Biol. Evol., April 1, 2006; 23(4): 807 - 816. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Borge, M. T. Webster, G. Andersson, and G.-P. Saetre Contrasting Patterns of Polymorphism and Divergence on the Z Chromosome and Autosomes in Two Ficedula Flycatcher Species Genetics, December 1, 2005; 171(4): 1861 - 1873. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Woolfit and L. Bromham Population size and molecular evolution on islands Proc R Soc B, November 7, 2005; 272(1578): 2277 - 2282. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. B. Dopman, L. Perez, S. M. Bogdanowicz, and R. G. Harrison Consequences of reproductive barriers for genealogical discordance in the European corn borer PNAS, October 11, 2005; 102(41): 14706 - 14711. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Ometto, S. Glinka, D. De Lorenzo, and W. Stephan Inferring the Effects of Demography and Selection on Drosophila melanogaster Populations from a Chromosome-Wide Scan of DNA Variation Mol. Biol. Evol., October 1, 2005; 22(10): 2119 - 2130. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Llopart, D. Lachaise, and J. A. Coyne Multilocus Analysis of Introgression Between Two Sympatric Sister Species of Drosophila: Drosophila yakuba and D. santomea Genetics, September 1, 2005; 171(1): 197 - 210. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Schofl, F. Catania, V. Nolte, and C. Schlotterer African Sequence Variation Accounts for Most of the Sequence Polymorphism in Non-African Drosophila melanogaster Genetics, August 1, 2005; 170(4): 1701 - 1709. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. A. Machado, N. Robbins, M. T. P. Gilbert, and E. A. Herre Critical review of host specificity and its coevolutionary implications in the fig/fig-wasp mutualism PNAS, May 3, 2005; 102(suppl_1): 6558 - 6565. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. Osada and C.-I Wu Inferring the Mode of Speciation From Genomic Data: A Study of the Great Apes Genetics, January 1, 2005; 169(1): 259 - 264. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. D. Kern and D. J. Begun Patterns of Polymorphism and Divergence from Noncoding Sequences of Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans: Evidence for Nonequilibrium Processes Mol. Biol. Evol., January 1, 2005; 22(1): 51 - 62. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Das, S. Mohanty, and W. Stephan Inferring the Population Structure and Demography of Drosophila ananassae From Multilocus Data Genetics, December 1, 2004; 168(4): 1975 - 1985. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. J. Kulathinal, B. R. Bettencourt, and D. L. Hartl Compensated Deleterious Mutations in Insect Genomes Science, November 26, 2004; 306(5701): 1553 - 1554. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. J. Moehring, J. Li, M. D. Schug, S. G. Smith, M. deAngelis, T. F. C. Mackay, and J. A. Coyne Quantitative Trait Loci for Sexual Isolation Between Drosophila simulans and D. mauritiana Genetics, July 1, 2004; 167(3): 1265 - 1274. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. D. Kern, C. D. Jones, and D. J. Begun Molecular Population Genetics of Male Accessory Gland Proteins in the Drosophila simulans Complex Genetics, June 1, 2004; 167(2): 725 - 735. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Hey and R. Nielsen Multilocus Methods for Estimating Population Sizes, Migration Rates and Divergence Time, With Applications to the Divergence of Drosophila pseudoobscura and D. persimilis Genetics, June 1, 2004; 167(2): 747 - 760. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. W. O. Ballard Sequential Evolution of a Symbiont Inferred From the Host: Wolbachia and Drosophila simulans Mol. Biol. Evol., March 1, 2004; 21(3): 428 - 442. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Sawamura, J. Roote, C.-I Wu, and M.-T. Yamamoto Genetic Complexity Underlying Hybrid Male Sterility in Drosophila Genetics, February 1, 2004; 166(2): 789 - 796. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. E. Ramos-Onsins, B. E. Stranger, T. Mitchell-Olds, and M. Aguade Multilocus Analysis of Variation and Speciation in the Closely Related Species Arabidopsis halleri and A. lyrata Genetics, January 1, 2004; 166(1): 373 - 388. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Piccinali, M. Aguade, and E. Hasson Comparative Molecular Population Genetics of the Xdh Locus in the Cactophilic Sibling Species Drosophila buzzatii and D. koepferae Mol. Biol. Evol., January 1, 2004; 21(1): 141 - 152. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Parsch Selective Constraints on Intron Evolution in Drosophila Genetics, December 1, 2003; 165(4): 1843 - 1851. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. D. Dean, K. J. Ballard, A. Glass, and J. W. O. Ballard Influence of Two Wolbachia Strains on Population Structure of East African Drosophila simulans Genetics, December 1, 2003; 165(4): 1959 - 1969. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Glinka, L. Ometto, S. Mousset, W. Stephan, and D. De Lorenzo Demography and Natural Selection Have Shaped Genetic Variation in Drosophila melanogaster: A Multi-locus Approach Genetics, November 1, 2003; 165(3): 1269 - 1278. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. J. Besansky, J. Krzywinski, T. Lehmann, F. Simard, M. Kern, O. Mukabayire, D. Fontenille, Y. Toure, and N'F. Sagnon Semipermeable species boundaries between Anopheles gambiae and Anopheles arabiensis: Evidence from multilocus DNA sequence variation PNAS, September 16, 2003; 100(19): 10818 - 10823. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Woolfit and L. Bromham Increased Rates of Sequence Evolution in Endosymbiotic Bacteria and Fungi with Small Effective Population Sizes Mol. Biol. Evol., September 1, 2003; 20(9): 1545 - 1555. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Tao, Z.-B. Zeng, J. Li, D. L. Hartl, and C. C. Laurie Genetic Dissection of Hybrid Incompatibilities Between Drosophila simulans and D. mauritiana. II. Mapping Hybrid Male Sterility Loci on the Third Chromosome Genetics, August 1, 2003; 164(4): 1399 - 1418. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. M. Ranz, C. I. Castillo-Davis, C. D. Meiklejohn, and D. L. Hartl Sex-Dependent Gene Expression and Evolution of the Drosophila Transcriptome Science, June 13, 2003; 300(5626): 1742 - 1745. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. E. Broughton and R. G. Harrison Nuclear Gene Genealogies Reveal Historical, Demographic and Selective Factors Associated With Speciation in Field Crickets Genetics, April 1, 2003; 163(4): 1389 - 1401. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. A. Gomez and E. Hasson Transpecific Polymorphisms in an Inversion Linked Esterase Locus in Drosophila buzzatii Mol. Biol. Evol., March 1, 2003; 20(3): 410 - 423. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. J. Kulathinal, L. Skwarek, R. A. Morton, and R. S. Singh Rapid Evolution of the Sex-Determining Gene, transformer: Structural Diversity and Rate Heterogeneity Among Sibling Species of Drosophila Mol. Biol. Evol., March 1, 2003; 20(3): 441 - 452. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. J. Begun and P. Whitley Molecular Population Genetics of Xdh and the Evolution of Base Composition in Drosophila Genetics, December 1, 2002; 162(4): 1725 - 1735. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Beltran, C. D. Jiggins, V. Bull, M. Linares, J. Mallet, W. O. McMillan, and E. Bermingham Phylogenetic Discordance at the Species Boundary: Comparative Gene Genealogies Among Rapidly Radiating Heliconius Butterflies Mol. Biol. Evol., December 1, 2002; 19(12): 2176 - 2190. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. I. Tenaillon, M. C. Sawkins, L. K. Anderson, S. M. Stack, J. Doebley, and B. S. Gaut Patterns of Diversity and Recombination Along Chromosome 1 of Maize (Zea mays ssp. mays L.) Genetics, November 1, 2002; 162(3): 1401 - 1413. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. A. Machado, R. M. Kliman, J. A. Markert, and J. Hey Inferring the History of Speciation from Multilocus DNA Sequence Data: The Case of Drosophila pseudoobscura and Close Relatives Mol. Biol. Evol., April 1, 2002; 19(4): 472 - 488. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Parsch, C. D. Meiklejohn, and D. L. Hartl Patterns of DNA Sequence Variation Suggest the Recent Action of Positive Selection in the janus-ocnus Region of Drosophila simulans Genetics, October 1, 2001; 159(2): 647 - 657. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
- THIS ARTICLE
-
Abstract
- Full Text (PDF)
- Alert me when this article is cited
- Alert me if a correction is posted
- SERVICES
- Email this article to a friend
- Similar articles in this journal
- Similar articles in PubMed
- Alert me to new issues of the journal
- Download to citation manager
- Reprints & Permissions
- CITING ARTICLES
- Citing Articles via HighWire
- Citing Articles via Google Scholar
- GOOGLE SCHOLAR
- Articles by Kliman, R. M.
- Articles by Hey, J.
- Search for Related Content
- PUBMED
- PubMed Citation
- Articles by Kliman, R. M.
- Articles by Hey, J.

) MauP, (
) MauD, (
) SecP, () SecD. In each case, polymorphism within species (as listed in 















