Leptodea Leptodon
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Natural Resource Ecology and Management Natural Resource Ecology and Management Publications 2017 A comparison of genetic diversity and population structure of the endangered scaleshell mussel (Leptodea leptodon), the fragile papershell (Leptodea fragilis) and their host-fish the freshwater drum (Aplodinotus grunniens) Jer Pin Chong The University of Illinois at Chicago Kevin J. Roe Iowa State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/nrem_pubs Part of the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, Genetics Commons, Natural Resources and Conservation Commons, and the Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons The ompc lete bibliographic information for this item can be found at https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ nrem_pubs/264. For information on how to cite this item, please visit http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ howtocite.html. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Natural Resource Ecology and Management at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Natural Resource Ecology and Management Publications by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A comparison of genetic diversity and population structure of the endangered scaleshell mussel (Leptodea leptodon), the fragile papershell (Leptodea fragilis) and their host-fish the freshwater drum (Aplodinotus grunniens) Abstract The al rvae of freshwater mussels in the order Unionoida are obligate parasites on fishes. Because adult mussels are infaunal and largely sessile, it is generally assumed that the majority of gene flow among mussel populations relies on the dispersal of larvae by their hosts. The bjo ective of this study was to compare the genetic diversity and the degree of congruence between the population structures of two related freshwater mussels Leptodea leptodon and Leptodea fragilis and their fish host, Aplodinotus grunniens. Host specificity in parasites has been shown to result in greater congruence between the population structures of the two interacting species, and assessing the congruence of genetic structure of the endangered L. leptodon with its sister species L. fragilis and their sole host is an important step in understanding the impact of host dispersal on population structure. Analysis of microsatellite data indicated that despite its imperiled status, L. leptodon displayed greater genetic diversity than the more common L. fragilis. However, the population structures of all three species were incongruent even in the presence of substantial gene flow. Other factors such as habitat specificity may play a role in generating the differences in population structure observed. This study indicates that barriers to gene flow or lack of available host fish are not the cause of decline of the federally endangered L. leptodon, and suggests that alternative explanations should be considered. Keywords Conservation, Population genetics, host-parasite interactions, Unionidae Disciplines Ecology and Evolutionary Biology | Genetics | Natural Resources and Conservation | Natural Resources Management and Policy Comments This article is published as Chong, Jer Pin, and Kevin J. Roe. "A comparison of genetic diversity and population structure of the endangered scaleshell mussel (Leptodea leptodon), the fragile papershell (Leptodea fragilis) and their host-fish the freshwater drum (Aplodinotus grunniens)." Conservation Genetics (2017). doi: 10.1007/s10592-017-1015-x. Posted with permission. Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. This article is available at Iowa State University Digital Repository: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/nrem_pubs/264 Conserv Genet DOI 10.1007/s10592-017-1015-x RESEARCH ARTICLE A comparison of genetic diversity and population structure of the endangered scaleshell mussel (Leptodea leptodon), the fragile papershell (Leptodea fragilis) and their host-fish the freshwater drum (Aplodinotus grunniens) Jer Pin Chong1 · Kevin J. Roe2 Received: 14 February 2017 / Accepted: 19 September 2017 © The Author(s) 2017. This article is an open access publication Abstract The larvae of freshwater mussels in the order This study indicates that barriers to gene flow or lack of Unionoida are obligate parasites on fishes. Because adult available host fish are not the cause of decline of the feder- mussels are infaunal and largely sessile, it is generally ally endangered L. leptodon, and suggests that alternative assumed that the majority of gene flow among mussel popu- explanations should be considered. lations relies on the dispersal of larvae by their hosts. The objective of this study was to compare the genetic diversity Keywords Conservation · Population genetics · Host– and the degree of congruence between the population struc- parasite interactions · Unionidae tures of two related freshwater mussels Leptodea leptodon and Leptodea fragilis and their fish host, Aplodinotus grun‑ niens. Host specificity in parasites has been shown to result Introduction in greater congruence between the population structures of the two interacting species, and assessing the congruence The direct or indirect interactions between species are the of genetic structure of the endangered L. leptodon with its basis of the emerging properties of ecosystems and the sister species L. fragilis and their sole host is an important varied ecological processes that occur within them. Inter- step in understanding the impact of host dispersal on popula- specific interactions have evolutionary importance because tion structure. Analysis of microsatellite data indicated that interacting species affect not only each other’s ecological despite its imperiled status, L. leptodon displayed greater roles but also their evolutionary trajectories (i.e. the Red genetic diversity than the more common L. fragilis. How- Queen hypothesis) (Lively et al. 1990; Morran et al. 2011). ever, the population structures of all three species were Interactions in which two or more species undergo reciprocal incongruent even in the presence of substantial gene flow. evolutionary changes represent cases in which the participat- Other factors such as habitat specificity may play a role in ing species are more closely tied and are generally referred generating the differences in population structure observed. to as coevolutionary (Thompson 1999). Examples of some of these interactions include those between plants and pol- linators (Grant and Grant 1965; Levin 1985), predators and Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10592-017-1015-x) contains supplementary prey (Brodie and Brodie 1990, 1991), and hosts and para- material, which is available to authorized users. sites (Dybdahl and Lively 1996; Gigord et al. 2001; Nason et al. 2002). Investigations into the population structure of * Kevin J. Roe parasites and their hosts have revealed a variety of patterns [email protected] that appear to vary with such factors as dispersal ability of Jer Pin Chong hosts and parasites (Blouin et al. 1995; McCoy et al. 2003), [email protected] host specificity of the parasite (Johnson et al. 2002; Little 1 Department of Biological Sciences, University of Illinois et al. 2006; Dick and Patterson 2007), and the ecological at Chicago, Chicago, IL 60607, USA requirements of the species involved (Campbell et al. 1974; 2 Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, Brooks et al. 2006). If the host specificity of a parasite is Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011, USA Vol.:(0123456789)1 3 Conserv Genet high, congruence between the population structures of the restricted to only 13 streams, and can only be consistently parasite and its host is predicted (Distel et al. 1994). found in three Missouri streams including the Meramec, Freshwater mussels (Bivalvia: Unionoida) and their fish Bourbeuse, and Gasconade rivers (Oesch 1995; Szyman- hosts represent an intriguing but underutilized system for ski 1998; USFWS 2010). In contrast, its sister species, L. studying the effects of hosts on the population structures fragilis is widely distributed, ranging from Canada south of their parasites. Unionoid mussels are typically long- to Mexico and from the Appalachian Mountains west to lived and gonochoristic. Male mussels release sperm into South Dakota, and is generally considered to be common the water column, which is taken into the mantle cavity by throughout much of its range (Burch 1975; Clarke 1981). female mussels and used to fertilize their eggs. Fertilized The only known host fish for both species, the freshwater eggs are brooded by the females in modified portions of the drum, (Barnhart et al. 1998) displays the widest natural dis- gills until the larvae are mature. In the family Unionidae tribution of any freshwater fish in North America (Lee et al. the larvae, termed glochidia, are parasitic, and must attach 1980). In addition, freshwater drum exhibit the potential to to a vertebrate host for a period of several weeks (Lefevre move substantial distances, tagged freshwater drum have and Curtis 1912) in order to metmorphose into juveniles. been recaptured up to 104 km from their original point of Unionid mussels can be broadly categorized as either host capture (Funk 1955). generalists, which can parasitize a number of different host Our research goal is to investigate the population struc- species, or host specialists which can only parasitize a single