Skip to main content
dryadopen

Integrating top-down and bottom-up approaches to understand the genetic architecture of speciation across a monkeyflower hybrid zone

<p><span>Understanding the phenotypic and genetic architecture of reproductive isolation is a longstanding goal of speciation research. In several systems, large-effect loci contributing to barrier phenotypes have been characterized, but such causal connections are rarely known for more complex genetic architectures. In this study, we combine 'top-down' and 'bottom-up' approaches with demographic modeling toward an integrated understanding of speciation across a monkeyflower hybrid zone. Previous work suggests that pollinator visitation acts as a primary barrier to gene flow between two divergent red- and yellow-flowered ecotypes of <em>Mimulus</em> <em>aurantiacus</em>. Several candidate isolating traits and anonymous SNP loci under divergent selection have been identified, but their genomic positions remain unknown. Here, we report findings from demographic analyses that indicate this hybrid zone formed by secondary contact, but that subsequent gene flow was restricted by widespread barrier loci across the genome. Using a novel, geographic cline-based genome scan, we demonstrate that candidate barrier loci are broadly distributed across the genome, rather than mapping to one or a few 'islands of speciation.' Quantitative trait locus (QTL) mapping reveals that most floral traits are polygenic, with little evidence that QTL co-localize, indicating that most traits are genetically independent. Finally, we find little evidence that QTL and candidate barrier loci overlap, suggesting that some loci contribute to other forms of reproductive isolation. Our findings highlight the challenges of understanding the genetic architecture of reproductive isolation and reveal that barriers to gene flow aside from pollinator isolation may play an important role in this system.</span></p>

ShareScore

36/100

Overall dataset sharing score

Score breakdown

These five areas show where the dataset supports — or may limit — practical reuse.

Stewardship
4
Harmonization
12
Access
12
Reuse readiness
0
Engagement
8

Topics