henhaobio
Sign in

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological SciencesEvolutionary BiologyPeer-reviewed journal article

Autopolyploidy exacerbates dominance masking under negative frequency-dependent selection: evidence from sporophytic self-incompatibility in Arabidopsis arenosa and A. lyrata

Xavier VekemansiD, Uliana Kolesnikova, Jakub VlčekiD, Mathieu GenêteiD, Adrien DufouriD, Rowan Welti, Céline PouxiD, Vincent CastriciD, Filip KolářiD, Polina Yu. NovikovaiD

PDFDOIPreprint

Abstract

Polyploidy is a widespread phenomenon in flowering plants, with up to 30% of extant species being recent polyploids. Whether and how polyploidy modulates the action of natural selection remains debated, and the particular case of balancing selection has been poorly explored. This study investigates the impact of autopolyploidy on sporophytic self-incompatibility in plants, a striking example of a genetic system evolving under a special form of balancing selection (strong negative frequency-dependent selection). Numerical simulations reveal that under strict codominance, the number of S-alleles maintained in tetraploid populations is expected to double as compared to diploid populations. However, under a model with strict hierarchical dominance among alleles, the number of S-alleles increases only slightly, but gene diversity and observed heterozygosity are substantially lower in tetraploids as compared to diploids, due to enhanced dominance masking effects. Empirical data on Arabidopsis arenosa and A. lyrata confirm the latter predictions, showing similar levels of allelic diversity but dramatically lower observed and expected heterozygosity at the self-incompatibility locus in tetraploids compared to diploids. The study highlights the significant impact of autopolyploidy on patterns of diversity at the self-incompatibility locus, emphasizing the increased dominance effect in tetraploids. The results also allow us to reject a scenario of strong founder effects associated with evolution of the polyploid lineages.

Citations
2
FWCI
7.36
Field percentile
top 3%

Reproducibility ledger

Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.

Sign in to file a reproducibility report.