Published April 15, 2014 | Version v1
Dataset Open

Data from: Complex phylogeography and historical hybridization between sister taxa of freshwater sculpin (Cottus).

  • 1. University of California, Merced
  • 2. Humboldt State University

Description

Species ranges which span different geographic landscapes frequently contain cryptic species or population-level structure. Identifying these possible diversification factors can often be accomplished under a comparative phylogeographic framework. However comparisons suffer if previous studies are limited to a particular group or habitat type. In California, a complex landscape has led to several phylogeographic breaks, primarily in terrestrial species. However two sister taxa of freshwater fish, riffle sculpin (Cottus gulosus) and Pit sculpin (C. pitensis), display ranges based on morphological identifications which do not coincide with these breaks. Using a comprehensive sampling and nuclear, mitochondrial, and microsatellite markers, we hypothesized proposed species ranges are erroneous based on potential hybridization/gene flow between species. Results identified a phylogeographic signature consistent with this hypothesis, with breaks at the Coast Range Mountains and Sacramento/San Joaquin River confluence. Coastal locations of C. gulosus represent a unique lineage and "true" C. gulosus were limited to the San Joaquin basin, both regions under strong anthropogenic influence and potential conservation targets. C. pitensis limits extended historically throughout the Sacramento/Pit River basin but currently are restricted to the Pit River. Interestingly, locations in the Sacramento River contained low levels of ancestral hybridization and gene flow from C. gulosus but now appear to be a distinct population. The remaining population structure was strongly correlated with Sierra Nevada presence (high) or absence (low). This study stresses the importance of testing phylogeographic breaks across multiple taxa/habitats before conservation decisions are made, but also the potential impact of different geographic landscapes on evolutionary diversification.

Notes

Files

508.txt

Files (386.7 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:79180d596ac93970b17367d9ad2175ec
27.8 kB Preview Download
md5:01265a8eea4eb0fc85bd24f03ad3211a
24.1 kB Preview Download
md5:4661b33d55246a839f581108c58f7df5
26.3 kB Preview Download
md5:5fe1ac7ab0036e29c74ca0c44b158c8e
66.0 kB Download
md5:6f82b221320ba3f07cb11f42c376231f
238.7 kB Preview Download
md5:8ad480290216690d62860d6ae21be526
1.2 kB Download
md5:5ee1b3f7c5288717b517ab0bc2df7143
879 Bytes Download
md5:2b4bc0f43702be239d64f9076bd38c25
887 Bytes Download
md5:18e314d5db79f4da390dd6ee4ff4dec2
879 Bytes Download

Additional details

Related works

Is cited by
10.1111/mec.12758 (DOI)