Hostname: page-component-669899f699-vbsjw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-24T20:20:16.823Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

High Phenotypic and Molecular Variation in Downy Brome (Bromus tectorum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Rebecca H. Kao ,
Cynthia S. Brown  and
Ruth A. Hufbauer
Rebecca H. Kao*
Affiliation:
Program in Interdisciplinary Mathematics, Ecology, and Statistics (PRIMES) and Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523
Cynthia S. Brown
Affiliation:
Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management and Graduate Degree Program in Ecology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523
Ruth A. Hufbauer
Affiliation:
Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management and Graduate Degree Program in Ecology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523
*
bkao@neoninc.org
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The invasive grass Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass, downy brome) has extensive ecological breadth in its introduced range, and is increasing in abundance at high elevations. As a predominantly selfing species with high potential population growth rates, it is a likely candidate for having general-purpose genotypes that facilitate its invasion into high elevations. We evaluated evidence for general-purpose genotypes by examining phenotypic and molecular variation in B. tectorum from low- and high-elevation sites in the Rocky Mountains. Common garden experiments revealed that plants from high elevations germinated faster, but no other phenological, morphological, or physiological differences were found between elevations. Leaf length was longer for low-elevation sites in a common garden using field-collected seeds, but this was not found in a common garden using greenhouse-grown seeds, suggesting maternal effects. For most traits, there was significant phenotypic variation among sites and individuals. Using microsatellites, we genotyped individuals from low- and high-elevation sites. We found no indication of genetic differentiation at these loci between high and low elevations, but there was significant variation within and among sites. No single genotype was common across sites. The success of B. tectorum is not due to a few general-purpose genotypes, but rather many genotypes associated with many different phenotypes. Understanding the mechanisms behind the success of invaders enhances our knowledge of basic evolutionary and ecological processes and is crucial to our ability to manage ongoing, and prevent future, invasions, especially into new habitats.

Keywords

Downy brome, Bromus tectorum L. BROTEBroad ecological distributionBromus tectorumdifferentiationgeneral-purpose genotypeinvasion
Type
Research Articles
Information
Invasive Plant Science and Management , Volume 1 , Issue 2 , April 2008 , pp. 216 - 225
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

Allen, P. S. and Meyer, S. E. 2002. Ecology and ecological genetics of seed dormancy in downy brome. Weed Sci 50:241–247.Google Scholar
Baker, H. G. 1965. Characteristics and modes of origin of weeds. Pages 147–172. in Baker, H. G. and Stebbins, G. L., editors. The genetics of colonizing species. New York, NY Academic.Google Scholar
Bartlett, E., Novak, S. J., and Mack, R. N. 2002. Genetic variation in Bromus tectorum (Poaceae): differentiation in the eastern United States. Am. J. Bot 89:602–612.Google Scholar
Beckstead, J., Meyer, S. E., and Allen, P. S. 1996. Bromus tectorum seed germination: between-population and between-year variation. Can. J. Bot 74:875–882.Google Scholar
Ben-Shlomo, R., Paz, G., and Rinkevich, B. 2006. Postglacial-period and recent invasions shape the population genetics of botryllid ascidians along European Atlantic coasts. Ecosystems 9:1118–1127.Google Scholar
Bossdorf, O., Auge, H., Lafuma, L., Rogers, W. E., Siemann, E., and Prati, D. 2005. Phenotypic and genetic differentiation between native and introduced plant populations. Oecologia 144:1–11.Google Scholar
Butin, E., Porter, A. H., and Elkinton, J. 2005. Adaptation during biological invasions and the case of Adelges tsugae . Evol. Ecol. Res 7:887–900.Google Scholar
Colautti, R. I., Grigorovich, I. A., and MacIsaac, H. J. 2006. Propagule pressure: a null model for biological invasions. Biol. Invasions 8:1023–1037.Google Scholar
Dlugosch, K. M. and Parker, I. M. 2008. Founding events in species invasions: genetic variation, adaptive evolution, and the role of multiple introductions. Mol. Ecol 17:431–449.Google Scholar
Dodd, M. B., Lauenroth, W. K., and Welker, J. M. 1998. Differential water resource use by herbaceous and woody plant life-forms in a shortgrass steppe community. Oecologia 117:504–512.Google Scholar
Doyle, J. J. and Doyle, J. L. 1987. A rapid DNA isolation procedure from small quantities of fresh leaf tissue. Phytochem. Bull 19:11–15.Google Scholar
Evans, R. D., Rimer, R., Sperry, L., and Belnap, J. 2001. Exotic plant invasion alters nitrogen dynamics in an arid grassland. Ecol. Appl 11:1301–1310.Google Scholar
Excoffier, L., Laval, G., and Schneider, S. 2005. Arlequin ver. 3.0: an integrated software package for population genetics data analysis. Evol. Bioinformatics Online 1:47–50.Google Scholar
Farquhar, G. D., Ehleringer, J. R., and Hubick, K. T. 1989. Carbon isotope discrimination and photosynthesis. Annu. Rev. Plant Phys. Plant Mol. Biol 40:503–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fehmi, J. S., Rice, K. J., and Laca, E. A. 2004. Radial dispersion of neighbors and the small-scale competitive impact of two annual grasses on a native perennial grass. Restor. Ecol 12:63–69.Google Scholar
Geng, Y-P., Pan, X-Y., Xu, C-Y., Zhang, W-J., Li, B., Chen, J-K., Lu, B-R., and Song, Z-P. 2007. Phenotypic plasticity rather than locally adapted ecotypes allows the invasive alligator weed to colonize a wide range of habitats. Biol. Invasions 9:245–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Genton, B. J., Shykoff, J. A., and Giraud, T. 2005. High genetic diversity in French invasive populations of common ragweed, Ambrosia artemisiifolia, as a result of multiple sources of introduction. Mol. Ecol 14:4275–4285.Google Scholar
Griffith, T. M. and Watson, M. A. 2006. Is evolution necessary for range expansion? Manipulating reproductive timing of a weedy annual transplanted beyond its range. Am. Nat 167:153–164.Google Scholar
Hulbert, L. C. 1955. Ecological studies of Bromus tectorum and other annual bromegrasses. Ecol. Monogr 25:181–213.Google Scholar
Jensen, J. L., Bohonak, A. J., and Kelley, S. T. 2005. Isolation by distance, web service. BMC Genetics 6:13.Google Scholar
Kolbe, J. J., Glor, R. E., Schettino, L. R. G., Lara, A. C., Larson, A., and Losos, J. B. 2004. Genetic variation increases during biological invasion by a Cuban lizard. Nature 431:177–181.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lavergne, S. and Molofsky, J. 2007. Increased genetic variation and evolutionary potential drive the success of an invasive grass. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 104:3883–3888.Google Scholar
Lee, P. L. M., Patel, R. M., Conlan, R. S., Wainwright, S. J., and Hipkin, C. R. 2004. Comparison of genetic diversities in native and alien populations of hoary mustard (Hirschfeldia incana [L.] Lagreze-Fossat). Int. J. Plant Sci 165:833–843.Google Scholar
Liebert, A. E., Gamboa, G. J., Stamp, N. E., Curtis, T. R., Monnet, K. M., Turillazzi, S., and Starks, P. T. 2006. Genetics, behavior and ecology of a paper wasp invasion: Polistes dominulus in North America. Ann. Zool. Fenn 43:595–624.Google Scholar
Lindholm, A. K., Breden, F., Alexander, H. J., Chan, W. K., Thakurta, S. G., and Brooks, R. 2005. Invasion success and genetic diversity of introduced populations of guppies Poecilia reticulata in Australia. Mol. Ecol 14:3671–3682.Google Scholar
McKone, M. J. 1985. Reproductive biology of several bromegrasses (Bromus): breeding system, pattern of fruit maturation, and seed set. Am. J. Bot 72:1334–1339.Google Scholar
Mergeay, J., Verschuren, D., and De Meester, L. 2006. Invasion of an asexual American water flea clone throughout Africa and rapid displacement of a native sibling species. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 273:2839–2844.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meyer, S. E. and Allen, P. S. 1999. Ecological genetics of seed germination regulation in Bromus tectorum L. I. Phenotypic variance among and within populations. Oecologia 120:27–34.Google Scholar
Meyer, S. E., Allen, P. S., and Beckstead, J. 1997. Seed germination regulation in Bromus tectorum (Poaceae) and its ecological significance. Oikos 78:475–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, S. E., Nelson, D. L., and Carlson, S. L. 2004. Ecological genetics of vernalization response in Bromus tectorum L. (Poaceae). Ann. Bot 93:653–663.Google Scholar
Novak, S. J. and Mack, R. N. 1993. Genetic variation in Bromus tectorum (Poaceae): comparison between native and introduced populations. Heredity 71:167–176.Google Scholar
Novak, S. J. and Mack, R. N. 2005. Genetic bottlenecks in alien plant species: influence of mating systems and introduction dynamics. Pages 201–228. in Sax, D. F., Stachowicz, J. J., and Gaines, S. D., editors. Species Invasions: Insights into Ecology, Evolution, and Biogeography. Sunderland, MA Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
Novak, S. J., Mack, R. N., and Soltis, D. E. 1991. Genetic variation in Bromus tectorum (Poaceae): population differentiation in its North American range. Am. J. Bot 78:1150–1161.Google Scholar
Ogle, S. M., Reiners, W. A., and Gerow, K. G. 2003. Impacts of exotic annual brome grasses (Bromus spp.) on ecosystem properties of northern mixed grass prairie. Am. Mid. Nat 149:46–58.Google Scholar
Parker, I. M., Rodriguez, J., and Loik, M. E. 2003. An evolutionary approach to understanding the biology of invasions: local adaptation and general-purpose genotypes in the weed Verbascum thapsus . Conserv. Biol 17:59–72.Google Scholar
Poulin, J., Weller, S. G., and Sakai, A. K. 2005. Genetic diversity does not affect the invasiveness of fountain grass (Pennisetum setaceum) in Arizona, California and Hawaii. Diversity and Distributions 11:241–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramakrishnan, A. P., Coleman, C. E., Meyer, S. E., and Fairbanks, D. J. 2002. Microsatellite markers for Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass). Mol. Ecol. Notes 2:22–23.Google Scholar
Ramakrishnan, A. P., Meyer, S. E., Fairbanks, D. J., and Coleman, C. E. 2006. Ecological significance of microsatellite variation in western North American populations of Bromus tectorum . Plant Spec. Biol 21:61–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramakrishnan, A. P., Meyer, S. E., Waters, J., Stevens, M. R., Coleman, C. E., and Fairbanks, D. J. 2004. Correlation between molecular markers and adaptively significant genetic variation in Bromus tectorum (Poaceae) an inbreeding annual grass. Am. J. Bot 91:797–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rice, K. J., Black, R. A., Radamaker, G., and Evans, R. D. 1992. Photosynthesis, growth, and biomass allocation in habitat ecotypes of cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum). Funct. Ecol 6:32–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rice, K. J. and Dyer, A. R. 2001. Seed aging, delayed germination and reduced competitive ability in Bromus tectorum . Plant Ecol 155:237–243.Google Scholar
Rice, K. J. and Mack, R. N. 1991. Ecological genetics of Bromus tectorum 1: a hierarchical analysis of phenotypic variation. Oecologia 88:77–83.Google Scholar
Rimer, R. L. and Evans, R. D. 2006. Invasion of downy brome (Bromus tectorum L.) causes rapid changes in the nitrogen cycle. Am. Midl. Nat 156:252–258.Google Scholar
Schuelke, M. 2000. An economic method for the fluorescent labeling of PCR fragments. Nat Biotechnol 18:233–234.Google Scholar
Sperry, L. J., Belnap, J., and Evans, R. D. 2006. Bromus tectorum invasion alters nitrogen dynamics in an undisturbed arid grassland ecosystem. Ecology 87:603–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spitze, K. 1993. Population structure in Daphnia obtusa: quantitative genetic and allozymic variation. Genetics 135:367–374.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Terhivuo, J. and Saura, A. 2006. Dispersal and clonal diversity of North-European parthenogenetic earthworms. Biol. Invasions 8:1205–1218.Google Scholar
Valliant, M. T., Mack, R. N., and Novak, S. J. 2007. Introduction history and population genetics of the invasive grass Bromus tectorum (Poaceae) in Canada. Am. J. Bot 94:1156–1169.Google Scholar
Wilen, C. A., Holt, J. S., Ellstrand, N. C., and Shaw, R. G. 1995. Genotypic diversity of kikuyugrass (Pennisetum clandestinum) populations in California. Weed Sci 43:209–214.Google Scholar