Abstract

AbstractCytochrome B sequences and allozymes reveal complex patterns of molecular variation in dusky salamander (Desmognathus) populations in eastern Tennessee. One group of allozymically distinctive populations, which we refer to as the Sinking Creek form (SCF), combines morphological attributes of Desmognathus fuscus with cytB sequences characteristic of Desmognathus carolinensis. This form is abruptly replaced by D. fuscus just north of Johnson City, TN with no evidence of either sympatry or gene exchange. To the south, allozymic markers indicate a broad zone of admixture with populations characterized by distinct cytB sequences and that may or may not be ultimately referable to Desmognathus conanti. A third distinctive group of populations, which we refer to as the Lemon Gap form (LGF), occurs in the foothills of the Great Smoky and southern Bald Mountains and exchanges genes with Desmognathus santeetlah along the escarpment of the Great Smokies, D. carolinensis in the southern Bald Mountains, and populations of a different haplotype clade in the Ridge and Valley. We treat all these as innominate forms that may represent “failed species,” recognizing that it may never be possible to reconcile species limits with patterns of phylogeny, morphology, and gene exchange in these salamanders.

Highlights

  • Evolutionary biologists still seek to objectively define species and to operationally delimit them in nature (Sites and Marshall 2003, 2004; Bernardo 2011)

  • The only between clade divergences of less than 0.08 per site are for haplotype comparisons involving the b, c, D. conanti, and D. santeetlah clades

  • The only other populations with more than 10% of individuals assigned to that cluster are D. carolinensis at Locality 21 (29%) and D. cf. fuscus at South Mtn. 5 (23%)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Evolutionary biologists still seek to objectively define species and to operationally delimit them in nature (Sites and Marshall 2003, 2004; Bernardo 2011). Molecular techniques sometimes complicate these pursuits by revealing cryptic diversity and phylogenetic structure within nominate species (Agapow et al 2004; Pfenniger and Schwenk 2007; Trontelj et al 2007) and provoking disagreement over which, or even whether, species should be recognize

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call