Morphological, genetic and behavioural analyses of a hybrid zone between the ground beetles Carabus lewisianus and C. albrechti (Coleoptera, Carabidae): asymmetrical introgression caused by movement of the zone?

Abstract

We analysed the putative hybrid zone between the ground beetles Carabus lewisianus Breuning and C. albrechti Morawitz from the Kanto and Tanzawa Mountains in central Honshu, Japan, using morphological, genetic, and behavioural data. Canonical discriminant analysis of three external and five genital morphological characters revealed an apparent morphological gap, suggesting restricted sympatry in the contact zone. RFLP and molecular phylogenetic analyses of the mitochondrial gene ND5 revealed that haplotypes originating from C. lewisianus introgressed extensively into C. albrechti. Fitting tanh curves to morphological (external and genital) and genetic characters showed differential cline widths and centres, suggesting stronger selection for genital morphology with narrower cline widths, and extensive introgression of the nuclear genes responsible for external characters relative to those controlling genital morphology into the range of C. albrechti. Linkage disequilibria between the morphological characters did not differ from zero, suggesting sufficient recombination occurred in the zone but the effect of small sample sizes was not negligible. Mate choice trials demonstrated that males showed a weak but not significant preference for conspecific mates. We interpret these patterns as evidence for (1) partial reproductive isolation presumably by postmating processes; (2) selection against intermediate genital morphologies, and (3) independent responses of the characters to different evolutionary forces that may cause movement of genital clines and introgression of the mitochondrial gene and external morphology. The movement of the boundaries may have resulted in the particular species distribution patterns in the study area. © 2005 The Linnean Society of London, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2005, 86, 79–94.