TY - GEN
T1 - Small-scale morphological differentiation in three brooding sea star species with limited dispersal
AU - Foltz, D. W.
AU - Flowers, J. M.
PY - 2010
Y1 - 2010
N2 - For species with limited dispersal potential, variation in morphological traits on a small geographic scale might be due to some combination of phenotypic plasticity, natural selection or random genetic drift. We analyzed morphological variation for eight characters in three closely-related species of sea stars in the genus Leptasterias, subgenus Hexasterias, each with an obligate brood-protecting mode of reproduction. The four sampling locations were closely spaced (distances between locations were less than 20 km), and each species was present at three or four of the locations. For two species (Leptasterias aequalis species B and L. hexactis), the amount of morphological variation among the four locations was not significantly different from zero. The remaining species (L. aequalis species A) exhibited morphological variation among the same locations that was significantly greater than zero. The different patterns of microgeographic variation in morphology for the three species could be the result of either natural selection in a heterogeneous environment or phenotypic plasticity, but cannot be attributed to some other non-selective explanations, such as genetic drift, hybridization or undetected cryptic species.
AB - For species with limited dispersal potential, variation in morphological traits on a small geographic scale might be due to some combination of phenotypic plasticity, natural selection or random genetic drift. We analyzed morphological variation for eight characters in three closely-related species of sea stars in the genus Leptasterias, subgenus Hexasterias, each with an obligate brood-protecting mode of reproduction. The four sampling locations were closely spaced (distances between locations were less than 20 km), and each species was present at three or four of the locations. For two species (Leptasterias aequalis species B and L. hexactis), the amount of morphological variation among the four locations was not significantly different from zero. The remaining species (L. aequalis species A) exhibited morphological variation among the same locations that was significantly greater than zero. The different patterns of microgeographic variation in morphology for the three species could be the result of either natural selection in a heterogeneous environment or phenotypic plasticity, but cannot be attributed to some other non-selective explanations, such as genetic drift, hybridization or undetected cryptic species.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79952573912&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79952573912&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:79952573912
SN - 9780415408196
T3 - Echinoderms: Durham - Proceedings of the 12th International Echinoderm Conference
SP - 167
EP - 172
BT - Echinoderms
T2 - 12th International Echinoderm Conference
Y2 - 7 August 2006 through 11 August 2006
ER -