Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Explaining the geographic distributions of sexual and asexual populations

Nature volume 391, pages 889–892 (1998)Cite this article

Abstract

Examination of the geographic distributions of sexual organisms and their asexual, or parthenogenetic, competitors reveals certain consistent patterns. These patterns are called geographic parthenogenes is1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8. For example, if we compare sexual organisms with closely related asexuals, we find that, in the Northern Hemisphere, there is a strong tendency for the asexuals to occur further to the north. One researcher to document this pattern is Bierzychudek, who examined 43 cases (drawn from 10 genera) where the geographic distributions of a sexual plant and a closely related asexual are known4. In 76% of these cases, the asexual plant's range was more northerly than the range of the sexual. Some of the remaining cases probably fit with this pattern, but more data must be obtained before this suggestion can be confirmed. Asexuals also tend to occur at high altitudes, and in marginal, resource-poor environments1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8. We have constructed a mathematical model of a habitat that stretches from south to north in the Northern Hemisphere. Our computer simulations based on this model support the idea that a single basic process may account for much of what is known about geographic parthenogenesis. This process involves the movement of individuals from areas in which they are well adapted to areas where they are poorly adapted.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Final equilibrium density distributions for three simulation runs.
Figure 2: The intermediate equilibria leading to the final equilibrium shown in Fig. 1a.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Vandel, A. La parthéngénèse géographique: contribution l'étude biologique et cytologique de la parthénogénèse naturelle. Bull. Biol. Belg. 62, 164–281 (1928).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Suomalainen, E. Parthenogenesis in animals. Adv. Genet. 3, 193–253 (1950).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Lynch, M. Destabilizing hybridization, general-purpose genotypes and geographic parthenogenesis. Q. Rev. Biol. 59, 257–290 (1984).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bierzychudek, P. Patterns in plant parthenogenesis. Experientia 41, 1255–1263 (1985).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hughes, R. N. A Functional Biology of Clonal Animals (Chapman and Hall, London, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Glesener, R. R. & Tilman, D. Sexuality and the components of environmental uncertainty: Clues from geographic parthenogenesis in terrestrial animals. Am. Nat. 112, 659–673 (1978).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bell, G. The Masterpiece of Nature (Univ. California Press, San Francisco, 1982).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Parker, E. D. in Evolutionary Genetics from Molecules to Morphology (ed. Singh, R. & Krimbas, C.) (Cambridge Univ. Press, in the press).

  9. Bulmer, M. The Mathematical Theory of Quantitative Genetics (Clarendon, Oxford, 1980).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Maynard Smith, J. The Evolution of Sex (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1978).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Charlesworth, B. Mutation-selection balance and the evolutionary advantage of sex and recombination. Genet. Res. 55, 199–221 (1990).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Hamilton, W. D., Axelrod, R. & Tanese, R. Sexual reproduction as an adaptation to resist parasites (a review). Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 87, 3566–3573 (1990).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Hurst, L. D. & Peck, J. R. Recent advances in understanding of the evolution and maintenance of sex. Trends Ecol. Evol. 11, 46–52 (1996).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Kondrashov, A. S. Deleterioius mutations and the evolution of sexual reproduction. Nature 336, 435–440 (1988).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Kondrashov, A. S. Classification of hypotheses on the advantage of amphimixis. J. Hered. 84, 372–387 (1993).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Peck, J. R. Frequency dependent selection, beneficial mutations, and the evolution of sex. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 125, 87–92 (1993).

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  17. Peck, J. R. Aruby in the rubbish: Beneficial mutations, deleterious mutations and the evolution of sex. Genetics 137, 597–606 (1994).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Peck, J. R. Limited dispersal, deleterious mutations and the evolution of sex. Genetics 142, 1053–1060 (1996).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Peck, J. R., Barreau, G. & Heath, S. C. Imperfect genes. Fisherian mutation and the evolution of sex. Genetics 145, 1171–1199 (1997).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Michod, R. E. & Levin, B. R. The Evolution of Sex: an Examination of Current Ideas (Sinauer, Sunderland, MA, 1988).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Antonovics, J. Evolution in closely adjacent plant populations. V. Evolution of self-fertility. Heredity 23, 219–238 (1968).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Dias, P. C. Sources and sinks in population biology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 11, 326–330 (1996).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Kirkpatrick, M. & Barton, N. H. Evolution of a species range. Am. Nat. (in the press). (Author: update?)

  24. García-Ramos, G. & Kirkpatrick, M. Genetic models of adaptation and gene flow in peripheral populations. Evolution 51, 21–28 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Barton, N. H. The probability of establishment of an advantageous mutant in a subdivided population. Genet. Res. 50, 35–40 (1987).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank N. H. Barton, B. Charlesworth, J. Maynard Smith, D. Parker and M. Turelli for advice and assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for the Study of Evolution, University of Sussex, BN1 9QG, Brighton, UK

    Joel R. Peck, Jonathan M. Yearsley & David Waxman

Authors
  1. Joel R. Peck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jonathan M. Yearsley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David Waxman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Peck, J., Yearsley, J. & Waxman, D. Explaining the geographic distributions of sexual and asexual populations. Nature 391, 889–892 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1038/36099

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/36099

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing