Content uploaded by Jonathan Arnold
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Jonathan Arnold
Content may be subject to copyright.
Intraspecific Phylogeography: The Mitochondrial DNA Bridge Between Population Genetics
and Systematics
Author(s): John C. Avise, Jonathan Arnold, R. Martin Ball, Eldredge Bermingham, Trip
Lamb, Joseph E. Neigel, Carol A. Reeb, Nancy C. Saunders
Source:
Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics,
Vol. 18 (1987), pp. 489-522
Published by: Annual Reviews
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2097141
Accessed: 25/02/2009 23:39
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=annrevs.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Annual Reviews is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Annual Review of
Ecology and Systematics.
http://www.jstor.org
Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 1987. 18:489-522
Copyright ?) 1987 by Annual Reviews Inc. All rights reserved
INTRASPECIFIC
PHYLOGEOGRAPHY:
The
Mitochondrial
DNA Bridge Between
Population
Genetics and Systematics
John C. Avisel, Jonathan Arnold', R. Martin Ball', Eldredge
Bermingham 2, Trip Lamb"3, Joseph E. Neigell 4, Carol A.
Reebl, and Nancy C. Saunders"
5
'Department
of Genetics,
University
of Georgia,
Athens,
Georgia
30602;
2NMFS/
CZES, Genetics, 2725 Montlake
Boulevard
East, Seattle, Washington
98112;
3Savannah
River Ecology
Laboratory,
Drawer
E, Aiken, South
Carolina
29801;
4Department
of Microbiology
and
Immunology,
School
of Medicine,
University of
California,
Los
Angeles,
California
90024;
5School
of Veterinary
Medicine,
Virginia
Tech University,
Blacksburg,
Virginia
24046
INTRODUCTION
A recurring debate in evolutionary biology is over the extent to which
microevolutionary
processes operating
within species can be extrapolated
to
explain macroevolutionary
differences among species and higher taxa (36,
38, 45, 46, 53, 67, 68, 80). As discussed by Stebbins & Ayala (83), several
issues involved must be carefully distinguished, such as (a) whether
micro-
evolutionary processes (e.g. mutation, chromosomal
change, genetic drift,
natural
selection) have operated
throughout
the history of life (presumably
they have); (b) whether
such known processes can by themselves account for
macroevolutionary
phenomena;
and (c) whether these processes can predict
macroevolutionary
trends and patterns. In another, phylogenetic sense,
489
0066-4162/87/11 20-0489$02.00
490 AVISE
ET AL
macroevolution
is ineluctably
an extrapolation
of microevolution:
Organisms
have parents,
who in turn had
parents,
and so on back
through time. Thus, the
branches in macroevolutionary
trees have a substructure that consists of
smaller branches
and twigs, ultimately
resolved as generation-to-generation
pedigrees (Figure 1). It is through these pedigrees that genes have been
transmitted,
tracing the stream of heredity
that is phylogeny.
It would seem that
considerations of phylogeny
and
heredity
should
provide
a logical starting point for attempts to understand any connections of
macroevolution
to microevolution.
Yet amazingly,
the discipline traditionally
associated
with heredity
and microevolutionary process (population
genetics)
developed and has remained
largely
separate
from those fields associated with
phylogeny and macroevolution
(systematics
and
paleontology). Thus, several
classic textbooks in population
genetics (35, 39, 64) do not so much as index
"phylogeny," "s
ystematics," or "speciation," while the equally important
textbooks in systematics (55, 81, 96) can be read and understood
with only
the most rudimentary
knowledge of Mendelian and population genetics.
Notwithstanding
some evidence for recent increased communication between
these disciplines (40, 71), too many systematists
and population
geneticists
continue to operate
in largely separate
realms, employing
different
languages
and concepts to address issues that should be of importance
to all.
X n X tn u)
sV) *0 G D E pedigrees
E E
C O A R S E F I N E
R E S O L U T I O N
Figure I At closer levels of examination,
macroevolutionary
trees (such as the one on the left
summarizing relationships among some of the vertebrate
classes) must in principle have a
substructure
consisting
of smaller
and smaller
branches,
ultimately
resolvable as family pedigrees
through
which genes have been transmitted. Some branches
in the pedigree
on the right
have been
darkened to indicate the transmission
path of mtDNA from the earliest pictured
female.
PRINCIPLES OF mtDNA PHYLOGEOGRAPHY 491
It might also be supposed
that the newer field of molecular
evolution, with
its obvious grounding
in genetics and yet a concern with phylogeny, would
have facilitated a firmer linkage between micro- and macroevolutionary
study. And to some extent it has, by allowing evaluations of large-scale
evolutionary trees in terms of DNA and protein characters with a known
genetic basis. But movement in the opposite direction-extending phyloge-
netic principles and reasoning to the microevolutionary
level-has been
negligible. Thus, when molecular
evolutionists work at the intraspecific level,
they tend to adopt the terms and concepts of population genetics, such as
"variances in allele frequencies," "genetic drift," "mutation-selection bal-
ance," "fitness,"
and so forth, but not the terms and concepts of systematics,
such as "monophyletic groups," "parsimony networks," "clades," or "syn-
apomorphic character states." Conversely, when systematists work at the
intraspecific level, for example to describe subspecies, it is usually with
morphological
or behavioral traits whose genetic basis (or even control) is
poorly known. Worse yet, geographic
locale per se is too often the primary
basis for assigning newly collected specimens to "subspecies," so that at-
tempts to understand
any relationship
between phylogenetic differentiation
and spatial separation
flirt with circular
reasoning.
The reasons
that the field of molecular evolution has not contributed
greatly
to the incorporation
of phylogenetic principles
into population genetics are,
we suspect, primarily
twofold. First, the inception
and early development
of
molecular evolution (reviewed in 18, 63, 70) largely coincided with (and
stimulated) the rise of the neutralist school of thought (58, 59), which
challenged a common view that genetic variability
was molded primarily by
natural selection. Thus, molecular evolutionists were (justifiably) preoccu-
pied with the selectionist-neutralist
debate and never
gained very close contact
with various
schools of systematic thought
that were also growing actively at
that time (55, 81). Second, in the early years protein electrophoresis
was the
only molecular
technique readily applicable
to comparisons
at the intraspecif-
ic level. Yet allozymes of a particular
locus are qualitative,
multistate traits
the phylogenetic
order of which cannot be safely inferred from the observable
property, electrophoretic mobility. Furthermore, allozymes are encoded by
nuclear
genes that segregate
and recombine
during
each generation
of sexual
reproduction.
These attributes of allozymes understandably
directed methods
of data
analysis
toward concerns with allele frequencies
and heterozygosities,
which in turn channeled thinking back into the traditional
framework and
language of population genetics and away from phylogeny.
The purpose
of this report
is to make a case that animal
mitochondrial DNA
(mtDNA) (by virtue of its maternal, nonrecombining
mode of inheritance,
rapid pace of evolution, and extensive intraspecific polymorphism) permits
and even demands an extension of phylogenetic thinking
to the microevolu-
492 AVISE
ET AL
tionary level. As such, data from mtDNA can provide a liaison service for
expanding communication
between systematists and population
geneticists.
With empirical
and conceptual
channels opened, it might then be possible to
reconsider various connections between micro- and macroevolutionary
change as interpreted
against a continuous genealogical backdrop. This re-
view will be a success if it stimulates further
dialogue in these areas.
MTDNA-NOT "JUST ANOTHER" MOLECULAR
MARKER
If one were to specify the properties
desired of an ideal molecular system for
phylogenetic analysis, the wish list might include the following. The mole-
cule should: (a) be distinctive, yet ubiquitously
distributed,
so that secure
homologous comparions
could be made among a wide variety of organisms;
(b) be easy to isolate and assay; (c) have a simple genetic structure lacking
complicating features such as repetitive DNA, transposable elements,
pseudogenes, and introns; (d) exhibit a straightforward
mode of genetic
transmission, without recombination or other genetic rearrangements; (e)
provide suites of qualitative character states whose phylogenetic in-
terrelationships
could be inferred
by reasonable
parsimony
criteria; and, for
purposes of microevolutionary
analysis, (t) evolve at a rapid
pace such that
new character
states commonly arise within the lifespan of a species. To a
remarkable
degree, the mitochondrial
DNA of higher
animals
meets all of the
above criteria.
Molecular properties
of animal mtDNA have been reviewed previously
(10, 25, 26), so only a brief synopsis sufficient for current discussion is given
here. The reader is directed
to the earlier
papers
for details and
qualifications.
In higher animals, mtDNA is a small, covalently closed circular molecule,
about 16-20 kilobases long. It is tightly packed
with genes for 13 messenger
RNA's, 2 ribosomal
RNA's, and 22 transfer RNA's. In addition to these 37
genes, an area known as the "D-loop" (in vertebrates and echinoderms)
or "A
+ T-rich" region (in Drosophila), roughly 0.8 kilobases long, appears to
exercise control over mtDNA replication and RNA transcription.
Introns,
repetitive DNA, pseudogenes, and even sizeable spacer sequences between
genes, are all absent. Gene arrangement
appears
very stable, at least within a
taxonomic class or phylum. For example, gene order is identical in assayed
mammals and frogs but differs from that in Drosophila. Nonetheless, evolu-
tion at the nucleotide sequence level is rapid, perhaps
1-10 times faster than
typical single-copy nuclear DNA (28, 92). Most of the genetic changes are
simple base substitutions;
some are small addition/deletions
(one or a few
nucleotides); and fewer still involve large length differences (up to several
hundred nucleotides). The size differences are usually (though not ex-
PRINCIPLES
OF mtDNA PHYLOGEOGRAPHY 493
clusively; 69) confined to the control region
of the molecule, which in general
is evolving especially rapidly. The final and perhaps
most important
point is
that, to the best of current
knowledge (50, 60), inheritance
of animal mtDNA
is strictly
maternal.
Thus, unlike the situation
for nuclear
DNA, the mtDNA
mutations
arising in different individuals
are not recombined
during sexual
reproduction.
No molecular system is likely to be perfect for phylogenetic analysis, and
mtDNA does have some potential
and real limitations that need to be recog-
nized:
Heteroplasmy
Most somatic cells (and mature
oocytes) contain hundreds or thousands of
mtDNA molecules, so that
at its inception
a new mutation
will either
generate
or add to a heteroplasmic
condition in which two or more genotypes coexist
within an individual. On theoretical grounds, it was originally feared that
heteroplasmy
might be extensive and hopelessly complicate mtDNA study,
but empirical
experience
proved
this worry
to be unjustified.
Cases of hetero-
plasmy have been discovered (20 and references
therein)
but are unusual
and
therefore of little impact in routine surveys of animal mtDNA. Current
thinking is that mutations
within a cell line (as opposed to paternal
leakage
of mtDNA via sperm) generate most instances of heteroplasmy, and that
the heteroplasmic
state is quite transitory,
due to rapid sorting of mtDNA
molecules in germcell lineages (34, 52, 76, 86). Thus, as phrased by
Wilson et al (97), "The vast majority of individuals tested seem effec-
tively haploid as regards the number of types of mtDNA transmitted
to
the next generation (although polyploid as regards the number
of mtDNA
copies per cell)."
Homoplasy
An ideal phylogenetic
marker
would be free from reversals
as well as parallel
or convergent
evolutionary
change (homoplasy).
In one respect, mtDNA falls
short of this standard-many restriction sites have been observed to "blink"
on and off repeatedly
during evolution (e.g. 43, 61). This phenomenon
is
presumably
most often attributable
to recurrent transitional base substitutions
(3) at some nucleotide sites. If particular
positions in the mtDNA genome are
considered "characters,"
and if evolutionary change at these positions has
been especially rapid with respect to the time since separation
of assayed
lineages, then the small number of alternative character states assumable
insures that some homoplasious changes will have occurred. Nonetheless,
because mtDNA genomes are nonrecombining,
the entire molecule can jus-
tifiably be considered
the "character,"
in which case the number
of possible
character
states becomes astronomical.
494 AVISE
ET AL
Typical empirical surveys of mtDNA (see beyond) effectively involve
assay of at least several hundred
base-pairs
of information per individual.
When viewed this way, any widespread
and intricate
similarities
present in
mtDNA are most unlikely
to have arisen by convergent
evolution, and so they
must primarily
reflect phylogenetic
descent (or, conversely stated, any wide-
spread and intricate
differences observed
among mtDNA molecules could not
be overcome by wholesale convergent mutation).
The effects of homoplasious
change in mtDNA are thus probably
limited to introduction of circumscribed
ambiguity in tree or network
placements
of mtDNA genotypes. Furthermore,
approaches for recognizing and treating homoplasy in mtDNA have been
suggested (10, 89, 90).
Scale
Some nucleotide positions in mtDNA are far more labile evolutionarily
than
are others, presumably
due to relaxed selective constraints
(4). The initial
rapid pace of mtDNA differentiation
(estimated at about 2% sequence di-
vergence per million years in mammals; 28) is attributable primarily to
changes at these sites, after which further mtDNA differences accumulate
much more slowly. The overall effect is that beyond perhaps about 8-10
million yr, a plot of mtDNA nucleotide
sequence
divergence (p) against
time
(t) becomes curvilinear, eventually reaching
a plateau
where estimation
of t
from p is pointless (28). For this reason, unless special precautions
are taken
to work
only with more slowly evolving portions
of the molecule, meaningful
phylogenetic comparisons
from conventional mtDNA surveys will normally
be confined to conspecific populations and closely related species whose
separations
date to within the last few million years.
At the other end of the scale, for very recently disjoined populations
or
species, it is likely that a substantial fraction of observed mtDNA sequence
differences arose prior
to population separation (i.e. they represent
retention
of polymorphisms originally
present
in ancestral
parental
stock). There are at
least two ways to deal with this potential complication.
First, from a popula-
tion genetic perspective, statistical corrections
can be applied (72, 97). For
example, let Ax, Sy, 8A, and 8xy represent
the mean pairwise mtDNA di-
vergence values between individuals
of population
X, of population Y, of the
ancestral population, and between individuals in population X versus Y,
respectively. Although 8A cannot be observed
directly, it can be estimated
by
assuming that
SA = 0.5 (&x + Sy)-
Then the corrected
distance estimate between populations
X and Y becomes
8 = 8XY -
PRINCIPLES OF mtDNA PHYLOGEOGRAPHY 495
A second way to deal with the predicament
involves a shift to a phylogenetic
perspective. Since mtDNA genotypes in different lines do not recombine,
individual organisms (rather
than populations
or species) can justifiably be
considered as the basic operational
taxonomic
units
(OTU's) in a phylogenetic
reconstruction (62). This straightforward approach,
in which individuals
(or,
more precisely, their mtDNA genotypes) constitute the tips of hypothesized
evolutionary trees (or nodes of evolutionary networks), can be especially
informative.
For example, with respect
to matriarchal
phylogeny, it is biolog-
ically quite plausible
that some individuals
may truly
be more closely related
to members
of another
species than
they are to conspecifics, owing solely to
particular patterns
of maternal
lineage survival and extinction accompanying
the speciation process (73, 85; also see below).
Selection Versus
Neutrality
The longstanding
debate about whether the dynamics
of genetic variation are
governed primarily
by natural selection or by genetic drift of neutral
muta-
tions, can also be extended
to mtDNA. In our
view, the phylogenetic
value of
mtDNA does not, however, completely hinge on the outcome. Thus, even if
mtDNA genotypes prove commonly to differ with respect
to fitness, properly
identified synapomorphic
(shared-derived)
character states should still permit
recognition
of monophyletic assemblages (clades)
of molecules. Nonetheless,
in some kinds of data analyses involving genetic distance estimates and
molecular clock concepts to date separation
events, it would be especially
important
to know whether mtDNA variability
is neutral
(although, particu-
larly when longer spans
of time are involved and much genetic information is
assayed, the magnitude of genetic differentiation
under some models of
natural selection should also be well-correlated
with time; 9, 44).
Two senses in which mtDNA variability
might be deemed neutral need to
be carefully distinguished.
First, in a mechanistic
sense, we already
"know"
that most of the particular
mtDNA genotypic variants segregating in pop-
ulations probably
have, by themselves, absolutely no differential effect on
organismal fitness. These include, for example, base substitutions in silent
positions of protein-coding
genes, and some substitutions and small addition/
deletions in the nontranscribed
D-loop region. These changes are dis-
proportionately
common in mtDNA (25) and
are
ones for which only the most
ardent selectionist would argue a direct link to organismal
fitness. On the
other hand, mtDNA contains genes whose products
(usually in collaboration
with those of the nuclear
genome) are crucial to production
of energy neces-
sary for animal survival
and reproduction (49, 74). Some mtDNA mutations
must, then, be highly visible to selection. When they arise, each such
mutation will by chance be associated with a particular array
of mechanistical-
ly neutral
variants elsewhere in the molecule. Since mtDNA is maternally
496 AVISE ET AL
inherited, these associations will not be dissoluted by recombination (95). In
this second, dynamic sense, mechanistically neutral
mtDNA variants
may,
through linkage to selected mtDNA mutations, have evolutionary
histories
that are at times influenced or even dominated by effects of natural
selection.
A deeper
understanding
of such possibilities
poses a stiff challenge for future
study. Not only will knowledge
be required
of the periodicity
and intensity of
selection on fitness-related mtDNA mutations, but historical accidents of
association with neutral markers will have to be taken into account. Further-
more, all this action must be understood within the context of ever-changing
nuclear
gene backgrounds
whose epistatic interactions with mtDNA are
likely
to be of great importance
(5, 25, 49, 78).
Lineage Sampling
Bias
The phylogenies inferred from mtDNA comparisons
represent
the presumed
historical sequences of mutational events accompanying the differentiation of
maternal lines. An mtDNA phylogeny is thus an example of a molecular
genealogy-a record
of evolutionary
changes in a piece of DNA, in this case
one that has a history of maternal
transmission. In general, any organismal
phylogeny must in some sense represent a composite attribute of many
molecular
genealogies, including
those for all nuclear
genes, each of which in
any generation
could have been transmitted
through
male or female parents.
As phrased by Wainscoat
(93), "We inherit our mitochondrial DNA from
just
one of our sixteen great-great
grandparents, yet this maternal ancestor has
only contributed one-sixteenth
of our nuclear DNA." The asexual, maternal
transmission
of mtDNA is thus a double-edged
sword. Although
the informa-
tion recorded
in mtDNA represents
only one of many molecular
tracings in
the evolutionary
histories of organisms,
it is nonetheless a specified genealog-
ical history (female -> female -> female), and one whose molecular record
has not been complicated by the effects of recombination.
INTRASPECIFIC PHYLOGENY
AND GEOGRAPHIC
POPULATION
STRUCTURE
Most mtDNA surveys of natural
populations
have involved the technically
expedient restriction
enzyme approach.
MtDNA is isolated from individual
animals, digested with particular
endonucleases, and the resulting digestion
products separated
by molecular weight through gels. The "raw" data then
consist of restriction fragment digestion profiles on gels, or with some
additional
effort, restriction site maps. The evolutionary
changes
in restriction
sites underlying the differing digestion profiles or site maps can often be
inferred
simply, and a parsimony
network
summarizing
the presumed
history
of genotypic interconversions can be generated. A straightforward
example
PRINCIPLES OF mtDNA
PHYLOGEOGRAPHY 497
involving BstEII
sites observed
in the mtDNA from
Peromyscus
maniculatus
(61) is presented
in Figure 2. A typical survey
now often includes data from
ten or more enzymes and involves, on average, 40-100 or more restriction
sites per individual. The recognition sequence
of each employed endonucle-
ase is either four, five, or six base-pairs
in length, so a routine survey of
mtDNA would effectively screen
individuals for genetic
differences at several
hundred
nucleotide positions.
To exemplify more fully the kinds of phylogenetic implications
inherent
in
such data, we briefly summarize
results from a typical natural
population
survey. Bermingham
& Avise (19) used 13 restriction endonucleases
to score
an average of 54 sites per individual
in the mtDNA of 75 bowfin fish (Amia
calva) collected from river drainages
from South Carolina
to Mississippi. A
total of 13 distinct mtDNA genotypes (which for simplicity can be called
"clones")
were observed. Figure
3A shows a hand-drawn
parsimony
network
(constructed by an extension of the approach exemplified in Figure 2) in-
terconnecting these clonal genotypes, and in Figure 3B this network is
superimposed over the geographic sources of the collections. Two major
genetic (and geographic) assemblages of mtDNA clones are apparent-an
eastern assemblage of nine related clones observed in bowfin from South
Carolina, Georgia, and Florida; and a western assemblage of four related
A B C E F
i0.2_
5 = __ -
5.1 -_
4.1 -
3.0-
2.0 -
1.6-
1.0- _
0.5 -
Figure 2 (left) Diagrammatic representation
of the five BstElI digestion profiles observed
among mtDNA's isolated from samples of Peromyscus maniculatus (61). The leftmost lane
shows selected sizes (in kilobases) of fragments
in a molecular
weight standard.
(right)
Restric-
tion site maps (obtained from double-digestion procedures) corresponding
to the fragment
profiles
on the left. These site maps
have been interconnected
into a parsimony
network
reflecting
probable evolutionary relationships
among the BstEII
patterns.
Arrows indicate direction
of site
loss and not necessarily direction
of evolution.
498 AVISE
ET AL
clones in bowfin from Alabama and
Mississippi.
At least four assayed restric-
tion site changes distinguish any eastern
from any western genotype.
As drawn, these parsimony
networks are unrooted,
but additional
hypoth-
eses about phylogenetic orientation
can be advanced. By several criteria,
mtDNA clone 1 is a likely candidate
for the ancestral genotype within the
eastern assemblage
of Amia calva: (a) It is by far the most common eastern
genotype, occurring
in 30 of 59 assayed specimens; (b) it is geographically
the most widespread, observed in nine of the ten eastern river drainages
surveyed; and (c) in the parsimony
analysis, it forms the hub of a network
whose spokes connect separately
to seven other mtDNA genotypes (Figure
3A). Clone 1 is also at least one mutation step closer to the western mtDNA
Figure 3 Phylogenetic networks and phenograms summarizing evolutionary relationships
among 13 mtDNA genotypes observed in a sample of 75 bowfin fish, Amia calva (19). (A)
Hand-drawn
parsimony
network.
Slashes
crossing
branches indicate restriction site changes
along
a path;
heavier lines encompass
2 major arrays
of mtDNA genotypes
distinguishable by at least 4
restriction site changes. (B) The parsimony
network in A superimposed
over the geographic
sources of collections. (C) Wagner parsimony
network computer generated
from a presence-
absence site matrix. Inferred restriction site changes are indicated,
and numbers
in the network
represent
levels of statistical
support
(by bootstrapping)
for various clades. (D) UPGMA pheno-
gram, where p is estimated nucleotide sequence divergence.
PRINCIPLES
OF mtDNA PHYLOGEOGRAPHY 499
CLONE LOCALE
4
4 j COOPER
APALACHICOLA
\ ~ ~~~~ 6
se 9
to
< g | ] ESCAMBIA
to
40 12 MISSISSIPPI
13
CLONE LOCALE
7
6
4 COOPER
5 to
3 APALACHICOLA
2
8
9
I
J
ESCAMBIA
to
12 MISSISSIPPI
0.010 0.008 0.006 0.004 0.002 0.000
p
clade than are any other mtDNA genotypes in the east. In the western
genotypic array, clones 10 and 12, which occur in the drainages most
proximate
to those in the east (Figure
3B), are genetically closest to clone 1
(each differs by four assayed mutation
steps); and fish in the most westerly
drainage show further
distinction from these clones (Figures 3A and 3B).
Some data sets are far too large for such easy analysis by hand, and
computer
assistance is required.
Several tree-building
software packages are
500 AVISE
ET AL
available (42); we routinely employ various
algorithms
in the PHYLIP pack-
age distributed
by Joe Felsenstein. For example, Figure 3C shows a Wagner
parsimony network (from the METRO annealing algorithm
in PHYLIP) of
mtDNA genotypes in bowfin fish generated from a matrix consisting of
presence-absence information for each restriction site in each mtDNA clone.
Particular site changes along various branches of the network
are shown, and
numbers indicate the levels of statistical support (the proportion of times that a
group was distinguished
in a bootstrap analysis; 41) for a given hypothesized
mtDNA clade.
It is also possible to convert mtDNA fragment
or site data into estimates of
nucleotide sequence divergence (p) between genotypes (e.g. 72, 91), and the
resulting distance matrixes can provide the basis for tree or phenogram
construction. Figure 3D shows a UPGMA phenogram (81) for the mtDNA
clones in Amia calva. The eastern versus western clonal assemblages are
again apparent
and differ in nucleotide
sequence by an average
of about 1%.
In general then, many qualitative
and quantitative
methods of tree construc-
tion can be applied to mtDNA data. It is beyond the scope of this review to
address
the ongoing debate about "best" methods for phylogeny reconstruc-
tion (and Avise's views have been presented elsewhere; 6). Suffice it to say
that in our experience, tree-constructing algorithms involving philosophically
distinct methodologies usually produce very similar outcomes when applied
to a given set of mtDNA data. The pictured
networks
and phenograms
for
Amia calva (Figure 3) are merely a case in point.
In our laboratory,
similar surveys of geographic
variation
in mtDNA have
now been completed or are in progress for about 20 species, including
mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians,
marine and freshwater
fishes, and an
invertebrate (the horseshoe crab). The remainder
of this section summarizes
major
features
of these data (Table 1) in the context of qualitative patterns
of
geographic population
structure. The original papers
should be consulted for
details.
In principle, intraspecific phylogenies overlaid
on geographic maps could
yield many
kinds of outcomes. Five major categories
of possibilities and their
provisional interpretations
are summarized in Figure 4. For example, an
mtDNA phylogeny itself could show discontinuities
(or genetic "breaks")
in
which arrays of related genotypes differ from other such arrays by many
mutational
steps. Such genetically
distinct mtDNA assemblages might occupy
separate geographic regions within the range
of a species (category I, Figure
4), or they could co-occur geographically (category II). Alternatively,
mtDNA phylogenies themselves might be more or less continuous
genetical-
ly, and spatially either disjunct (category III), totally overlapping (category
IV), or nested (category V). We have empirical examples approximating
almost all of these theoretical
outcomes.
PRINCIPLES
OF mtDNA PHYLOGEOGRAPHY 501
X
z
ZW~~~~
LU0 U In O E > o S W Z
2 2 ~ 2
ZLJ N , CL
z +
o >-
z ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+~~z fa
x U Z N
ZI
t
N z I-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~w
z )C
5 Z + I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Li
o ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C
1cr -i 4-
4
LL ?
L'i U) U) - U) -i~U A) U)
0' U 0
HJ 0 0 c
uL' C
C.) C.) I '
U) U)z 0 0
z~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'
0 >
(9 CD
LU x7:
1-r
o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i
502 AVISE ET AL
Category I-Phylogenetic Discontinuities, Spatial Separation
In our experience, this is the most commonly
encountered
situation. It applies
for example, to the Amia calva case history
already
detailed
above, in which
arrays
of related mtDNA genotypes occurred in eastern
versus western river
drainages in the southeastern United States, and the two arrays were dif-
ferentiable by at least four assayed mutation steps (and p -0.01). The
magnitudes of genetic breaks
distinguishing
populations from different
geo-
graphic regions are in fact often considerably greater
than that observed in
Amia calva. For example, in the redear sunfish
Lepomis
microlophus, which
was sampled from the same river drainages
as Amia, eastern
versus western
arrays
of mtDNA genotypes differed
by 17 or more
assayed
mutation
steps (p
=0.09), yet maximum differentiation within either the eastern or western
mtDNA assemblages was always less than
p = 0.007 (19). Other species in
which we have observed discontinuous intraspecific
mtDNA phylogenetic
networks, with a strong geographic orientation, include the pocket gopher
(Geomys pinetis), deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus), bluegill sunfish
(Lepomis
macrochirus), spotted
sunfish
(L. punctatus),
warmouth
sunfish
(L.
gulosus), mudpuppy
salamanders
(Necturus
alabamensis and relatives), des-
ert tortoise (Scaptochelys agassizii), and horseshoe crab (Limulus
polyphe-
mus). References and relevant data from these studies are summarized
in
Table 1.
The most likely explanation
for major genetic discontinuities that display
geographic orientation involves long-term, extrinsic (i.e. zoogeographic)
barriers to gene flow, such that conspecific populations occupy easily
recognizable branches on an intraspecific
evolutionary
tree. Another
related
possibility, not mutually
exclusive, is extinction of intermediate
genotypes in
widely distributed
species with limited dispersal
and gene flow capabilities.
Apart
from the mtDNA
phylogeographic patterns
per se, is there
additional
support
for the significance of historical
zoogeography
in shaping intraspecif-
ic genetic architectures? At least two empirical lines of evidence can be
advanced.
First, populations
separated
for long times by zoogeographic
barri-
ers should also accumulate differences in the nuclear
genome. Few studies
have assayed nuclear
genes (or their products)
in concert with mtDNA, but
two that have done so-involving the pocket
gopher, Geomys
pinetis (13) and
the bluegill sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus (12)-found dramatic
allozyme
frequency distinctions between major mtDNA phylogenetic groups (Figure
5). Second, strong
biogeographic
barriers
should mould the genetic structures
of independently evolving species in concordant fashion. Five species of
freshwater fishes have been assayed for mtDNA differentiation across river
drainages in the southeastern United States-and, remarkably,
all showed
strong patterns of congruence in the geographic placements of the major
mtDNA phylogenetic breaks (Figures 3, 5, and 6). To account for these
PRINCIPLES
OF mtDNA PHYLOGEOGRAPHY 503
20
Z0)
0)
to
C)0
0 Q N 0 00
'0
00t
0
o oo. 00~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~oc
CO~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C
.0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
CO~~~~~~~~~~~~~'
o~~~~
0 (L)~~~~~~~~~~~0
00 0
0)~~~~
.U 0) 0
0 0
00 Z~~~~~~~~~0
0)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0
0
0
0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 0
0
En r.0)0 ,
0 0~~~~~~~~0C
- _ 0)~~ ~
>
504 AVISE ET AL
20
73
124 E 72
0 42
00 cis
4.) cis
0
O O
0 O O 0 'IC -
0 O O O O O O O
0
0 CZ -
0
0
0 0
Cld
s-4 11
0
cis
0 Z -cl O 00
0
u
0
72
0
0
u cis cis
r. cis cis
cis m O m
z 0
cis cis Ic; - to
7:1 cis
cis s.. = 0 cis
0 cis 9
U O u
to 0 0 cis LL,
0 0 L14 0 0 w
4.) -a w 0
4- cis
0 O 0 0 0 0
Z Z
z
tn 00 C14 tn
z A
0
(D
to 4.4
0 0
E 0
z
rA
>
0
u
40-4
0
0
14)
CZ
-O 0 E qj--
0 0 Z +-, = Ci 0
t4... 0
0
PRINCIPLES OF mtDNA PHYLOGEOGRAPHY 505
0
co
0 co
0 co co I" r- r-
0 ci 6 ci
> >
0
>
00
C14
.14
>
O 0
ed u 0
Au 0
C5 C5
co u
'4-J
o
tn
z z z
2
.14
>
2
0 0
U r-
0
CN
Z
00
en 00 en
0 0
Ei
.,CJ
Ln p.,
5! e
OZ E = E Cb Ow
506 AVISE ET AL
results, we advanced
a detailed biogeographic
reconstruction-one that im-
plicates historical patterns of river drainage isolation and coalescence associ-
ated with Pliocene and Pleistocene changes in sea level (19).
Preliminary evidence suggests that intraspecific phylogeographic dis-
continuities in mtDNA may commonly align with the boundaries of
zoogeographic provinces as identified by more conventional
biogeographic
data. For example, from lists of distributional limits of freshwater fish
species, Swift et al (84) identified two major zoogeographic provinces (east
versus west of the Apalachicola River), plus additional
subprovinces,
in the
southeastern United States. Boundary
zones between these regions agreed
quite well with the concentrations
of intraspecific phylogenetic breaks in
Geomys pinetis
0
mtDNA
Lepomi s m
ac roc hi rus
0 00 00 ;
Got-2 0t
DNA
Figure 5 Empirical examples in which highly divergent
mtDNA phylogeographic groupings
also proved distinct in allozyme frequencies. Above: Data for southeastern
pocket gopher,
Geomys pinetis (13). On the left are pie diagrams summarizing geographic
distributions
(in three
southern
states) of the two electromorphs (labeled
"95" and "100")
of the albumin locus. On the
right is an mtDNA phylogenetic network,
the most dramatic feature of which is the large genetic
gap (p 0.034) distinguishing
the same arrays
of eastern versus western
samples. Below: Data for
the bluegill sunfish, Lepomis
macrochirus. On the left are
pie diagrams summarizing geographic
distributions
of electromorphs (labeled
"100"
and
"58")
of the Got-2 nuclear locus (from 11). On
the right are pie diagrams
of frequencies
of two highly distinct (p = 0.085) mtDNA genotypes
(from 12).
PRINCIPLES OF mtDNA PHYLOGEOGRAPHY 507
Figure 6 Geographic distributions of major mtDNA clades in three additional species of
sunfish, Lepomis (from 19). Within each species, major
mtDNA
phylogenetic
breaks
(,a
= 0.062,
0.063, and 0.087 for L. punctatus,
L. gulosus, and
L. microlophus, respectively) distinguish
fish
in eastern rivers from those in drainages
further
to the west.
mtDNA for the five widely distributed
fish species assayed by Bermingham
&
Avise (19). In another example, a genetic discontinuity between two
phylogenetic assemblages of mtDNA's in the coastal horseshoe crab (77)
occurred near Cape Canaveral, Florida, a region long-recognized as tran-
sitional between warm-temperate
and tropical marine faunas (1, 22).
Recognizable biogeographic provinces presumably
exist because of environ-
mental
impediments (ecological and/or
physical;
historical as well as contem-
508 AVISE
ET AL
porary) to dispersal and gene flow. These impediments
are conventionally
recognized as reflected in concentrations of distributional
limits for many
species; perhaps
they may also be reflected
in concentrations of intraspecific
phylogenetic discontinuities
within species that
have geographic
distributions
extending across zoogeographic provinces.
Category Il-Phylogenetic Discontinuities, Lack of Spatial
Separation
In surveys from our laboratory,
we have no good empirical
examples of the
situation diagrammed
in category II, Figure 4-mtDNA phylogenetic dis-
continuities not associated with spatial separation.
Indeed, it has even been
rare to observe large mtDNA differences (i.e. greater than about 1-2%
nucleotide
sequence divergence)
between conspecific individuals
collected at
any given geographic
site. One example involved
the deer
mouse
Peromyscus
maniculatus (61), in which, for unknown
reasons, two or more moderately
divergent
mtDNA clones were occasionally found within particular localities
in the eastern United States. For example, two mtDNA clones collected in
Giles County, Virginia, differed by five restriction
sites changes (in assays
with eight endonucleases) and an estimated sequence divergence of p-
0.013. Even in P. maniculatus, however, the largest genetic differences in
mtDNA (p values greater
than about
0.03) were invariably between
mice from
different regions of North America (61), so that the overall pattern is more
consistent with category I in Figure 4.
In a large sample
of bluegill sunfish
(Lepomis
macrochirus) collected from
Lake Oglethorpe
in north
Georgia,
two grossly different mtDNA genotypes (p
= 0.085) did co-occur in roughly equal frequency
(12). Further
analysis of
this situation, involving more extensive geographic sampling as well as
comparisons
with nuclear
genotypes (1 1), revealed that the Lake Oglethorpe
population
is probably
a random-mating, hybrid
swarm
arising
from second-
ary
contact
between
allopatrically
evolved races
of bluegill. In such secondary
admixture zones (as well as in cases where reproductively
isolated sibling
species are inadvertently assayed as if belonging
to a single species), mtDNA
phylogenetic
discontinuities
in the absence
of current
spatial separation
are
of
course to be expected.
Category II-Phylogenetic Continuity,
Spatial Separation
Not all assayed species have exhibited the large mtDNA phylogeographic
"breaks" characteristic
of category I. Another
commonly encountered situa-
tion is one in which mtDNA parsimony
networks
are more
or less continuous,
with consistently small numbers
of mutational
steps (and fairly low p values)
between phylogenetically adjacent
clones, each of which is nonetheless
con-
fined to a subset of the geographic
range
of the species (III, Figure 4). Such a
situation is approximated
in the marine oyster toadfish Opsanus tau (16).
PRINCIPLES OF mtDNA PHYLOGEOGRAPHY 509
Among 43 individuals
sampled from Massachusetts
to Georgia, five closely
related but geographically localized mtDNA genotypes were observed, each
differing from its apparent closest relative by only one or two assayed
restriction sites (and associated p < 0.008). The two most common
genotypes
were respectively confined to collections north versus south of the Cape
Hatteras area in North Carolina (another boundary region between
zoogeographic provinces (22). Yet mean sequence divergence between the
five mtDNA genotypes in 0. tau was only p -0.005. Other
species in which
we have observed limited differentiation yet geographic localization of
mtDNA clones include the gulf toadfish (Opsanus beta), diamondback ter-
rapin (Malaclemys terrapin), and old-field mouse (Peromyscus
polionotus)
(Table 1). This phylogeographic pattern
is also characteristic
of the differenti-
ation observed within particular regions for most of the category-I species
previously listed (in other words, category III is similar
to the within-region
pattern
of category I-Figure 4).
The most likely explanation
for geographic
localization
of mtDNA clones
and clades, in the absence of major phylogenetic breaks,
involves historically
limited gene flow between populations in species not subdivided by firm
long-term zoogeographic barriers
to dispersal. Thus, recently arisen muta-
tions are confined to subsets
of the species' range, and the overall population
structure may conform more or less to either
the "island" or "stepping
stone"
models in traditional
population genetics (54).
Category IV-Phylogenetic Continuity,
Lack of Spatial
Separation
Within a few species, closely related mtDNA genotypes appear not to be
geographically localized. Perhaps
the best example involves the American
eel, Anguilla rostrata (14). In 109 eels taken from seven locales between
Maine and
Louisiana,
numerous related
mtDNA genotypes
were detected, yet
each (when present in two or more individuals) was geographically wide-
spread. Similarly, in the hardhead sea catfish (Ariusfelis), two related
clades
of mtDNA genotypes ( -0.006) were both widely distributed
along the
South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico coastlines (16). Other assayed species
exhibiting limited mtDNA phylogenetic diversity and relatively little geo-
graphic structure include the marine
gafftopsail
catfish (Bagre marinus), the
red-winged blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus) (Table 1), and, to an argued
extent, humans (24, 94).
We propose
that
geographic populations
of species exhibiting
this category
of intraspecific phylogeography have had relatively extensive and recent
historical
interconnections
through gene flow. This would require the absence
of firm and longstanding zoogeographic
barriers
to movement, as well as life
histories conducive to dispersal. All of the above examples can at least
provisionally be understood in these terms. American eels have a
510 AVISE ET AL
catadromous life history-mass spawning takes place in the western tropical
mid-Atlantic
Ocean, and larvae
are
transported (perhaps
passively) to coastal
regions by ocean currents. Young eels mature
in freshwater
before completing
the life cycle by migrating
back to the mid-Atlantic for spawning. Thus, any
freshwater
population
in the Americas may contain a nearly
random draw of
genotypes from what is effectively a single mating pool. The eel life-history
pattern
is highly unusual, but other marine
fishes, such as the marine
catfish
which are active swimmers
as adults, may also prove
to exhibit the "category-
IV"
phylogeographic pattern (8, 16, 48). Marine fish occupy a realm relative-
ly free of solid geographic
barriers
to dispersal (at least over major portions
of
their ranges and in comparison
to those of their freshwater
counterparts that
are necessarily confined to specific drainages
for moderate
lengths of evolu-
tionary time). Many marine fishes also possess great dispersal capabilities,
either as pelagic larvae, juveniles, and/or adults.
Birds constitute another group of potentially highly mobile animals for
which the "category-IV"
phylogeographic pattern may prove to be common.
For example, populations
of the red-winged blackbird,
Agelaius phoeniceus,
(the only avian species extensively assayed at the time of this writing)
exhibited very limited mtDNA phylogeographic
structure across all of North
America (Table 1). Red-winged blackbirds are known to be moderately
nest-site philopatric (average distances between banding and recovery at
nesting sites in successive years are generally less than 50 km; 37), so the
documentation
of a "category-IV"
pattern clearly cannot be taken to imply
panmixia or even long-distance gene flow on a generation-to-generation
scale. Rather, we suspect that these blackbirds (and other species in
phylogeographic category IV) have had a relative fluidity of movement (in
birds, obviously facilitated
by the capacity
for flight) over a recent
evolution-
ary
time scale such that
populations
have been in solid genetic contact
within,
perhaps, the last few tens of thousands of generations (see next section).
For humans, assays of mtDNA from individuals of diverse racial and
geographic
origin revealed
only a weak tendency
for phylogenetic
structuring
of groups, according
to Cann
et al (33; see also 24, 27, 30, 31, 32). Based on
a conventional mtDNA clock calibration of 2% nucleotide sequence di-
vergence per million years, Cann et al (31) proposed a mean interracial
divergence
time in humans
of about
50,000 years, and Brown (24) and Cann
et al (33) hypothesized a common (female) ancestor for all humans about
200,000 years ago. Cann et al -(33)
also argue
from the mtDNA data that
this
female ancestor lived in Africa. For any species whose numbers and ranges
have expanded dramatically
from a single refugium or place of origin in
recent evolutionary times, mtDNA phylogeographic differentiation should
similarly be quite limited.
Using independently
obtained data, Johnson et al (57) report a greater
degree of geographic
and racial clustering
of human
mtDNA genotypes than
PRINCIPLES
OF mtDNA
PHYLOGEOGRAPHY 511
did the Cann et al (31, 32, 33) research group. MtDNA genotypes
thought to
be ancestral for humans were geographically
and racially widespread, but
genotypes presumed
derived
were often race specific. Thus, according
to the
Johnson et al data (57; see also 94), humans are better characterized
as
exhibiting the category-V phylogeographic
pattern (see below).
Category V-Phylogenetic Continuity,
Partial Spatial
Separation
The four phylogeographic
categories listed above are of course somewhat
arbitrarily
selected though distinct points from a wide field of possibilities.
We include
category
V here and
in Figure
4 only to provide
an
example
of one
type of intermediate situation. In this category, some mtDNA genotypes are
geographically
widespread,
while allied genotypes
are
localized, such that the
overall pattern is one of a nested series of phylogeographic
relationships.
Besides humans, we have already mentioned one other example. In the
eastern
mtDNA clonal assemblage
of the bowfin fish Amia calva (Figure 3),
mtDNA genotype 1 was present
in nine of ten surveyed
river
drainages, while
each of eight other genotypes was apparently
confined to one or a few
adjacent
drainages
within the range of genotype 1. A reasonable
hypothesis
for this eastern assemblage is that genotype 1 is plesiomorphic
(ancestral),
while the other genotypes are apomorphic
(derived). Individual
fish sharing
the derived states
(i.e. possessing synapomorphic
mtDNA traits)
form
various
monophyletic
groups (with respect
to maternal
ancestry). But because of the
possibility of joint retention of the ancestral
condition, individuals sharing
genotype 1 do not necessarily
form a clade within the eastern
assemblage
of
bowfin (although
compared
to bowfin in the western
drainages,
they may still
form a broader
clade including all eastern genotypes).
Phylogeographic
category V might be anticipated
in species or subsets of
species with historically
intermediate levels of gene flow between geographic
populations. Thus, unlike category III, presumed
ancestral
genotypes occur
over a broad
area;
while unlike category
IV, newly arisen mutations have not
yet spread throughout
the range of a species. Nonetheless, in practice this
intermediate
situation may normally
be difficult to distinguish clearly from
categories III or IV, respectively (Table 1).
MTDNA EVOLUTIONARY
TREES ARE SELF-PRUNING
mtDNA transmission
is the female analogue
of "male surname transmission"
in many human societies: Progeny of both sexes inherit mitochondria
from
their mothers, but only daughters
subsequently
transmit
mtDNA to future
generations.
Thus, mtDNA (and surnames)
are examples of asexually trans-
mitted traits
within
otherwise
sexually reproducing
species. Realistic statistic-
al models of mtDNA evolution must accommodate this mode of inheritance;
512 AVISE ET AL
they must also somehow account for the empirical
rarity
of major mtDNA
phylogenetic gaps within local populations
(category II, Figure 4), and the
common occurrence
of monophyletic
groupings among
allopatric
populations
(categories I and III, Figure 4). The method of applying
generating
functions
to the distributions
of family size in a branching process (51) is a relevant
probabilistic approach that has been used to study the dynamics of surnames
(65, 66, 82) as well as mtDNA lineages (15, 73).
Assume, for example, that adult females within a population produce
daughters
according
to a Poisson distribution
with mean
,. The probability of
loss of a given female lineage after one generation
(or the proportion
of such
lineages lost from the population)
is then e- , and
the probability of loss after
G generations is given by the generating function PG = e4X- 1), where x
equals the probability
of loss in the previous generation
(82). (Generating
functions are also available for other parametric
family size distributions,
such as the binomial.) In the Poisson case, if mothers
leave on average one
surviving daughter, about 37% of the maternal
lineages will by chance go
extinct in the first generation, and less than 2% of the original mothers will
likely have successfully contributed mtDNA molecules to the population 100
generations later.
Avise et al (15) used an extension
of this approach
to estimate
probabilities
(iT) of survival
of two or more independent
mtDNA lineages through
time. In
the Poisson situation, with ,u (and hence also the variance, v) equal to 1.0,
within about 4n generations
all individuals within a stable-sized population
begun with n females will with high probability
trace maternal
ancestries to a
single foundress
(Figure 7); and
the times in generations
to intermediate levels
of iT are roughly n to 2n. That is, all mtDNA sequence differences would
almost certainly
have arisen less than 4n generations earlier
and more prob-
ably within n to 2n generations.
Lineage sorting
can be much
more
rapid
than
this when the variance in progeny numbers across females is greater. For
example, in computer
simulations
where females produced
daughters
accord-
ing to a negative binomial distribution with , = 1.0 and v = 5.0, individuals
invariably stemmed from a single female ancestor
less than 2n generations
earlier (Figure 7). The variances in progeny survival between families are
probably large in many species.
In general
then, stochastic mtDNA lineage extinction
within a population
is
expected to occur at a (counterintuitively)
rapid pace, with the net effect of
continually
truncating
the frequency spectrum
of times to common mtDNA
ancestry. In other words, due simply to the stochastic lineage turnover
associated with the vagaries of reproduction,
mtDNA evolutionary
trees are
continually "self-pruning."
This line of reasoning may largely account for
limited mtDNA sequence divergence values (e.g. p usually much less then
about 0.01) observed within local populations,
or within entire species char-
PRINCIPLES OF mtDNA PHYLOGEOGRAPHY 513
1.0 .0 ;
n1 POISSON
1, l
0.9 \,=20~ LI9O
nz2 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~NEGATIVE
0.8 \ ~~~\08 BINOMIAL
0.7 0d n = 65
f
' d n n
0.6 n=1 0 w m 0.6 1 t 0 1 5.
05 \n=6 \\n n,0 0 -0r005
0.4\ 0.4-
0.3 03h vo20.0
0.2 \ \ \\ \ \ " 0.2
gaps
wihn sol mayseis(al loipisteoeaino rcse
I 10 lo 102 30 104 105 10 102 103
G G
Figure 7 left: Solid lines are theoretical
probabilities
(,Tr)
of survival
of two or more mtDNA
lineages through
G generations
within populations
founded by n females producing daughters
according
to a Poisson distribution
with mean 1.0. Dashed
lines are conditional
probabilities
(7re)
that two or more lineages survive, given that the population remains
extant. Right:
ie values
within populations
founded by n = 65 females producing daughters according to a negative
binomial distribution
with mean 1.0 and variances (v) ranging from 1.1 to 20.0 (from 15).
acterized by historically high levels of gene flow and/or recent expansion
from a single refugium.
On the other
hand, the empirical
existence of major
mtDNA phylogenetic
gaps within so many species (Table 1) also implies the operation
of processes
acting dramatically
to inhibit extinction of some mtDNA clades, such that
much larger genetic differences than those normally observed within pop-
ulations have had time to accumulate. Since such phylogenetic gaps are
almost invariably
observed between allopatric
populations,
it seems reason-
able that long-term
population
isolation is responsible. Suppose a particular
species has been subdivided
historically
into two or more spatially isolated
populations. Although the genetic distances between lineages within each
population will be limited by the balance between the rate of novel mtDNA
mutations and female lineage extinction, at least one mtDNA lineage per
extant population will be retained
indefinitely, and the distinction
between
these mtDNA lineages could be no less than that which
had
accumulated
since
the time of the original population
separation.
Neigel & Avise (73) have, by computer
simulation
of branching processes,
formalized
these latter ideas and couched them
in the language
of systematics.
(Our models were developed for "species differences"
in mtDNA, but they
apply equally well to expected relationships
between spatially isolated con-
specific populations).
Suppose
that
from
ancestral
stock, populations
A and
B
have separated
recently (less than about n generations
earlier,
where n is the
514 AVISE
ET AL
carrying capacity of females in each daughter population).
Then because of
stochastic
mtDNA lineage sorting at and subsequent
to population
separation,
it is likely that some individuals within A are in reality more closely related
(i.e. have shared
a female ancestor more recently) to some individuals of B
than they are to other
members
of A; and
conversely, some members of B are
phylogenetically
closer to some A's than to some B's. Populations A and B
could thus be said to be polyphyletic in matriarchal ancestry. However,
through time mtDNA lineage extinction continues inexorably within pop-
ulations, such that after about 3n to 4n generations, populations
A and B
would with high probability
appear monophyletic
with respect
to one another.
At intermediate times of separation
from
ancestral stock, populations
A and
B
could reasonably
be expected to exhibit a paraphyletic
relationship. Figure 8
plots results of a typical computer simulation summarizing
probabilities
of
poly-, para-, and monophyly of isolated populations as a function of time
since population separation.
These times were observed under the Poisson
distribution
of family size. For larger
variances
in progeny
numbers (or when
founder effect is severe), expected times to reciprocal
monophyly of pop-
ulations would be even lower. Thus, particularly
for species composed of
many small demes (and limited gene flow between them), allopatric pop-
ulations should
often be monophyletic
in matriarchal
ancestry. Whether
or not
they would appear
to be so in an mtDNA survey might well depend on the
level of laboratory effort expended (i.e. the number of restriction sites
assayed) in the search for synapomorphic character states. The larger
phylogenetic gaps (category I, Figure 4) should occur between demic arrays
1.0 - II_.
p 0.5\ /
N 2N 3N 4N
GEN.
Figure 8 Example of results from computer simulations monitoring probabilities (P) of
monophyly (curve I), polyphyly (II) and paraphyly (III a,b) of two isolated populations G
generations after their separation from ancestral stock (from 73). In each of 400 replicate
simulations, the daughter populations
were founded by 300 and 200 individuals, respectively,
drawn at random from an ancestral stock. The daughter
populations
were subsequently
density
regulated
at carrying capacities
k = 300 and
k = 200 by constraining
the mean number of female
progeny per mother as follows: ,t = e(k-1)/k. N is equal to 300.
PRINCIPLES
OF mtDNA
PHYLOGEOGRAPHY 515
isolated for especially long periods
of time and should be easiest to detect (as
well as most strongly
supported
statistically
by procedures
such as bootstrap-
ping; Figure 3C).
Can these models be related to observed rates of mtDNA evolution and
census population
sizes in more concrete fashion?
From
empirical
experience,
individuals in localized geographic areas, and in entire species in
phylogeographic
category IV, usually show estimates of mtDNA nucleotide
sequence divergence much less than about
p = 0.008. Using Brown et al's
(28) conventional
mtDNA clock calibration,
this implies an upper bound on
times since common female ancestry
of about
400,000 years. This would be
roughly compatible
with expectations
for a population
(or set of populations
well inteconnected
by gene flow) of perhaps
n 400,000 females, provided
the population
has a generation
length of 1 year, has been fairly stable
in size,
and has ,u and v near 1.0. But because branching process theory yields only
probabilistic
outcomes, and because mtDNA lineage survivorship
is likely to
have a large stochastic component, it would not at all be surprising
for that
same population
to have been of size anywhere
from, say, n = 200,000 to
1,000,000 or more (Figure
7). And some very different
demographic
scenar-
ios would not be ruled out. For example, absolute population
size could have
been vastly larger throughout
much of the evolution of the species, but by
chance, two mtDNA lineages dating to 400,000 years ago happened to
squeeze through
more recent
bottlenecks
in population
size. Thus, evolution-
ary reconstructions regarding
population
size and times of ancestry
should be
presented
with due caution; and for most populations, we may never have
direct and detailed knowledge of historical demography
against which to
evaluate possible inferences from present-day
mtDNA diversities.
Nonetheless, unless the rate of mtDNA evolution is anomalously
high in
particular
populations, the major phylogeographic
gaps observed in many
species strongly suggest long times since common female ancestry
for some
conspecifics-much longer than is observed empirically within local pop-
ulations. For example, from the mtDNA data for the eastern
versus western
monophyletic groupings of the redear
sunfish Lepomis microlophus
(Figure
6), mean population
separation
(corrected
for within-region
divergence) oc-
curred about 4 million years ago, and some mtDNA lineages within the
species may date to as much as 5 million years B P (20). Similar values apply
to allopatric
clades within several other species in Table 1.
ECOGEOGRAPHY
AND PHYLOGEOGRAPHY
Data on within-species variability in mtDNA thus lend themselves to ex-
amination
from two vantages: (a) phylogenetic interrelationships
among the
mtDNA molecules themselves and (b) geographic distributions of the
516 AVISE ET AL
phylogenetic groupings. Jointly, these elements constitute concerns of a
discipline that might be termed intraspecific phylogeography.
Notwithstanding
occasional examples of concern with the influence of
historical population subdivision in shaping genetic architecture at the in-
traspecific level (e.g. 2, 75), attention seems more conventionally to have
been focused on possible adaptive
explanations (the "adaptationist paradigm")
for geographic
differences
in attributes such as morphology
or behavior
(47).
One line of evidence for this preoccupation
has been the formulation
of
several "ecogeographic
rules"
summarizing recognizable
trends
in presumed
adaptive responses to geographically
varying
environmental conditions (23).
For example, Bergmann's
rule notes a tendency in homeotherms for larger
body sizes at higher latitudes (presumably
a surface/volume
adaptation
for
heat conservation
in colder climates);
Allen's rule notes a latitudinal trend
in
lengths of limbs (shorter extremities may similarly conserve heat in cold
climates); and Gloger's rule notes a tendency
for populations
in humid areas
to be more heavily pigmented (probably a manifestation of selection for
background-matching
related
to predation
and competition).
While these and
other ecogeographic rules at best represent general trends with many ex-
ceptions (98), they have been provocative
and informative
constructs.
In this
same spirit, we want to suggest several
phylogeographic
hypotheses
that may
serve as a stimulus for further considerations
of geographic trends in in-
traspecific phylogeny.
We take it as axiomatic that the extended pedigree within any species
constitutes
its intraspecific phylogeny and that
genes transmitted
through
this
pedigree can in principle provide genealogical tracings
of hereditary
history.
As emphasized, data from mtDNA allow estimation of one specified com-
ponent of the pedigree-the matriarchal
phylogeny. Thus, the historical
picture recorded in mtDNA is far from a complete characterization of in-
traspecific phylogeny, and that picture may be especially distorted
if males
and females differ in phylogeographically
relevant characteristics,
such as
variances
in progeny numbers
or levels of dispersal (87, 88). Yet techniques
of mtDNA assay have provided
the first extensive and readily
accessible data
in the form of "gene genealogies" at the intraspecific
level. The following
phylogeographic
hypotheses are motivated by the mtDNA data and theory
currently
available and are offered within that context.
Phylogeographic Hypotheses
(a) Most species are composed of geographic populations whose members
occupy different
branches of an intraspecific, phylogenetic tree. Such geo-
graphic partitioning
of phylogenetic
branches can be termed
phylogeographic
population
structure.
The magnitude
of genetic distance between branches
can
range from small to great, but not uncommonly, geographic clades are
distinguished
by large phylogenetic gaps or breaks.
PRINCIPLES OF mtDNA PHYLOGEOGRAPHY 517
(b) Species with limited phylogeographic
population structure have life
histories conducive to dispersal and have occupied ranges free of firm
impediments to gene flow. Such species have had a relative fluidity of
geographic movement over recent evolutionary
time and may be especially
common in certain groups such as flying insects, birds, and marine fishes, or
in species such as the human that have expanded recently from a single
refugium. Genealogical
distances
within such species are constrained because
of the inevitable extinction
of lineages expected within populations behaving
as a single demographic
unit in evolution.
(c) Monophyletic groups distinguished
by large phylogenetic gaps usually
arise from long-term
extrinsic (zoogeographic) barriers to gene flow. Since
reproduction leads to a continual turnover
of lineages, isolated populations
should evolve through
time to a condition of reciprocal monophyly, and the
time of isolation
should be positively correlated
(all else being equal) with the
magnitude of genealogical differentiation.
This hypothesis has a series of
corollaries that also serve as predictions for further
empirical tests of the
expectation:
(i) As time since isolation increases, the degree of phYlogeographic
concordance across
separate gene genealogies increases. That is, phylogenetic differentiation between long-
isolated
populations (either
in refugia
or in situ) should be reflected in appropriate assays of
numerous nuclear as well as cytoplasmic genes.
(ii) The geographic placements of phvlogenetic
gaps are concordant across species. That
is, long-term barriers to gene flow should tend to mold the intraspecific genetic
architectures
of species with similar life histories in geographically
concordant fashion.
(iii) Phvlogenetic gaps within species are geographically concordant with boundaries
between traditionally recognized zoogeographic provinces. That is, to the extent that
biogeographic provinces
reflected
in species' distributional limits exist because of environ-
mental barriers to gene flow, such barriers
may also tend to result in geographic con-
centrations
of boundaries
between well-differentiated clades within species.
Whether or not these hypotheses are confirmed with additional
data, we
feel that concern
with intraspecific phylogeography
should assume a place in
evolutionary study at least commensurate with ecogeography. Indeed,
ecogeography will also benefit from this new enterprise. Let us give two
empirical examples. In the deer mouse Peromyscus maniculatus,
mammalo-
gists have recognized two distinct morphotypes-a long-tailed, long-eared
form typically associated
with forest environments,
and a short-tailed,
short-
eared form more characteristic of grasslands
(21). Data from mtDNA clearly
indicate that at least with respect to matriarchal
ancestry, these morphotypes
do not constitute separate
evolutionary
clades (61). The extensive mtDNA
phylogenetic structure
in P. maniculatus across North America is strongly
oriented to geography
and bears no consistent relationship
to these morpho-
logical distinctions. Such findings add support
to earlier
suggestions that the
518 AVISE ET AL
ear and tail length differences
represent
selection-driven
responses to ecologi-
cal challenges posed by forests and grassland
and have arisen more than
once
in separate evolutionary
lines. For a counterexample,
in the bluegill sunfish
Lepomis macrochirus, ichthyologists
have also recognized
two distinct mor-
phological and physiological forms (56). In this case the morphological
"races" proved to belong to highly divergent branches in an intraspecific
evolutionary
tree (Figure 5; 11, 12). This of course
in no way excludes natural
selection as a possible factor influencing
the evolution of these racial differ-
ences.
In a recent review of geographic variation in allozymes, Selander &
Whittam (79) concluded: "studies of protein polymorphisms
indicate that a
great
variety of organisms,
ranging
from bacteria to humans .. ., are strongly
structured
genetically and that their evolution cannot be understood
without
reference
to this structure."
Data from mtDNA have revealed
an even greater
degree of population
structure
for many species. But more importantly,
the
nature
of assayable mtDNA differences has allowed relatively unambiguous
documentation
of a strong
phylogenetic
component
to geographic
differentia-
tion. Most species have a rich phylogeographic
diversity characterized by
localized clades and, not infrequently,
important
phylogenetic gaps between
allopatric
populations.
Many mtDNA lineages within
species date to common
ancestors several million years BP. Thus, no longer will it be defensible to
consider
species as phylogenetically
monolithic entities
in scenarios
of specia-
tion or macroevolution. Phylogenetic differences within species are quali-
tatively of the same kind as, though often smaller in magnitude
than, those
normally pictured
in higher-order
phylogeny reconstructions.
To paraphrase
and update the statement
by Selander & Whittam
quoted above: Studies of
mtDNA polymorphisms
indicate that
a great
many species are strongly
struc-
tured phylogenetically and that their evolution cannot be fully understood
without references to this intraspecific
phylogeographic
structure.
SUMMARY
Mitochondrial
DNA has provided the first extensive and readily accessible
data available to evolutionists in a form suitable for strong genealogical
inference at the intraspecific level. The rapid pace of mtDNA nucleotide
substitution, coupled with the special mode of maternal nonrecombining
mtDNA inheritance,
offers advantages
for phylogenetic
analysis
at the micro-
evolutionary
level that
will not be matched
easily by any nuclear
gene system.
These peculiarities of mtDNA data have literally forced the addition of a
phylogenetic perspective
to studies of intraspecific
evolutionary process and
as such have provided an empirical and conceptual bridge between the
nominally rather
separate
disciplines of systematics
and population
genetics.
PRINCIPLES
OF mtDNA PHYLOGEOGRAPHY 519
MtDNA has also served to clarify thinking
about the distinction
between (yet
relevance of) gene genealogies to organismal
phylogeny.
Many species have proved
to exhibit a deep and geographically
structured
mtDNA phylogenetic history. Study of the relationship between genealogy
and geography constitutes a discipline that can be termed intraspecific
phylogeography. We present several phylogeographic
hypotheses that were
motivated
by available data and that
represent
possible trends
whose broader
generality
remains
to be tested. Study
of intraspecific
phylogeography
should
assume a place in evolutionary biology at least commensurate
with that of
ecogeography, with mutual benefit resulting
to both disciplines. Theories of
speciation and macroevolution
must now recognize and accommodate the
reality of phylogeographic
differentiation
at the intraspecific
level.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We wish to thank Dr. Bob Lansman for introducing us to mitochondrial
DNA. John C. Avise's laboratory
has been supported
by grants
from NSF.
Publication costs were funded by contract DE-AC09-76SR00-819 between
the US Department
of Energy and the University of Georgia Institute of
Ecology.
Literature
Cited
1. Abbott, R. 1957. The tropical western
Atlantic province. Proc. Phila. Shell
Club 1:7-11
2. Ammerman, A. J., Cavalli-Sforza, L.
L. 1984. The Neolithic Transition and
the Genetics of Populations in Europe.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton
Univ. Press
3. Aquadro,
C. F., Greenberg,
B. D. 1983.
Human mitochondrial DNA variation
and evolution: Analysis of nucleotide
sequences from seven individuals. Ge-
nietics 103:287-312
4. Aquadro, C. F., Kaplan, N., Risko, K.
J. 1984. An analysis of the dynamics
of
mammalian mitochondrial DNA se-
quence evolution. Molec. Biol. Evol.
1:423-34
5. Asmussen, M. A., Arnold, J., Avise, J.
C. 1987. Definition and properties of
disequilibrium
statistics for associations
between nuclear and cytoplasmic
genotypes. Genetics. 115:755-68
6. Avise, J. C. 1983. Protein variation
and
phylogenetic reconstruction.
In Protein
Variation:
Adaptive
and Taxonomic
Sig-
nificance, ed. G. Oxford, D. Rollinson,
pp. 103-30. London:
Syst. Assoc. Publ.
Br. Mus. Nat. History
7. Avise, J. C. 1986. Mitochondrial
DNA
and the evolutionary genetics of higher
animals. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond.
B312:325-42
8. Avise, J. C. 1987. Identification
and in-
terpretation of mitochondrial DNA
stocks in marine
species. In Proc. Stock
Identification Workshop,
ed. H. Kumpf,
E. L. Nakamura,
pp. Panama
City, FL:
Publ. Natl. Oceanogr. Atmos. Admin.
In press
9. Avise, J. C., Ayala, F. J. 1975. Genetic
change and
rates of cladogenesis. Genet-
ics 81:757-73
10. Avise, J. C., Lansman, R. A. 1983.
Polymorphism
of mitochondrial
DNA in
populations
of higher animals. In Evolu-
tion of Genes and Proteins, ed. M. Nei,
R. K. Koehn, pp. 147-64. Sunderland,
Mass: Sinauer
11. Avise, J. C., Smith, M. H. 1974.
Biochemical
genetics of sunfish. I. Geo-
graphic variation and subspecific in-
tergradation in the bluegill, Lepomis
macrochirus. Evolution 28:42-56
12. Avise, J. C., Bermingham, E., Kessler,
L. G., Saunders,
N. C. 1984. Character-
ization of mitochondrial
DNA variability
in a hybrid
swarm between subspecies of
bluegill sunfish (Lepomis
macrochirus).
Evolution 38:931-41
13. Avise, J. C., Giblin-Davidson, G.,
520 AVISE FT Al.
Laerm, J., Patton, J. C., Lansman, R.
A. 1979. Mitochondrial DNA clones
and matriarchal
phylogeny within and
among geographic populations of the
pocket gopher, Geomvs pinetis. Proc.
Natl. Acad. Aci. USA 76:6694-98
14. Avise, J. C., Helfman, G. S.. Saunders,
N. C., Hales, L. S. 1986. Mitochondrial
DNA differentiation in North Atlantic
eels: Population genetic consequences
of
an unusual life history pattern. Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 83:4350-54
15. Avise, J. C., Neigel, J. E., Arnold, J.
1984. Demographic
influences on mito-
chondrial DNA lineage survivorship
in
animal populations. J. Mol. Evol.
20:99-105
16. Avise, J. C., Reeb, C. A., Saunders,
N.
C. 1987. Geographic population struc-
ture and
species differences in mitochon-
drial DNA of mouthbrooding marine
catfishes (Ariidae)
and demersal
spawn-
ing toadfishes (Batrachoididae).
Evolu-
lion. In press
17. Avise, J. C., Shapira,
J. F., Daniel, S.
W., Aquadro, C. F., Lansman, R. A.
1983. Mitochondrial DNA differentia-
tion during the speciation process in
Peromvscus. Mol. Biol. Evol. 1:38-
56
18. Ayala, F. J., ed. 1976. Molecular
Evolution. Sunderland,
Mass: Sinauer
19. Bermingham, E., Avise, J. C. 1986.
Molecular zoogeography of freshwater
fishes in the southeastern United States.
Genetics 113:939-65
20. Bermingham, E., Lamb, T., Avise, J.
C. 1986. Size polymorphism
and hetero-
plasmy in the mitochondrial DNA of
lower vertebrates.
J. Hereditv 77:249-
52
21. Blair, W. F. 1950. Ecological factors in
speciation of Peromyscus. Evolution
4:253-75
22. Briggs, J. C. 1974. Marine Zoogeogra-
phv. New York: McGraw-Hill
23. Brown, J. H., Gibson, A. C. 1983.
Biogeographv. St. Louis, Mo: C. V.
Mosby
24. Brown, W. M. 1980. Polymorphism
in
mitochondrial DNA of humans as re-
vealed by restriction endonuclease anal-
ysis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
77:3605-9
25. Brown, W. M. 1983. Evolution of an-
imal mitochondrial
DNA. In Evolution
of Genes and Proteins, ed. M. Nei, R.
K. Koehn, pp. 62-88. Sunderland,
Mass: Sinauer
26. Brown, W. M. 1985. The mitochondrial
genome of animals. In Molecular Evolu-
tionarv Genetics, ed. R. J. Maclntyre
pp. 95-130. New York: Plenum
27. Brown, W. M., Goodman,
H. M. 1979.
Quantitation of intrapopulation
variation
by restriction
analysis of human mito-
chondrial DNA. In Extrachromosomal
DNA, ed. D. J. Cummings, P. Borst, I.
B. Dawid, S. M. Weissman, C. F. Fox,
pp. 485-500. New York: Academic
28. Brown, W. M., George, M. Jr., Wilson,
A. C. 1979. Rapid evolution of animal
mitochondrial DNA. Proc. Natl. Acad.
Sci. USA 76:1967-71
29. Brown, W. M., Prager, E. M., Wang,
A., Wilson, A. C. 1982. Mitochondrial
DNA sequences of primates:
Tempo and
mode of evolution. J. Mol. Evol.
18:225-39
30. Cann. R. L., Wilson, A. C. 1983.
Length mutations in human mitochon-
drial DNA. Genetics 104:699-711
31. Cann, R. L., Brown, W. M., Wilson,
A. C. 1982. Evolution of human
mitochondrial DNA: A preliminary
re-
port. In Human Genetics, Part A, The
unfolding genome, ed. B. Bonne-Tamir,
P. Cohen, and R. N. Goodman, pp.
157-65. New York: Liss
32. Cann, R. L., Brown, W. M., Wilson,
A. C. 1984. Polymorphic sites and the
mechanism of evolution of human
mitochondrial DNA. Genetics 106:479-
99
33. Cann. R. L., Stoneking, M., Wilson, A.
C. 1987. Mitochondrial DNA and hu-
man evolution. Nature 325:31-36
34. Chapman, R. W., Stephens, J. C.,
Lansman, R. A., Avise, J. C. 1982.
Models of mitochondrial DNA transmis-
sion genetics and
evolution in higher
eu-
caryotes. Genet. Res. 40:41-57
35. Crow, J. F., Kimura, M. 1970. An In-
troduction to Population Genetic
Theorv. New York: Harper & Row
36. Dobzhansky,
T. 1937. Genetics and the
Origin of Species. New York:
Columbia
Univ. Press
37. Dolbeer, R. A. 1978. Movement and
migration
patterns
of red-winged
black-
birds: A continental overview. Bird
Banding 49:17-34
38. Eldrege, N., Gould, S. J. 1972. Punctu-
ated
equilibria:
An alternative to phyletic
gradualism.
In Models in Paleobiology,
ed. T. J. M. Schopf, pp. 82-115. San
Francisco, Calif: Freeman, Cooper
39. Falconer, D. S. 1981. Introduction to
Quantitative
Genetics New York:
Long-
man. 2nd ed.
40. Felsenstein, J. 1982. Numerical
methods
for inferring
evolutionary
trees.
Q. Rev. Biol. 57:379-404
41. Felsenstein, J. 1985. Confidence limits
on phylogenies: An approach utilizing
the bootstrap.
Evolution 39:783-91
PRINCIPLES OF mtDNA PHYLOGEOGRAPHY 521
42. Fink, W. L. 1986. Microcomputers and
phylogenetic analysis. Science 234:
1135-39
43. George, M. Jr, Ryder, 0. A. 1986.
Mitochondrial DNA evolution in the
genus Equus. Mol. Biol. Evol. 3:535-46
44. Gillespie, J. H. 1986. Rates of molecu-
lar evolution. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst.
17:637-65
45. Goldschmidt, R. 1940. The Material
Basis of Evolution. New Haven, Conn:
Yale Univ. Press
46. Gould, S. J. 1980. Is a new and general
theory of evolution emerging? Paleobi-
ology 6:119-30
47. Gould, S. J., Lewontin, R. C. 1979.
The spandrels
of San Marco
and the Pan-
glossian paradigm: A critique of the
adaptationist programme. Proc. Royal
Soc. London Ser. B 205:581-98
48. Graves, J. E., Ferris, S. D., Dizon, A.
E. 1984. Close genetic similarity of
Atlantic and Pacific skipjack tuna (Kat-
suwonus pelamis) demonstrated with
restriction endonuclease analysis of
mitochondrial DNA. Mar. Biol. 79:315-
19
49. Grivell, L. A. 1983. Mitochondrial
DNA. Sci. Am. 248:78-89
50. Gyllensten, U., Wharton, D., Wilson,
A. C. 1985. Material inheritance of
mitochondrial
DNA during backcrossing
of two species of mice. J. Hered.
76:321-24
51. Harris, T. 1963. The Theory of Branch-
ing Processes. Berlin: Springer-Verlag
52. Hauswirth,
W. W., Laipis, P. J. 1985.
Transmission genetics of mammalian
mitochondria:
A molecular model and
experimental
evidence. In Achievements
and Perspectives of Mitochondrial Re-
search, Vol. II: Biogenesis, ed. E.
Quagliariello, E. C. Slater, F. Palmieri,
C. Saccone, A. M. Kroon, pp. 49-60.
New York: Elsevier
53. Hecht, M. K., Hoffman, A. 1986. Why
not neo-Darwinism? A critique of
paleobiological challenges. Oxford
Surv. Evol. Biol. 3:1-47
54. Hedrick, P. W. 1983. Genetics of Pop-
ulations. New York: Van Nostrand
Reinhold
55. Hennig, W. 1966. Phylogenetic Sys-
tematics. Urbana:
Univ. Ill. Press
56. Hubbs, C. L., Allen, E. R. 1944. Fishes
of Silver Springs, Florida. Proc. Fla.
Acad. Sci. 6:110-30
57. Johnson, M. J., Wallace, D. C., Ferris,
S. D., Rattazzi, M. C., Cavalli-Sforza,
L. L. 1983. Radiation of human
mitochondrial
DNA types analyzed by
restriction endonuclease cleavage pat-
terns. J. Mol. Evol. 19:255-71
58. Kimura, M., Ohta,
T. 1971. Theoretical
Aspects of Population Genetics. Prince-
ton, NJ: Princeton
Univ. Press
59. King, J. L., Jukes, T. H. 1969. Non-
Darwinian evolution: Random fixation
of selectively neutral mutations.
Science
164:788-98
60. Lansman,
R. A., Avise, J. C., Huettel,
M. D. 1983. Critical experimental
test
of the possibility of "patemal
leakage"
of mitochondrial DNA. Proc. Natl.
Acad. Sci. USA 80:1969-71
61. Lansman,
R. A., Avise, J. C., Aquadro,
C. F., Shapira, J. F., Daniel, S. W.
1983. Extensive genetic variation in
mitochondrial
DNAs among geographic
populations of the deer mouse, Per-
omyscus maniculatus. Evolution 37:1-
16
62. Lansman,
R. A., Shade, R. O., Shapira,
J. F., Avise, J. C. 1981. The use of
restriction endonucleases to measure
mitochondrial DNA sequence related-
ness in natural populations. III. Tech-
niques and potential applications. J.
Mol. Evol. 17:214-26
63. Lewontin, R. C. 1974. The Genetic
Basis of Evolutionary
Change. Colum-
bia Univ. Press, NY.
64. Li, C. C. 1955. Population Genetics.
Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
65. Lotka, A. J. 1931. Population analy-
sis-the extinction of families. I. J.
Wash. Acad. Sci. 21:453-59
66. Lotka, A. J. 1931. Population analy-
sis-the extinction of families. II. J.
Wash. Acad. Sci. 21:453-59
67. Mayr, E. 1963. Animal Species and
Evolution. Cambridge, Mass: Belknap
Press, Harvard
68. Mayr, E. 1982. Speciation and macro-
evolution. Evolution
36:1119-32
69. Moritz, C., Brown, W. M. 1986. Tan-
dem duplication
of D-loop and ribosom-
al RNA sequences
in lizard mitochondri-
al DNA. Science 233:1425-27
70. Nei, M. 1975. Molecular Population
Genetics and Evolution. New York:
Elsevier
71. Nei, M. 1987. Molecular Evolutionary
Genetics. New York: Columbia Univ.
Press
72. Nei, M., Li, W.-H. 1979. Mathematical
model for studying genetic variation
in
terms of restriction endonucleases.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
76:5269-73
73. Neigel, J. E., Avise, J. C. 1986.
Phylogenetic relationships
of mitochon-
drial DNA under various demographic
models of speciation. In Evolutionary
Processes and Theory, ed. E. Nevo, S.
Karlin, pp. 515-34. New York: Aca-
demic
522 AVISE ET AL
74. O'Brien, T. W., Denslow, N. D., Har-
ville, T. O., Hessler, R. A., Matthews,
D. E. 1980. Functional and structural
roles of proteins in mammalian
mitochondrial
ribosomes. In The Orga-
nization and Expression of the Mito-
chondrial
Genome, ed. A. M. Kroon, C.
Saccone, pp. 301-305. New York: Else-
vier
75. Ochman, H., Jones, J. S., Selander, R.
K. 1983. Molecular area effects in
Cepaea. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
80:4189-93
76. Rand, D. M., Harrison, R. G. 1986.
Mitochondrial DNA transmission genetL
ics in crickets. Genetics 114:955-70.
77. Saunders,
N. C., Kessler, L. G., Avise,
J. C. 1986. Genetic variation and geo-
graphic differentiation
in mitochondrial
DNA of the horeshoe crab, Limulus
polyphemus. Genetics 112:613-27
78. Schweyen, R. J., Wolf, K., Kaudewitz,
F. eds. 1983. Mitochondria 1983, Nuc-
leo-Mitochondrial Interactions. New
York: de Gruyter Publ.
79. Selander, R. K., Whittam, T. S. 1983.
Protein polymorphism and the genetic
structure of populations. In Evolution of
Genes and Proteins, ed. M. Nei, R. K.
Koehn, pp. 89-114. Sunderland,
Mass:
Sinauer
80. Simpson, G. G. 1944. Tempo
and Mode
in Evolution. New York: Columbia
Univ. Press
81. Sneathz P. H. A., Sokal, R. R. 1973.
Numerical Taxonomy. San Francisco:
W. H. Freeman
82. Spiess, E. B. 1977. Genes in Pop-
ulations. New York: Wiley
83. Stebbins, G. L., Ayala, F. J. 1981. Is a
new evolutionary synthesis necessary?
Science 213:967-71
84. Swift, C. C., Gilbert, C. R., Bortone, S.
A., Burgess, G. H., Yerger, R. W.
1986. Zoogeography of the freshwater
fishes of the southeastern
United States:
Savannah River to Lake Ponchartrain.
In
Zoogeography of North American
Freshwater
Fishes, ed. C. H. Hocutt,
E.
0. Wiley, pp. 213-65. New York:
Wiley-
85. Tajima, F. 1983. Evolutionary
relation-
ship of DNA sequences in finite pop-
ulations. Genetics 105:437-60
86. Takahata,
N. 1985. Population genetics
of extranuclear
genomes:-
A model and
review. In Population Genetics and
Molecular Evolution, ed. T. Ohta, K.
Aoki, pp. 195-212. Berlin: Springer-
Verlag
87. Takahata, N., Palumbi, S. R. 1985. Ex-
tranuclear differentiation and gene flow
in the finite island model. Genetics
109:441-57
88. Takahata, N., Slatkin, M. 1984.
Mitochondrial gene flow. Proc. Natl.
Acad. Sci. USA 81:1764-67
89. Templeton, A. R. 1983. Phylogenetic
inference from restriction endonuclease
cleavage site maps with particular
refer-
ence to the evolution of man and the
apes. Evolution 37:221-44
90. Templeton, A. R. 1983. Convergent
evolution and nonparametric
inferences
from restriction data and DNA se-
quences. In Statistical Analysis of DNA
Sequence Data, ed. B. S. Weir, pp.
151-79. New York: Marcel Dekker
91. Uphold, W. B. 1977. Estimation of
DNA sequence divergence from com-
parison of restriction endonuclease di-
gests. Nucleic Acids Res. 4:1257-65
92. Vawter, L., Brown, W. M. 1986. Nu-
clear and mitochondrial DNA com-
parisons
reveal extreme rate variation in
the molecular clock. Science 234:194-
96
93. Wainscoat,
J. 1987. Out of the garden
of
Eden. Nature 325:13
94. Wallace, D. G. 1983. Structure and
evolution of organelle DNAs. In
Endocytobiology,
Vol. II, ed. H. E. A.
Schenk, W. Schwemmler, pp. 87-100.
New York: de Gruyter
95. Whittam, T. S., Clark, A. G., Stone-
king, M., Cann, R. L., Wilson, A. C.
1986. Allelic variation in human
mitochondrial genes based
on patterns
of
restriction site polymorphism. Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 83:9611-15
96. Wiley, E. 0. 1'981.
Phylogenetics. New
York: Wiley
97. Wilson, A. C., Cann, R. L., Carr, S.
M., George, M. Jr., Gyllensten, U. B.,
Helm-Bychowski, K. M., Higuchi, R.
G., Palumbi, S. R., Prager, E. M.,
Sage, R. D., Stoneking, M. 1985.
Mitochondrial DNA and two per-
spectives on evolutionary genetics. Biol.
J. Linn. Soc. 26:375-400
98. Zink, R. M., Remsen, J. V. Jr. 1986.
Evolutionary processes and patterns
of
geographic
variation in birds.
In Current
Ornithology,
Vol. 4, ed. R. F. Johnston,
pp. 1-69. New York: Plenum