Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Figure 1.

Study site map with sampling locations (A1–D6).

The geographical representation of the genetic clusters obtained by GENELAND are: orange-D1, green-D2 and white-D3–D6). The red lines G1 and G2 are genetic barriers found with the software BARRIER. Neighbor-joining (NJ) trees constructed using A) ASD (Goldstein et al. 1995a), B) δµ2 (Goldstein et al. 1995b) and C) DSW (Shriver et al. 1995) display genetic distances. Bootstrap values are shown along branches and pie chart colors represents the proportions of the three genetic demes assigned by the software STRUCTURE in each deme.

More »

Figure 1 Expand

Figure 2.

PCA analysis.

Displays factor 1 (percentage of water without vegetation and the percentage of water with vegetation and stones) and factor 2 (percentage of grass bushes outside the river and the percentage of the pine-oak forest outside the river). The characteristics of the sites are: A1, A2 = COHAB1 100% COHERB2 0%, COVEGR 28%, COSTONR 28%, B1–C2 = COHAB197%, COHERB2 3%, COVEGR88%, COSTONR 7%, D1 = COHAB150%, COHERB240%, COVEGR 40%, COSTONR 15%, D2 = COHAB1 65%, COHERB2 40%, COVEGR 28%, COSTONR 65%, and D3–D6 = COHAB 83%, COHERB27%, COVEGR 0%, COSTONR 88%.

More »

Figure 2 Expand

Figure 3.

Dendogram using the Ward’s method.

Showing three types of microhabitat (D1, D2 and D3–D6), the microhabitat D1 and D2 are more similar between them and D3 to D6 are the same type of microhabitat.

More »

Figure 3 Expand

Figure 4.

Population genetic structure of A. leorae analyzed with STRUCTURE.

Each individual is represented by a horizontal line that is partitioned into K components representing the ancestry fractions in K = 3 clusters. Population and black lines separate individuals order individuals from different population. B) and C) Evanno et al. (2005) plots for detecting the number of K groups that best fit the data.

More »

Figure 4 Expand

Table 1.

Genetic differentiation for each deme. Below the diagonal FST and (RST), above the diagonal Dest.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

ΔS component of the genetic diversity and effective number of distinct genetic groups according to Jost (2008).

More »

Table 2 Expand

Figure 5.

Patterns of allelic richness and heterozygosity in the three demes.

Na = Number of different alleles, Na (Freq > = 5%) = Number of different alleles with a frequency > = 5%, Ne = Number of effective alleles = 1/(Sum pi∧2), I = Shannon’s information index, Number of private alleles = Number of alleles unique to a single population, He = Expected heterozygosity.

More »

Figure 5 Expand

Table 3.

Multivariate analysis of relationships between the demographic parameters, the habitat characteristics and the percentage of alleles and genotypes.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Support for the migration model between demes.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

Asymmetric immigration rates inferred in MIGRATE between demes.

More »

Table 5 Expand