Abstract
Because naturalized and invasive plant species have disproportionately smaller genome sizes compared to all angiosperms, genome size has been proposed as a general predictor of invasiveness. The family Cactaceae includes some of the most important invasive species worldwide, and it is one of the plant families with lowest number of genome size estimations. The main goal of this study was to explore possible correlations between genome size and invasiveness in Cactaceae, and between genome size and seed size and weight, traits previously linked with invasiveness. Propidium iodide flow cytometry was used to estimate the genome size from seeds (mostly) of 256 taxa of Cactaceae (32 of which are known to be invasive, and 13 are considered potentially invasive), and seed size, weight and mass were measured or obtained from previous work. Contrary to expectation, no significant differences were observed in genome size among categories of invasion, suggesting that genome size alone is not a reliable predictor of invasiveness in Cactaceae. Also, no correlations were observed between genome size and the studied seed traits when the whole dataset was considered. At a finer scale, in Opuntioideae, positive significant correlations were observed between genome size and the seed traits studied, and in Cacteae, the opposite trend was observed. Since Cactaceae species possess low rates of metabolism, selection towards traits linked with genome size may not have been favoured irrespective of the invasive strategy. The large number of genome size estimates reported in this study offers great opportunities for studying the evolution of genome size in this family and for exploring possible correlations between genome size and geographical, environmental and phenotypic traits.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Availability of data and material
Raw data is available in Supplementary Information.
References
Anderson EF (2001) The cactus family. Choice Rev Online 38:38–6177. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.38-6177
Arakaki M, Christin PA, Nyffeler R et al (2011) Contemporaneous and recent radiations of the world’s major succulent plant lineages. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108:8379–8384. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1100628108
Ashman TL, Kwok A, Husband BC (2013) Revisiting the dioecy-polyploidy association: alternate pathways and research opportunities. Cytogenet Genome Res 140:241–255. https://doi.org/10.1159/000353306
Baack EJ, Whitney KD, Rieseberg LH (2005) Hybridization and genome size evolution: timing and magnitude of nuclear DNA content increases in Helianthus homoploid hybrid species. New Phytol 167:623–630. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2005.01433.x
Bacher S, Blackburn TM, Essl F et al (2018) Socio-economic impact classification of alien taxa (SEICAT). Methods Ecol Evol 9:159–168. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12844
Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker BM, Walker SC (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw 67:1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
Beaulieu JM, Moles AT, Leitch IJ et al (2007a) Correlated evolution of genome size and seed mass. New Phytol. 173:422–437. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2006.01919.x
Beaulieu JM, Leitch IJ, Knight CA (2007b) Genome size evolution in relation to leaf strategy and metabolic rates revisited. Ann Bot 99:495–505. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcl271
Beaulieu JM, Leitch IJ, Patel S et al (2008) Genome size is a strong predictor of cell size and stomatal density in angiosperms. New Phytol 179:975–986. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2008.02528.x
Bennett MD (1971) The duration of meiosis. Proc R Soc London Ser B Biol Sci 178:277–299. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.1971.0066
Bennett MD (1972) Nuclear DNA content and minimum generation time in herbaceous plants. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 181:109–135. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.1972.0042
Bennett MD (1987a) Variation in genomic form in plants and its ecological implications. New Phytol 106:177–200. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.1987.tb04689.x
Bennett AF (1987b) Interindividual variability: an underutilized resource. New Dir Ecol Physiol 19:147–169
Bennetzen JL, Ma J, Devos KM (2005) Mechanisms of recent genome size variation in flowering plants. Ann Bot 95:127–132. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mci008
Brochmann C, Brysting AK, Alsos IG et al (2004) Polyploidy in arctic plants. Biol J Linn Soc 82:521–536. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.2004.00337.x
Carta A, Peruzzi L (2016) Testing the large genome constraint hypothesis: plant traits, habitat and climate seasonality in Liliaceae. New Phytol 210:709–716. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.13769
Chen G-QQ, Guo S-LL, Yin L-PP (2010) Applying DNA C-values to evaluate invasiveness of angiosperms: validity and limitation. Biol Invasions 12:1335–1348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-009-9550-0
Comai L (2005) The advantages and disadvantages of being polyploid. Nat Rev Genet 6:836–846. https://doi.org/10.1038/Nrg1711
Daws MI, Hall J, Flynn S, Pritchard HW (2007) Do invasive species have bigger seeds? Evidence from intra- and inter-specific comparisons. South African J Bot 73:138–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sajb.2006.09.003
Diagne C, Catford JA, Essl F et al (2020) What are the economic costs of biological invasions? A complex topic requiring international and interdisciplinary expertise. NeoBiota 63:25–37. https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.63.55260
Doležel J, Sgorbati S, Lucretti S (1992) Comparison of three DNA fluorochromes for flow cytometric estimation of nuclear DNA content in plants. Physiol Plant 85:625–631. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.1992.tb04764.x
Doležel J, Greilhuber J, Lucretti S et al (1998) Plant genome size estimation by flow cytometry: inter-laboratory comparison. Ann Bot 82:17–26. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbo.1998.0730
Edwards EJ, Nyffeler R, Donoghue MJ (2005) Basal cactus phylogeny: implications of Pereskia (Cactaceae) paraphyly for the transition to the cactus life form. Am J Bot 92:1177–1188. https://doi.org/10.3732/ajb.92.7.1177
Fleischmann A, Michael TP, Rivadavia F et al (2014) Evolution of genome size and chromosome number in the carnivorous plant genus Genlisea (Lentibulariaceae), with a new estimate of the minimum genome size in angiosperms. Ann Bot 114:1651–1663. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcu189
Fox J, Friendly M, Weisberg S (2013) Hypothesis tests for multivariate linear models using the car package. R J 5:39–52. https://doi.org/10.32614/rj-2013-004
Francis D, Davies MS, Barlow PW (2008) A strong nucleotypic effect on the cell cycle regardless of ploidy level. Ann Bot 101:747–757. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcn038
Galbraith DW, Harkins KR, Maddox JM et al (1983) Rapid flow cytometric analysis of the cell cycle in intact plant tissues. Science 220:1049–1051. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.220.4601.1049
Gallagher RV, Leishman MR, Miller JT et al (2011) Invasiveness in introduced Australian acacias: the role of species traits and genome size. Divers Distrib 17:884–897. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2011.00805.x
Garcia S, Canela MÁA, Garnatje T et al (2008) Evolutionary and ecological implications of genome size in the North American endemic sagebrushes and allies (Artemisia, Asteraceae). Biol J Linn Soc 94:631–649. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.2008.01001.x
Greilhuber J, Leitch I (2013) Genome size and the Phenotype. In: Leitch I, Greilhuber J, Dolezel J, Wender J (eds) Plant genome diversity physical structure 2 behaviour and evolution of plant genomes. Springer-Verlag, Wien, pp 323–344
Greilhuber J, Dolezel J, Lysak MA et al (2005) The origin, evolution and proposed stabilization of the terms “genome size’’ and ‘C-value’ to describe nuclear DNA contents”. Ann Bot 95:255–260. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mci019
Grotkopp E, Rejmánek M (2007) High seedling relative growth rate and specific leaf area are traits of invasive species: phylogenetically independent contrasts of woody angiosperms. Am J Bot 94:526–532. https://doi.org/10.3732/ajb.94.4.526
Grotkopp E, Rejmánek M, Sanderson MJ, Rost TL (2004) Evolution of genome size in pines (Pinus) and its life-history correlates: supertree analyses. Evolution 58:1705–1729. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0014-3820.2004.tb00456.x
Guerrero PC, Majure LC, Cornejo-Romero A, Hernández-Hernández T (2019) Phylogenetic relationships and evolutionary trends in the Cactus family. J Hered 110:4–21. https://doi.org/10.1093/jhered/esy064
Gutiérrez-Flores C, León-de la Luz JL, García-De León FJ, Cota-Sánchez JH (2018) Variation in chromosome number and breeding systems: implications for diversification in Pachycereus pringlei (Cactaceae). Comp Cytogenet 12:61–82. https://doi.org/10.3897/CompCytogen.v12i1.21554
Hernández-Cruz R, Barrón-Pacheco F, Sánchez D et al (2018) Functional dioecy in Echinocereus: ontogenetic patterns, programmed cell death, and evolutionary significance. Int J Plant Sci 179:257–274. https://doi.org/10.1086/697072
Hernández-Hernández T, Hernández HM, Arturo De-Nova J et al (2011) Phylogenetic relationships and evolution of growth form in Cactaceae (Caryophyllales, Eudicotyledoneae). Am J Bot 98:44–61. https://doi.org/10.3732/ajb.1000129
Hernández-Hernández T, Brown JW, Schlumpberger BO et al (2014) Beyond aridification: multiple explanations for the elevated diversification of cacti in the new World Succulent Biome. New Phytol 202:1382–1397. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.12752
Hothorn T, Bretz F, Westfall P (2008) Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biometrical J 50:346–363. https://doi.org/10.1002/bimj.200810425
Kempes CP, Wang L, Amend JP et al (2016) Evolutionary tradeoffs in cellular composition across diverse bacteria. ISME J 10:2145–2157. https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2016.21
Knight CA, Ackerly DD (2002) Variation in nuclear DNA content across environmental gradients: a quantile regression analysis. Ecol Lett 5:66–76. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1461-0248.2002.00283.x
Knight CA, Beaulieu JM (2008) Genome size scaling through phenotype space. Ann Bot 101:759–766. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcm321
Knight CA, Molinari NA, Petrov DA (2005) The large genome constraint hypothesis: evolution, ecology and phenotype. Ann Bot 95:177–190. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mci011
Kolar CS, Lodge DM (2001) Progress in invasion biology: predicting invaders. Trends Ecol Evol 16:199–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-5347(01)02101-2
Kubešová M, Moravcová L, Suda J et al (2010) Naturalized plants have smaller genomes than their non-invading relatives: a flow cytometric analysis of the Czech alien flora. Preslia 82:81–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-004-8122-6
Kuester A, Conner JK, Culley T, Baucom RS (2014) How weeds emerge: a taxonomic and trait-based examination using United States data. New Phytol 202:1055–1068. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.12698
Küster EC, Kühn I, Bruelheide H, Klotz S (2008) Trait interactions help explain plant invasion success in the German flora. J Ecol 96:860–868. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2745.2008.01406.x
Lavergne S, Muenke NJ, Molofsky J (2010) Genome size reduction can trigger rapid phenotypic evolution in invasive plants. Ann Bot 105:109–116. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcp271
Leitch IJ, Bennett MD (2004) Genome downsizing in polyploid plants. Biol J Linn Soc 82:651–663. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.2004.00349.x
Leitch IJ, Bennett MD (2007) Genome size and its uses: the impact of flow cytometry. In: Dolezel J, Greilhuber J, Suda J (eds) Flow cytometry with plant cells: analysis of genes, chromosomes and genomes. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, pp 153–176
Leitch IJ, Chase MW, Bennett MD (1998) Phylogenetic analysis of DNA C-values provides evidence for a small ancestral genome size in flowering plants. Ann Bot 82:85–94. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbo.1998.0783
Leitch I, Johnston E, Pellicer J et al (2020) Plant DNA C-values Database (Release 7.1). https://cvalues.science.kew.org/
Leung B, Lodge DM, Finnoff D et al (2002) An ounce of prevention or a pound of cure: bioeconomic risk analysis of invasive species. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 269:2407–2413. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2002.2179
Loureiro J, Rodriguez E, Dolezel J et al (2007) Two new nuclear isolation buffers for plant DNA flow cytometry: a test with 37 Species. Ann Bot 100:875–888. https://doi.org/10.1093/annbot/mcm152
Loureiro J, Castro M, de Oliveira JC et al (2013) Genome size variation and polyploidy incidence in the alpine flora from Spain. An Del Jard Bot Madrid 70:39–47. https://doi.org/10.3989/ajbm.2350
Loureiro J, Kron P, Temsch EM et al (2021) Isolation of plant nuclei for estimation of nuclear DNA content—overview and best practices. Cytom Part A 99:318–327. https://doi.org/10.1002/cyto.a.24331
Lynch M, Conery JS (2000) The evolutionary fate and consequences of duplicate genes. Science 290(5494):1151–1155. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.290.5494.1151
Machado MC (2008) What is the role of hybridization in the evolution of the Cactaceae? Bradleya 26:1–18. https://doi.org/10.25223/brad.n26.2008.a1
Magallón S, Gómez-Acevedo S, Sánchez-Reyes LL, Hernández-Hernández T (2015) A metacalibrated time-tree documents the early rise of flowering plant phylogenetic diversity. New Phytol 207:437–453. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.13264
Majure LC, Puente R, Patrick Griffith M et al (2012) Phylogeny of Opuntia s.s. (Cactaceae): clade delineation, geographic origins, reticulate evolution. Am J Bot 99:847–864. https://doi.org/10.3732/ajb.1100375
Mathakutha R, Steyn C, le Roux PC et al (2019) Invasive species differ in key functional traits from native and non-invasive alien plant species. J Veg Sci 30:994–1006. https://doi.org/10.1111/jvs.12772
Mayer MS, Williams LM, Rebman JP (2000) Molecular evidence for the hybrid origin of Opuntia prolifera (Cactaceae). Madroño 47:109–115
Meyerson LA, Cronin JT, Bhattarai GP et al (2016) Do ploidy level and nuclear genome size and latitude of origin modify the expression of Phragmites australis traits and interactions with herbivores? Biol Invasions 18:2531–2549. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-016-1200-8
Meyerson LA, Pyšek P, Lučanová M et al (2020) Plant genome size influences stress tolerance of invasive and native plants via plasticity. Ecosphere 11:1–38. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.3145
Moodley D, Geerts S, Richardson DM, Wilson JRU (2013) Different traits determine introduction, naturalization and invasion success in woody plants: proteaceae as a test case. PLoS ONE 8:e75078. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0075078
Moore AJ, De Vos JM, Hancock LP et al (2018) Targeted enrichment of large gene families for phylogenetic inference: phylogeny and molecular evolution of photosynthesis genes in the portullugo clade (Caryophyllales). Syst Biol 67:367–383. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syx078
Morgan HD, Westoby M (2005) The relationship between nuclear DNA content and leaf strategy in seed plants. Ann Bot 96:1321–1330. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mci284
Moura RF, Queiroga D, Vilela E, Moraes AP (2020) Polyploidy and high environmental tolerance increase the invasive success of plants. J Plant Res. 134:105–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10265-020-01236-6
Novoa A, Kaplan H, Kumschick S et al (2015a) Soft touch or heavy hand? Legislative approaches for preventing invasions: Insights from cacti in South Africa. Invasive Plant Sci Manage 8:307–316. https://doi.org/10.1614/ipsm-d-14-00073.1
Novoa A, Le Roux JJ, Robertson MP et al (2015b) Introduced and invasive cactus species: a global review. AoB Plants 7:plu078. https://doi.org/10.1093/aobpla/plu078
Novoa A, Rodríguez J, López-Nogueira A et al (2016) Seed characteristics in Cactaceae: useful diagnostic features for screening species for invasiveness? S Afr J Bot 105:61–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sajb.2016.01.003
Novoa A, Le Roux JJ, Richardson DM, Wilson JRU (2017) Level of environmental threat posed by horticultural trade in Cactaceae. Conserv Biol 31:1066–1075. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12892
Novoa A, Brundu G, Day MD et al (2019) Global actions for managing cactus invasions. Plants 8:421. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants8100421
Novoa A, Richardson DM, Pyšek P et al (2020) Invasion syndromes: a systematic approach for predicting biological invasions and facilitating effective management. Biol Invasions 22:1801–1820. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-020-02220-w
Pandit MK, White SM, Pocock MJO (2014) The contrasting effects of genome size, chromosome number and ploidy level on plant invasiveness: a global analysis. New Phytol 203:697–703. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.12799
Pellicer J, Fay MF, Leitch IJ (2010) The largest eukaryotic genome of them all? Bot J Linn Soc 164:10–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8339.2010.01072.x
Pyšek P, Richardson DM (2008) Traits associated with invasiveness in alien plants: Where Do we Stand? In: Nentwig W (ed) Biol Invasions, Ecological Studies 193. Springer, Berlin, pp 97–125
Pyšek P, Jarošík V, Hulme PE et al (2012) A global assessment of invasive plant impacts on resident species, communities and ecosystems: the interaction of impact measures, invading species’ traits and environment. Glob Chang Biol 18:1725–1737. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2011.02636.x
Pyšek P, Skálová H, Čuda J et al (2018) Small genome separates native and invasive populations in an ecologically important cosmopolitan grass. Ecology 99:79–90. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.2068
Pyšek P, Bacher S, Kühn I et al (2020) MAcroecological Framework for Invasive Aliens (MAFIA): disentangling large-scale context dependence in biological invasions. NeoBiota 62:407–461. https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.62.52787
Qiao X, Li Q, Yin H et al (2019) Gene duplication and evolution in recurring polyploidization–diploidization cycles in plants. Genome Biol 20:1–23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-019-1650-2
R Core Team (2016) R Development Core Team. R A Lang Environ Stat Compu. http://www.R-project.org
Rejmánek M (1996) A theory of seed plant invasiveness: the first sketch. Biol Conserv 78:171–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/0006-3207(96)00026-2
Rejmánek M, Richardson DM (1996) What attributes make some plant species more invasive? Ecology 77:1655–1661. https://doi.org/10.2307/2265768
Richardson DM, Pyšek P (2006) Plant invasions: Merging the concepts of species invasiveness and community invasibility. Prog Phys Geogr 30:409–431
Robertson PA, Mill A, Novoa A et al (2020) A proposed unified framework to describe the management of biological invasions. Biol Invasions 22:2633–2645. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-020-02298-2
Roddy AB, Théroux-Rancourt G, Abbo T et al (2020) The scaling of genome size and cell size limits maximum rates of photosynthesis with implications for ecological strategies. Int J Plant Sci 181:75–87. https://doi.org/10.1086/706186
Schmidt JP, Drake JM (2011) Time since introduction, seed mass, and genome size predict successful invaders among the cultivated vascular plants of Hawaii. PLoS ONE 6:17391. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0017391
Schneider CA, Rasband WS, Eliceiri KW (2012) NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat Methods 9:671–675. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2089
Seebens H, Bacher S, Blackburn TM et al (2021) Projecting the continental accumulation of alien species through to 2050. Glob Change Biol 27:970–982. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15333
Simonin KA, Roddy AB (2018) Genome downsizing, physiological novelty, and the global dominance of flowering plants. PLoS Biol 16:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2003706
Suda J, Meyerson LA, Leitch IJ, Pyšek P (2015) The hidden side of plant invasions: the role of genome size. New Phytol 205:994–1007. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.13107
Van Kleunen M, Dawson W, Schlaepfer D et al (2010a) Are invaders different? A conceptual framework of comparative approaches for assessing determinants of invasiveness. Ecol Lett 13:947–958. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01503.x
Van Kleunen M, Weber E, Fischer M (2010b) A meta-analysis of trait differences between invasive and non-invasive plant species. Ecol Lett 13:235–245. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01418.x
Varela-Álvarez E, Gómez Garreta A, Rull Lluch J et al (2012) Mediterranean Species of Caulerpa are polyploid with smaller genomes in the invasive ones. PLoS ONE 7:e47728. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0047728
Vilà M, Espinar JL, Hejda M et al (2011) Ecological impacts of invasive alien plants: a meta-analysis of their effects on species, communities and ecosystems. Ecol Lett 14:702–708. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01628.x
Vitales D, Fernández P, Garnatje T, Garcia S (2019) Progress in the study of genome size evolution in Asteraceae: analysis of the last update. Database 2019:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1093/database/baz098
Walker JF, Yang Y, Feng T et al (2018) From cacti to carnivores: improved phylotranscriptomic sampling and hierarchical homology inference provide further insight into the evolution of Caryophyllales. Am J Bot 105:446–462. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajb2.1069
Funding
This research was supported by Project RENATURE financed by the “Programa Operacional Regional do Centro 2014–2020 (Centro2020)—CENTRO-01-0145-FEDER-000007”. MC was financed by Project RENATURE—“Programa Operacional Regional do Centro 2014–2020 (Centro2020)—CENTRO-01–0145-FEDER-000007”; SC was financed by CULTIVAR project (CENTRO-01–0145-FEDER-000020), co-financed by the Regional Operational Programme Centro 2020, Portugal 2020 and European Union, through European Fund for Regional Development (ERDF). AN was supported by EXPRO grant no. 19-28807X (Czech Science Foundation) and long-term research development project RVO 67985939 (The Czech Academy of Sciences). DMR acknowledges support from the DSI-NRF Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology and the Oppenheimer Memorial Trust (grant 18576/03). LM was financed by Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (FCT) PhD fellowship “SFRH/BD/116043/2016”.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Consent for publication
All authors have contributed significantly to the work and agree with the content of the submission.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lopes, S., Mota, L., Castro, M. et al. Genome size variation in Cactaceae and its relationship with invasiveness and seed traits. Biol Invasions 23, 3047–3062 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-021-02557-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-021-02557-w