Table 5 Genetic diversity among populations of orchid species based on literature survey

From: Population genetic structure in European populations of Spiranthes romanzoffiana set in the context of other genetic studies on orchids

Species

NP

NS

Assay

NL

GST (FST)a,b

Ref.

Caladenia tentaculata G.F.K. Schldl.

9

490

ISO

22

0.034

13

Calypso bulbosa L.

21

779

ISO

3

0.072

25

Catasetum viridiflavum Hook.

16

1442

ISO

17

0.100

41

Catasetum viridiflavum Hook.

16

1442

ISO

17

0.060

41

Cephalanthera longifolia (L.) Fritsch

3

51

ISO

9

0.104

6

Cephalanthera rubra (L.) L.C.M. Richard

7

90

ISO

9

0.247

6

Cymbidium goeringii Reichb. f.

24

1078

ISO

14

0.108

26

Cypripedium acaule Ait.

4

134

ISO

14

0.164

9

Cypripedium calceolus L.

15

425

ISO

12

0.194

8

Cypripedium calceolus L.

3

230

ISO

11

0.016

37

Cypripedium candidum Muhl. ex Willd.

5

107

ISO

14

0.069

9

Cypripedium fasciculatum Kell.

3

69

ISO

12

0.040

20

Cypripedium kentuckiense C. Reed

8

220

ISO

12

0.182

19

Cypripedium reginae Walter

3

97

ISO

14

0.349

9

Dactylorhiza romana (Seb.) Soó

8

306

ISO

19

0.070

32

Dactylorhiza sambucina (L.) Soó

9

410

ISO

19

0.160

32

Diuris sulphurea R. Br.

3

195

ISO

15

0.349

14

Epipactis atrorubens (Hoffm. ex Bernh.) Besser

7

148

ISO

9

0.257

*

Epipactis gigantea Dougl. ex Hook.

4

67

ISO

9

0.214

*

Epipactis gigantea Dougl. ex Hook.

12

c.360

ISO

17

0.493

23

Epipactis helleborine (L.) Crantz

13

401

ISO

9

0.087

27

Epipactis helleborine (L.) Crantz

13

273

ISO

13

0.240

16

Epipactis helleborine (L.) Crantz

47

1170

ISO

9

0.206

34

Epipactis helleborine (L.) Crantz

4

111

ISO

8

0.033

1

Epipactis palustris (L.) Crantz

11

309

ISO

9

0.653

*

Epipactis purpurata G.E. Sm.

12

148

ISO

9

0.150

*

Eulophia sinensis Miq.

7

38

RAPD

97

0.653

35

Goodyera procera (Ker-Gawl.) Hook.

14

343

RAPD

101

0.386

24

Goodyera procera (Ker-Gawl.) Hook.

15

507

ISO

15

0.523

24

Gymnadenia conopsea R. Br.

16

c.300

ISO

11

0.471

2

Gymnadenia conopsea R. Br.

10

174

SSR

3

0.060

28

Lepanthes eltoroensis Stimson

10

96

ISO

6

0.219

36

Lepanthes rubripetala Stimson

11

200

ISO

7

0.266

36

Lepanthes rupestris Stimson

7

140

ISO

7

0.169

36

Leporella fimbriata (Lindl.) A. S. George

4

140

ISO

4

0.044

11

Microtis parviflora R. Br.

5

149

ISO

17

0.296

5

Nigritella rhellicani (Teppner & E. Klein) E. Kleine

23

308

ISO

10

0.153

29

Orchis laxiflora Lam.c

12

c.600

ISO

25

0.116

12

Orchis laxiflora Lam.c

2

47

ISO

9

0.080

3

Orchis longicornu Poir.c

6

162

ISO

27

0.015

4

Orchis mascula (L.) L.

3

62

ISO

9

0.083

3

Orchis morio L.c

18

346

ISO

27

0.055

7

Orchis morio L.c

5

117

ISO

9

0.064

3

Orchis palustris Jacq.c

8

325

ISO

25

0.448

12

Orchis papilionacea L.c

29

3000

ISO

28

0.038

10

Orchis papilionacea L.c

4

88

ISO

9

0.038

3

Orchis pauciflora Ten.

3

92

ISO

9

0.040

3

Orchis provincialis Balb.

2

60

ISO

9

0.023

3

Orchis purpurea Huds.

5

153

ISO

9

0.042

3

Orchis tridentata Scop.d

4

143

ISO

9

0.039

3

Pleurothallis adamantinensis Brade

2

35

ISO

12

0.049

31

Platanthera leucophaea (Nutt.) Lindl.

7

c.148

ISO

12

0.750

38

Platanthera leucophaea (Nutt.) Lindl.

10

192

RAPD

64

0.260

38

Pleurothallis fabiobarrosii Borba & Semir

2

65

ISO

12

0.081

31

Pleurothallis johannensis Barb. Rodr.

7

230

ISO

12

0.046

31

Pleurothallis ochreata Lindl.

4

70

ISO

12

0.175

31

Pterostylis aff. picta M. A. Clem.

9

139

ISO

16

0.054

39

Pleurothallis teres Lindl.

7

160

ISO

12

0.205

31

Pseudorchis albida (L.) A. & D. Löve s.s.

4

90

ISO

18

0.150

17

Pseudorchis straminea (Fern.) Soó

2

42

ISO

18

0.240

17

Pterostylis aff. alata Reichb. fil.

2

24

ISO

15

0.135

33

Pterostylis angusta A.S. George

2

19

ISO

15

0.012

33

Pterostylis aspera D.L. Jones & M.A. Clem.

7

85

ISO

15

0.124

33

Pterostylis gibbosa R. Br.

12

255

ISO

16

0.151

30

Pterostylis hamiltonii Nicholls

4

52

ISO

15

0.143

33

Pterostylis rogersii E. Coleman

9

111

ISO

15

0.136

33

Pterostylis scabra Lindl.

11

155

ISO

15

0.081

33

Spiranthes diluvialis Sheviak

12

651

ISO

14

0.044

18

Spiranthes sinensis (Pers.) Ames

6

181

ISO

22

0.174

15

Spiranthes spiralis (L.) Chevall.

7

857

ISO

4

0.026

40

Tolumnia variegata (Swartz) Braem

14

545

ISO

12

0.110

21

Vanilla barbellata Reich. f.

6

87

ISO

7

0.123

22

Vanilla claviculata (W. Wright) Swartz

5

89

ISO

7

0.158

22

Zeuxine gracilis Bl.

6

75

ISO

18

0.333

35

Zeuxine gracilis Bl.

6

74

RAPD

77

0.539

35

Zeuxine strateumatica (Ln.) Schltr.

10

50

RAPD

71

0.924

35

Mean N=76 (range=0.012–0.924)

    

0.187

 

Mean (excl. less than five populations, N=53)

    

0.219

 

Mean (excl. dominant data sets, N=71)

    

0.161

 

Mean (excl. both the above parameters, N=48)

    

0.184

 

Hamrick and Godt (1996) N=16

    

0.087

 
  1. NP=number of populations sampled; NS=number of individuals sampled; Assay: ISO=isozyme analysis, SSR=microsatellite analysis, RAPD=randomly amplified polymorphic DNA analysis; NL=number of loci analysed; GST (or FST)=proportion of genetic variation partitioned among populations. Source references: 1, Scacchi et al (1987); 2, Scacchi and De Angelis (1989); 3, Scacchi et al (1990); 4, Corrias et al (1991); 5, Peakall and Beattie (1991); 6, Scacchi et al (1991); 7, Rossi et al (1992); 8, Case (1993); 9, Case (1994); 10, Arduino et al (1995); 11, Peakall and James (1995); 12, Arduino et al (1996); 13, Peakall and Beattie (1996); 14, Sharma and Jones (1996); 15, Sun (1996); 16, Hollingsworth and Dickson (1997); 17, Reinhammar and Hedrén (1997); 18, Arft and Ranker (1998); 19, Case et al (1998); 20, Aagaard et al (1999); 21, Ackerman and Ward (1999); 22, Nielsen and Siegismund (1999); 23, Thornhill (1999); 24, Wong and Sun (1999); 25, Alexandersson and Ågren (2000); 26, Chung and Chung (2000); 27, Ehlers and Pedersen (2000); 28, Gustafsson (2000); 29, Hedrén et al (2000); 30, Sharma et al (2000); 31, Borba et al (2001); 32, Bullini et al (2001); 33, Sharma et al (2001); 34, Squirrell et al (2001); 35, Sun and Wong (2001); 36, Tremblay and Ackerman (2001); 37, Brzosko et al (2002); 38, Wallace (2002); 39, Sharma et al (2002); 40, Machon et al (2003); 41, Murren (2003); * J Squirrell and P Hollingsworth, unpublished.
  2. aSpecies in which no genetic variation was detected are not included in this review.
  3. bDifferent investigators have used different methods of assessing population differentiation (eg GST, FST, θ). We have not attempted to standardise here as in some cases the raw data are unavailable, and there is also a strong correlation between measures. Culley et al (2002) showed that when calculating GST in different ways (the average of ratios vs the ratio of averages), the difference is trivial in the vast majority of cases. Likewise, Weicker et al (2001) found high congruence between FST and θ in their review of empirical data sets. The variance caused by the spatial scale of sampling schemes among studies is likely to be a far more significant source of error in making comparisons among species.
  4. c–eRecent phylogenetic classifications place these species into
  5. c Anacamptis
  6. dNeotinea and
  7. eGymnadenia (Bateman et al, 1997).
Back to article page