Cited by 110Evolution and Genetic DynamicsPlant Micronutrient Interactions and EffectsHeavy metals in environment

Variability of zinc tolerance among and within populations of the pseudometallophyte species Arabidopsis halleri and possible role of directional selection

Meyer, Claire‐Lise, Kostecka, Alicja A., Saumitou‐Laprade, Pierre, Créach, Anne, Castric, Vincent, Pauwels, Maxime, Frérot, Hélène·2010·New Phytologist

Abstract

We estimated the level of quantitative polymorphism for zinc (Zn) tolerance in neighboring metallicolous and nonmetallicolous populations of Arabidopsis halleri and tested the hypothesis that divergent selection has shaped this polymorphism. A short-term hydroponic test was used to capture the quantitative polymorphism present between edaphic types, among and within populations. We measured six morphological and physiological traits on shoots and roots to estimate the response of A. halleri to Zn. In order to assess the adaptive value of Zn tolerance polymorphism, we compared differentiation of quantitative traits with that of molecular markers. Zinc tolerance of metallicolous populations was, on average, higher than that of nonmetallicolous populations according to the morphological and physiological traits measured. Phenotypic variability within edaphic types was very high and mainly explained by polymorphism among individuals within populations. Genetic differentiation for photosystem II yield of leaves (a measure of photosynthetic efficiency) was greater than the differentiation for microsatellite and thus, probably shaped by divergent selection. Overall, these results suggest that, in the sampled populations, Zn tolerance has been increased in metallicolous populations through selection on standing genetic variation within local nonmetallicolous ancestral populations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.03062.x

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Meyer, C., Kostecka, A. A., Saumitou‐Laprade, P., Créach, A., Castric, V., Pauwels, M., & Frérot, H.
Affiliations
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Corresponding author
Meyer, Claire‐Lise
Venue
New Phytologist
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-10-23
Volume
185
Issue
1
Pages
130-142
ISSN
  • 0028-646X (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8137
OpenAlex
W2028735706
Cited by
110
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 11
FWCI
3.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • New Phytologist (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Dépôt institutionnel de l'Université libre de Bruxelles (Université Libre de Bruxelles) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Micronutrient Interactions and Effects
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Heavy metals in environment
Keywords
zinc tolerance, Arabidopsis halleri, divergent selection, standing genetic variation, microsatellite markers, metal hyperaccumulation
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Biological, Phenotype, Photosynthesis, Polymorphism, Genetic, Selection, Genetic, Zinc, Arabidopsis, Plant Roots, Plant Shoots, Microsatellite Repeats, Photosystem II Protein Complex

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review