Hybrid origins of plant species
Abstract
The origin of new homoploid species via hybridization is theoretically difficult because it requires the development of reproductive isolation in sympatry. Nonetheless, this mode is often and carelessly used by botanists to account for the formation of species that are morphologically intermediate with respect to related congeners. Here, I review experimental, theoretical, and empirical studies of homoploid hybrid speciation to evaluate the feasibility, tempo, and frequency of this mode. Theoretical models, simulation studies, and experimental syntheses of stabilized hybrid neospecies indicate that it is feasible, although evolutionary conditions are stringent. Hybrid speciation appears to be promoted by rapid chromosomal evolution and the availability of a suitable hybrid habitat. A selfing breeding system may enhance establishment of hybrid species, but this advantage appears to be counterbalanced by lower rates of natural hybridization among selfing taxa. Simulation studies and crossing experiments also suggest that hybrid speciation can be rapid—a prediction confirmed by the congruence observed between the genomes of early generation hybrids and ancient hybrid species. The frequency of this mode is less clear. Only eight natural examples in plants have been rigorously documented, suggesting that it may be rare. However, hybridization rates are highest in small or peripheral populations, and hybridization may be important as a stimulus for the genetic or chromosomal reorganization envisioned in founder effect and saltational models of speciation.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Hybridization among species is common and contributes to long-term diversification.
“it is now widely accepted that hybridization among species is common and contributes to long-term diversification (Arnold, 1997; Rieseberg, 1997; Mallet, 2005; Abbott et al., 2013)”
From Genomics of plant speciation (2023) · cites this paper as Rieseberg, 1997
Homoploid hybrid speciation is thought to be rare because of the challenge of evolving RI from parental populations.
“In contrast to polyploid hybrid speciation, which is the focus of the next section of this review, homoploid hybrid speciation is thought to be rare because of the challenge of evolving RI from parental populations (Rieseberg, 1997; Buerkle et al., 2000; Schumer et al., 2014; but see Nieto Feliner et al., 2017).”
From Genomics of plant speciation (2023) · cites this paper as Rieseberg, 1997
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hybridization as an invasion of the genome
Mallet, J. (2005) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2005.02.010 · Cited by 2,196 · see citing works
Abbott, R., Albach, D., Ansell, S., Arntzen, J. W., Baird, S. J. E., Bierne, N., Boughman, J., Brelsford, A., Buerkle, C. A., Buggs, R., et al. (2013) · Journal of Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2012.02599.x · Cited by 2,194 · see citing works
The likelihood of homoploid hybrid speciation
Buerkle, C. A., Morris, R. J., Asmussen, M. A., & Rieseberg, L. H. (2000) · Heredity · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2540.2000.00680.x · Cited by 366 · see citing works
Self-citationBock, D. G., Cai, Z., Elphinstone, C., González-Segovia, E., Hirabayashi, K., Huang, K., Keais, G. L., Kim, A., Owens, G. L., & Rieseberg, L. H. (2023) · Plant Communications · doi:10.1016/j.xplc.2023.100599 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
“In contrast to polyploid hybrid speciation, which is the focus of the next section of this review, homoploid hybrid speciation is thought to be rare because of the challenge of evolving RI from parental populations (Rieseberg, 1997; Buerkle et al., 2000; Schumer et al., 2014; but see Nieto Feliner et al., 2017).”
InfluentialSelf-citationA paradigm shift in our view of species drives current trends in biological classification
Padial, J. M., & De la Riva, I. (2021) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/brv.12676 · Cited by 85 · see citing works
Nevado, B., Harris, S. A., Beaumont, M. A., & Hiscock, S. J. (2020) · Molecular Ecology · doi:10.1111/mec.15630 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
- Authors
- Rieseberg, L. H.
- Affiliations
- Indiana University Bloomington (US)
- Corresponding author
- Rieseberg, Loren H.
- ORCID
- Rieseberg, Loren H.
- Venue
- Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics
- Publisher
- Annual Reviews
- Published
- 1997-11
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 359-389
- ISSN
- 0066-4162 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2124539629
- Cited by
- 1,246
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 21 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 36 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 61 · 2019: 40 · 2018: 41 · 2017: 51 · 2016: 43 · 2015: 53 · 2014: 55 · 2013: 57 · 2012: 50
- FWCI
- 21.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Chromosomal and Genetic Variations
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Plant Diversity and Evolution
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Plant Taxonomy and Phylogenetics
- Keywords
- hybrid speciation, homoploid hybridization, reproductive isolation, sympatric speciation, karyotype evolution, self-pollination, hybridization rate, founder effect, plant speciation
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