» Articles » PMID: 29593776

Navigating the Interface Between Landscape Genetics and Landscape Genomics

Overview
Journal Front Genet
Date 2018 Mar 30
PMID 29593776
Citations 30
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

As next-generation sequencing data become increasingly available for non-model organisms, a shift has occurred in the focus of studies of the geographic distribution of genetic variation. Whereas landscape genetics studies primarily focus on testing the effects of landscape variables on gene flow and genetic population structure, landscape genomics studies focus on detecting candidate genes under selection that indicate possible local adaptation. Navigating the transition between landscape genomics and landscape genetics can be challenging. The number of molecular markers analyzed has shifted from what used to be a few dozen loci to thousands of loci and even full genomes. Although genome scale data can be separated into sets of neutral loci for analyses of gene flow and population structure and putative loci under selection for inference of local adaptation, there are inherent differences in the questions that are addressed in the two study frameworks. We discuss these differences and their implications for study design, marker choice and downstream analysis methods. Similar to the rapid proliferation of analysis methods in the early development of landscape genetics, new analytical methods for detection of selection in landscape genomics studies are burgeoning. We focus on genome scan methods for detection of selection, and in particular, outlier differentiation methods and genetic-environment association tests because they are the most widely used. Use of genome scan methods requires an understanding of the potential mismatches between the biology of a species and assumptions inherent in analytical methods used, which can lead to high false positive rates of detected loci under selection. Key to choosing appropriate genome scan methods is an understanding of the underlying demographic structure of study populations, and such data can be obtained using neutral loci from the generated genome-wide data or prior knowledge of a species' phylogeographic history. To this end, we summarize recent simulation studies that test the power and accuracy of genome scan methods under a variety of demographic scenarios and sampling designs. We conclude with a discussion of additional considerations for future method development, and a summary of methods that show promise for landscape genomics studies but are not yet widely used.

Citing Articles

Sample Size Impact (SaSii): An R script for estimating optimal sample sizes in population genetics and population genomics studies.

Scaketti M, Sujii P, Alves-Pereira A, Schwarcz K, Francisconi A, Moro M PLoS One. 2025; 20(2):e0316634.

PMID: 39946360 PMC: 11824989. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0316634.


Genomic Analysis of Sarda Sheep Raised at Diverse Temperatures Highlights Several Genes Involved in Adaptations to the Environment and Heat Stress Response.

Gaspa G, Cesarani A, Pauciullo A, Peana I, Macciotta N Animals (Basel). 2025; 14(24.

PMID: 39765489 PMC: 11672698. DOI: 10.3390/ani14243585.


The risk status, signatures of adaptation, and environmental suitability of village-based indigenous chickens from certain regions of Limpopo and KwaZulu-Natal provinces of South Africa.

Mogano R, Mpofu T, Mtileni B, Hadebe K Front Genet. 2025; 15:1450939.

PMID: 39744066 PMC: 11688331. DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2024.1450939.


South African indigenous chickens' genetic diversity, and the adoption of ecological niche modelling and landscape genomics as strategic conservation techniques.

Mogano R, Mpofu T, Mtileni B, Hadebe K Poult Sci. 2024; 104(1):104508.

PMID: 39657468 PMC: 11681890. DOI: 10.1016/j.psj.2024.104508.


Examining the Effects of Environment, Geography, and Elevation on Patterns of DNA Methylation Across Populations of Two Widespread Bumble Bee Species.

Heraghty S, Rahman S, Verble K, Lozier J Genome Biol Evol. 2024; 16(10).

PMID: 39327899 PMC: 11474243. DOI: 10.1093/gbe/evae207.


References
1.
Gunther T, Coop G . Robust identification of local adaptation from allele frequencies. Genetics. 2013; 195(1):205-20. PMC: 3761302. DOI: 10.1534/genetics.113.152462. View

2.
Lewontin R, KRAKAUER J . Distribution of gene frequency as a test of the theory of the selective neutrality of polymorphisms. Genetics. 1973; 74(1):175-95. PMC: 1212935. DOI: 10.1093/genetics/74.1.175. View

3.
Perez-Figueroa A, Garcia-Pereira M, Saura M, Rolan-Alvarez E, Caballero A . Comparing three different methods to detect selective loci using dominant markers. J Evol Biol. 2010; 23(10):2267-2276. DOI: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2010.02093.x. View

4.
Szymura J, Barton N . THE GENETIC STRUCTURE OF THE HYBRID ZONE BETWEEN THE FIRE-BELLIED TOADS BOMBINA BOMBINA AND B. VARIEGATA: COMPARISONS BETWEEN TRANSECTS AND BETWEEN LOCI. Evolution. 2017; 45(2):237-261. DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.1991.tb04400.x. View

5.
Wenzel M, Douglas A, James M, Redpath S, Piertney S . The role of parasite-driven selection in shaping landscape genomic structure in red grouse (Lagopus lagopus scotica). Mol Ecol. 2015; 25(1):324-41. DOI: 10.1111/mec.13473. View