In the wild hybridization of annual Datura species as unveiled by morphological and molecular comparisons

Abstract

BackgroundThe present work aimed to verify whether intermediate variants were natural crosses between Datura species (D. stramonium forms and D. ferox). Their existence has been long ago insinuated but has not been studied using morphological features and molecular tools. The variants differed in stem coloring, upper bearing forks, and fruit characters.ResultsPrincipal Components Analysis of 11 morphological characteristics showed that D. ferox and D. stramonium (forms stramonium and tatula) were quite different and the putative hybrids were intermittent. The D. ferox × D. stramonium f. tatula was closer to the latter of its parents. Sequencing analysis revealed identical amplified trnL intron in all variants and a 100% homology with D. stramonium accession number EU580984.1 suggested that this plastid cannot discern Datura variants. However, genomic analysis with URP markers indicated that the hybrids had >60% genetic makeup similarity with both parents suggesting that the intermediate variants were putative inter-specific hybrids. Moreover, the dendrogram stemmed from cluster analysis of the fingerprint profile of variants placed D. stramonium and D. ferox in different branches indicating their genetic differentiation from each other as well as from their hybrids.ConclusionsThe findings suggest that the natural hybridization of annual Datura species occurs. Extrapolating, this hybridization could be the first step for speciation. More possibly, it can alter population composition, its weediness and adaptability to local conditions.

Erratum to: in the wild hybridization of annual datura species as unveiled by morphological and molecular comparisons

“…After the publication of this work [ 1 ], it was brought to the author’s attention that in the sentence “Genus Datura , family Solanaceae, consists of nine (annual and tree) species, originating from the New and Old World [ 1 ]”, “originating from” should be replaced with “present in”. We regret any inconvenience that this inaccuracy may have caused.…”