Chromosomal rearrangements are proposed to promote genetic differentiation between chromosomally differentiated taxa and therefore promote speciation. Due to their remarkable karyotypic polymorphism, the shrews of the Sorex araneus group were used to investigate the impact of chromosomal rearrangements on gene flow. Five intraspecific chromosomal hybrid zones characterized by different levels of karyotypic complexity were studied using 16 microsatellites markers. We observed low levels of genetic differentiation even in the hybrid zones with the highest karyotypic complexity. No evidence of restricted gene flow between differently rearranged chromosomes was observed. Contrary to what was observed at the interspecific level, the effect of chromosomal rearrangements on gene flow was undetectable within the S. araneus species.

No abstract

The integrity of species is not fixed and may vary geographically. Here we investigate the geographic distributions and interactions of species in the Tegenaria atrica group (Araneae: Agelenidae). Detailed mapping of T. saeva and T. gigantea in England and Wales shows them to be broadly allopatric in southern England with a tightly defined, and possibly long-standing, narrow zone of parapatry in central southern England. In the north of England (Yorkshire), by contrast, the species are broadly sympatric as a result of recent range expansions. GIS techniques are used to map the species distributions and to quantify, we believe for the first time, the intimacy of interspecific interactions. The extent and nature of hybridization in these two areas is examined through regression and multivariate analyses of morphology. We show that the relative incidence of hybridization is much greater in Yorkshire than within the parapatric zone in the south. Clear patterns of asymmetric introgression are observed in both northern and southern England, with a greater impact of T. gigantea on T. saeva than vice versa. We find no sign of morphological reproductive character displacement at the zone of parapatry that might indicate reinforcement, although we cannot exclude more subtle effects, for example via cuticular pheromones. The integrity of these two species seems to be breaking down in northern England, a process that might gain momentum as the gene pools become more similar.

Chromosomal races of the common shrew differ in sets of metacentric chromosomes and on contact may produce hybrids with extraordinarily complex configurations at meiosis I that are associated with reduced fertility. There is an expectation that these may be some of the most extreme tension zones available for study and therefore are of interest as potential sites for reproductive isolation. Here, we analyse one of these zones, between the Novosibirsk race (characterized by metacentrics go, hn, ik, jl, mp and qr) and the Tomsk race (metacentrics gk, hi, jl and mn and acrocentrics o, p, q and r), which form hybrids with a chain‐of‐nine (CIX) and a chain‐of‐three (CIII) configuration at meiosis I. At the Novosibirsk–Tomsk hybrid zone, the CIX chromosomes form clines of 8.53 km standardized width on average, whereas the cline for the CIII chromosomes was 52.83 km wide. The difference in these cline widths fits with the difference in meiotic errors expected with the CIX and CIII configuration, and we produce estimates of selection against hybrids with these types of configurations, which we relate to dispersal and age of the hybrid zone. The hybrid zone is located at the isocline at 200 m altitude above sea level; this relationship between the races and altitude is suggested at both coarse and fine scales. This indicates adaptive differences between the races that may in turn have been promoted by the chromosome differences. Thus, the extreme chromosomal divergence between the Novosibirsk and Tomsk may be associated with genic differentiation, but it is still striking that, despite the large chromosomal differences, reproductive isolation between the Novosibirsk and Tomsk races has not occurred.

There now exists a substantial body of publications on international relations which may be fairly described as the output of a distinct school. Though its seminal thinkers, Charles Manning and Martin Wight, are no longer with us, the core of its extant membership (Hedley Bull, Michael Donelan, F. S. Northedge, Robert Purnell and others) is still in its prime and young recruits are constantly coming forward. Though delighted by this human prospect, its literary possibilities find me something less than enthusiastic. For it seems to me that repetition has set in and is likely to get worse as the years pass.