Mapa 11: Prevalencia de depresión Densidad de Población, 2010

Figure 1. Map of sampling locations and field sites in the Minneapolis area. Urban sampling locations are indicated in grey, rural sampling locations are indicated in white. Common garden locations are indicated in red. The purple outline indicates urban areas defined by MODIS satellite data at 0.5 km resolution (Schneider et al. 2009).

Figure 2. Mean Julian date of first open female flower for urban and rural populations. Grey = urban populations, white = rural populations. Dashed lines = urban field sites, solid lines = rural field sites. The bars indicate +/- standard error. There was a significant effect of regional seed source (p = 0.0006) and site (p = < 0.0001) (Table S3). Means were extracted from linear mixed effects model.

Figure 3. Mean number of predicted fruits produced by urban and rural populations at each field site. White = rural populations, grey = urban populations. The bars indicate +/- standard error. Predicted means were extracted from separate aster models for each site. There was a significant effect of source region (see Table S9). Rural field sites = RRT, RRO; urban field sites = USC, USP.

Figure 4. Mean Julian date of A) transition to reproduction, B) first open male flower, and C) first open female flower of urban populations and rural populations averaged across field sites. White = rural populations, grey = urban populations. The bars indicate +/- standard error. Letters indicate Tukey test results conducted among rural or among urban populations, where unique letters indicate significantly different groups. Urban and rural population names are listed along the x-axis in an arbitrary order based on the numerical identity of the population. There was a significant effect of population seed source on all flowering time variables (Table S6). Means were extracted from linear mixed effects models for each trait.

Figures – Chapter 2

Figure 1. Effects of rainfall treatment on a) mean julian date of transition of

reproduction, b) mean height at 8 weeks, and c) mean specific leaf area. Least-square means were extracted from linear models and are presented with standard error bars.

Figure 2. Effects of rainfall treatment on a) mean number of fruits (female fitness), and b) mean number of flowering spikes (male fitness). Predicted means were extracted from aster models and are presented with standard error bars.

Figure 3. Effects of rainfall treatment and longitude on mean number of fruits (female fitness). Predicted means were extracted from aster models and are presented with standard error bars.

Figure 4. Effects of rainfall treatment and latitude on mean number of flowering spikes (male fitness). Predicted means were extracted from aster models and are presented with standard error bars. Linear regression lines are shown for male fitness vs latitude for each rainfall treatment.

Figure 5. Effects of PC1 of BIOCLIM precipitation values on a) mean number of fruits (female fitness), and b) mean number of flowering spikes (male fitness). Linear

regression lines are shown in b) for male fitness vs PC1 for each rainfall treatment. Predicted means were extracted from aster models and are presented with standard error bars.

Figures – Chapter 3

Figure 1. Estimated admixture proportions (PCAngsd) for three different numbers of ancestral populations (K). Each bar represents a single individual. Population names are shown along the horizontal axis, and are listed in latitudinal order.

Figure 2. Genetic variation along the first two axes of a principal components analysis (PCA). Variation explained by each PC is shown in brackets. Populations are listed in latitudinal order, starting with the most northern populations. Each colour represents individuals from a different population.

Figure 3. The linear relationship between genetic distance (FST) and geographic distance

Figures – Chapter 4

Figure 1. Location of field sites and source populations. The black dots indicate the location of the 26 source populations (see Table 1 for exact coordinates). The populations circled in red indicate those populations with fruit counts at 16 weeks. The location of each site is indicated with a blue triangle.

Figure 2. The effect of source latitude on overall plant reproductive stage at 12 weeks. Values above 3 indicate either male or female flowers were open. See Table 2 for a description of all potential stages. Least-squared means were extracted for each population at each site.

Figure 3. The relationship between fitness and geographic distance of source population from each of the four transplant sites. Generalized linear mixed models were run on individual data and included block (random) and geographic distance from field site (fixed) as predictors. The model outcomes were transformed back to the response scale. Each row is a different site (MN, IA, IL, and MO), and each column is a different fitness component (P(Surv 4 wk), P(Flowering), P(Mature Fruit), Number of Fruit at 16 weeks). The blue line represents the expected value, and red dotted line indicates where the probability is 0.5. There are no confidence intervals due to the inclusion of block as a random effect.

Figure 4. The relationship between fitness and latitudinal distance of source population from each of the four transplant sites. Generalized linear mixed models were run on individual data and included block (random) and latitudinal distance from site (fixed) as predictors. The model outcomes were transformed back to the response scale. Each row is a different site (MN, IA, IL, and MO), and each column is a different fitness

component (P(Surv 4 wk), P(Flowering), P(Mature Fruit), Number of Fruit at 16 weeks). The blue line represents the expected value, and red horizontal dotted line indicates where the probability is 0.5, and the black horizontal dotted line represents the transplant site location. There are no confidence intervals due to the inclusion of block as a random effect.

Figure 5. Mean probability of survival at four weeks across spatial scales, corresponding to the results in Table 6. Each red box and text delineate a separate hardiness zone and the associated mean probability of survival for individuals from that zone. Each green box is a regional grouping within a zone, and the number indicates the mean probability of survival for individuals from that region. The legend on the right specifies the names for each zone and region, and the same legend applies to Figure 5 and 6. Blue triangles indicate the location of each site. Note that for MN and MO, the location of the site is masked by the regional groups.

Figure 6. Mean probability of flowering across spatial scales, corresponding to the results in Table 6. Each red box and text delineate a separate hardiness zone and the associated mean probability of survival for individuals from that zone. Each green box is a regional grouping within a zone, and the number indicates the mean probability of survival for individuals from that region. Sites where ‘region’ did not have a significant effect on the probability of flowering do not have regional groups. Blue triangles indicate the locations of each site, and black points indicate the location of individual populations.

Figure 7. Mean probability of producing mature fruits by 16 weeks across spatial scales, corresponding to the results in Table 6. Each red box and text delineate a separate

hardiness zone and the associated mean probability of survival for individuals from that zone. Each green box is a regional grouping within a zone, and the number indicates the mean probability of survival for individuals from that region. Sites where ‘region’ did not have a significant effect on the probability of flowering do not have regional groups. Blue triangles indicate the locations of each site, and black points indicate the location of individual populations. Note that for MN, the location of the site is masked by the regional groups.