Biological Invasions

, Volume 12, Issue 8, pp 2609–2618 | Cite as

Rapid spatial genetic differentiation in an invasive species, the round goby Neogobius melanostomus in the Baltic Sea

Original Paper


We analysed the pattern of genetic differentiation among six newly established (around 10 generations) sites of the round goby (Neogobius melanostomus) in the southern Baltic Sea by means of nine microsatellite loci and in total 183 individuals. All but one site were within 30 km from each other. We found statistically significant genetic differentiation in ten out of 15 comparisons after Bonferroni correction, and since the species is newly introduced this has happened in less than ten generations. The largest genetic differentiation was found between the two most divergent habitats, while sites with a similar habitat were not significantly differentiated. Estimates of gene flow (Nm) were low and ranged from 1.5 to 5.5. A large proportion of individuals were assigned to one site (Puck), suggesting that this site has acted as a source to the other sites.


Genetic divergence Microsatellites Round goby Invasive species Life-history 



MB and the genetic analyses were supported by FORMAS. This study is a part of the Swedish program AquaAliens, funded by Swedish EPA with support from the Swedish Board of Fisheries. We thank Åsa Kestrup, Alma Strandmark Michal Skora and the staff at Hel Marine Station for help, and Atis Minde for samples from Latvia. We also thank Sara Bergek, Niklas Kolm and Mare Löhmus for discussions and comments on the ms, and Reija Dufva for doing the labwork.


  1. Adams CE, Hamilton DJ, McCarthy I, Wilson AJ, Grant A, Alexander G, Waldron S, Snorasson SS, Ferguson MM, Skúlason S (2006) Does breeding site fidelity drive phenotypic and genetic sub-structuring of a population of Arctic charr? Evol Ecol 20:11–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Almqvist G (2008) Round goby Neogobius melanstomus in the Baltic Sea—invasion biology in practice. PhD thesis Stockholm University.
  3. Begg CB (1994) Publication bias. In: Cooper H, Hedges LV (eds) The handbook of research synthesis. Russel Sage Foundation, New York, pp 399–409Google Scholar
  4. Behrmann-Godel J, Gerlach G (2008) First evidence for postzygotic reproductive isolation between two sites of Eurasian perch (Perca fluviatilis L.) within Lake Constance. Frontier Zool 5:3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Behrmann-Godel J, Gerlach G, Eckmann R (2006) Kin and population recognition in sympatric Lake Constance perch (Perca fluviatilis L.): can assortative shoaling drive population divergence? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 59:461–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bergek S, Björklund M (2007) Cryptic barriers to dipsersal within a lake allow genetic divergence of Eurasian perch. Evolution 61:2035–2041CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bergek S, Björklund M (2009) Genetic and morphological divergence reveals local subdivision of perch (Perca fluviatilis L.). Biol J Linn Soc 96:746–758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Björklund M, Bergek S (2009) On the relationship between population divergence and sampling effort: is more always better? Oikos 118:1127–1129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Björklund M, Ruiz I, Senar JC (2010) Genetic differentiation in the urban habitat: the great tits (Parus major) of the parks of Barcelona city. Biol J Linn Soc (in press)Google Scholar
  10. Brown JE, Stepien CA (2008) Ancient divisions, rewcent expansions: phylogeography and population genetics of the round goby Apollonia melanostoma. Mol Ecol 17:2598–2615CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Brown JE, Stepien CA (2009) Invasion genetics of the Eurasian round goby in North America: tracing soruces and spread patterns. Mol Ecol 18:64–79PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Csilléry K, Johnson T, Beraldi D, Clutton-Brock T, Coltman D, Hansson B, Spong G, Pemberton JM (2006) Performance of marker-based relatedness estimators in natural sites of outbred vertebrates. Genetics 173:2091–2101CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Goudet J (2001) FSTAT, a program to estimate and test gene diversities and fixation indices (version 2.9.3). Available from
  14. Hendry AP, Wenburg JK, Bentzen P, Volk EC, Quinn TP (2000) Rapid evolution of reproductive isolation in the wild: evidence from introduced salmon. Science 290:516–518CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Hensler S, Jude D (2007) Diel vertical migration of round goby larvae as a potential mechanism for advective dispersal and ballast water transport. J Great Lakes Res 33:295–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jude DJ (1997) Round gobies: cyberfish of the third millenium. Great Lake Res Rev 3:27–34Google Scholar
  17. Karlsson AML, Almqvist G, Skora KE, Appelberg M (2007) Indications of competition between non-indigenous round goby and native flounder in the Baltic Sea. ICES J Mar Sci 64:479–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Knutsen H, Jorde PE, Andre C, Stenseth NC (2003) Fine-scaled geographic population structuring in a highly mobile marine species: the Atlantic cod. Mol Ecol 12:385–394CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Kolar SK, Lodge DM (2001) Progress in invasion biology: predicting invaders. Trends Ecol Evol 16:1233–1236Google Scholar
  20. Kuhner MK (2006) LAMARC 2.0: maximum likelihood and Bayesian estimation of sample parameters. Bioinformatics 22:768–770CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Lynch M, Ritland K (1999) Estimation of pairwise relatedness with molecular markers. Genetics 152:1753–1766PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Novak SJ (2007) The role of evolution in the invasion process. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:3671–3672CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Piry S, Alapetite A, Cornuet J-M, Paetkau D, Baudouin L, Estoup A (2004) GeneClass2: a software for genetic assignment and first-generation migrant detection. J Hered 95:536–539CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Rannala B, Mountain JL (1997) Detecting immigration by using multilocus genotypes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94:9197–9201CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Raymond M, Rousset F (1997) GENEPOP (version 1.2): population genetics software for exact tests and ecumenicism. J Hered 86:248–249Google Scholar
  26. Rice WR (1989) Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43:223–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sakai AK, Allendorf FW, Holt JS, Lodge DM, Molofsky J, With KA, Baughman S, Cabin RJ, Cohen JE, Ellstrand NC, McCauley DE, O’Neil P, Parker IM, Thompson JN, Weller SG (2001) The population biology of invasive species. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 32:305–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Schneider S, Kueffer J-M, Roessli D, Excoffier L (1996) Arlequin, ver. 1.0b5a, University of GenevaGoogle Scholar
  29. Stone JR, Björklund M (2001) Delrious: a computer program designed to analyse molecular marker data and calculate delta and relatedness estimates with confidence. Mol Ecol Notes 1:209–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. van Oosterhout C, Hutchinson WF, Wills DPM, Shipley P (2004) MICRO-CHECKER: software for identifying and correcting genotyping errors in microsatellite data. Mol Ecol Notes 4:535–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Vyskocilova M, Ondrackova M, Simkova A, Martin J-F (2007) Isolation and characterization of microsatellites in Neogobius kessleri (Perciformes, Gobiidae) and cross-species amplification within the family Gobidae. Mol Ecol Notes 7:701–704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Waples RS (1998) Separating the wheat from the chaff: patterns of genetic divergence in high gene flow species. J Hered 89:438–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Waples RS, Gaggiotti O (2006) What is a population? An empirical evaluation of some genetic methods for identifying the number of gene pools and their degree of connectivity. Mol Ecol 15:1419–1439CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Whitlock MC (2005) Combining probability from independent tests: the weighted Z-method is superior to Fisher’s approach. J Evol Biol 18:1368–1372CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Xu H, Fu Y-X (2004) Estimating effective population size or mutation rate with microsatellites. Genetics 166:555–563CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Animal Ecology, Evolutionary Biology CentreUppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden
  2. 2.Department of Systems EcologyStockholm UniversityStockholmSweden
  3. 3.Swedish Board of FisheriesInstitute of Coastal ResearchÖregrundSweden

Personalised recommendations