Lucek_et_al_JEB-2014-00477.R1_Dryad

Microsatellite data for contemporary and linear morphology for historical and contemporary stickleback populations from the Lake Geneva region and Switzerland

Bezault_LVRS-AFLP_EVOL-10-0838

Matrix of AFLP Genotypes. Individuals by lines and loci genotype (presence/absence) in column

KellerEtAl_MicrosatelliteGenotypes

KellerEtAl_MicrosatelliteGenotype

Morphology

Geometric morphometric landmarks and linear measurements for experimental F1 threespine stickleback, their parents, wild type adults and young of the year individuals. Wild caught fish derive either from a lake or a stream site whereas experimental families were split and raised either under a benthic or limnetic diet

Summary of stomach content data from wild caught adults.

<p>a) Percentage of planktonic prey in the stomachs of adult stickleback caught either at the lakeshore or stream habitat before the beginning of the breeding season (March 2009) and during the breeding season (July 2007). Indicated significances are based on post hoc <i>t</i> tests for a generalized linear model among sampling events (see text for details). b) Relative abundance of prey items in the stomach of all fish pooled per sampling event.</p

Results (two-tailed p-values) of Student’s t-tests comparing five components of fitness between homospecific, non-hybrid crosses, F1 hybrid crosses, and F2 hybrid crosses.

<p>Italics indicate significant comparisons after Bonferroni correction.</p><p>Results (two-tailed p-values) of Student’s t-tests comparing five components of fitness between homospecific, non-hybrid crosses, F1 hybrid crosses, and F2 hybrid crosses.</p

Distribution of standard lengths for the lake and stream habitat from wild caught adult individuals for each age class.

<p>No three-year-old stream fish were obtained. Significant size differences between habitats within an age class, based on Tukey’s HSD post hoc tests are indicated. Overall lake fish are significantly larger (<i>p<0.001</i>) when accounted for age.</p

Summary of the increase in body size over time for experimental fish.

<p>(a) Illustration of the method used to estimate average family-based body size. A 1×1 mm grid was attached to the bottom of a standardized plastic container, where the water level was kept at 1.5 cm. Panels b and c show the average body size over time for lake and stream populations under either b) lake-like or c) stream-like food treatment. Dots represent the mean standard length (SL) of all families per source population (±1 SE).</p

Appendix D. Between treatments Kruskal Wallis ANOVA and post-hoc t tests.

Between treatments Kruskal Wallis ANOVA and post-hoc t tests

Experimental crosses with genetic distance, divergence time and sample sizes.

<p>Crosses with parental species names, geography (sym = sympatric, allo = allopatric), genetic distance (uncorrected p), and divergence times in million years based on the lower and upper bounds of an internally calibrated, linear clock (using the age of Lake Malawi [<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0127207#pone.0127207.ref030" target="_blank">30</a>]), and two relaxed non-linear molecular clocks using the cichlid fossil record and the break up of Gondwanaland [<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0127207#pone.0127207.ref031" target="_blank">31</a>]. For details on these calibrations see Stelkens et al. [<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0127207#pone.0127207.ref012" target="_blank">12</a>]. The number of families used for the calculation of the different fitness components are shown (fert = fertilization rate, hatch = hatching rate, 14 surv = survival rate until 14 days after hatching, 180 surv = survival rate until 180 days after hatching, cumul = cumulative fitness), and the number of F1 families used to produce F2 (“mixed” indicates one case where we were forced to merge several F1 families before generating F2). Homospecific, non-hybrid crosses are listed in the lower part of the table. Hyphens indicate missing data. The number of families available usually drops with developmental stage because mortality increases with each successive measurement. For some families fitness was measured at later stages but not at earlier stages or vice versa, which is why the number of families is not stable or does not always decrease as the experiment progressed.</p><p>Experimental crosses with genetic distance, divergence time and sample sizes.</p