A comment on García et al. (2005, 2007) and related papers on mating patterns and gene dispersal in Prunus mahaleb

In two studies on mating patterns and spatial components of pollen and seed dispersal of Prunus mahaleb based on parentage analysis, García et al. (2005, 2007) depicted their 196 focal trees as a spatially isolated population where all reproductive trees had been genotyped. Additional distributional data for P. mahaleb trees in their study area, however, revealed that García and colleagues’ depiction of their study system bears little resemblance to reality. The trees these authors studied did not form a discrete, geographically isolated population. Around 300 ungenotyped reproductive trees occurred within the 1.5‐km distributional gap to the nearest population proclaimed by García and colleagues. Since exhaustive sampling of potential parental genotypes is essential in parentage analyses, the occurrence of a large number of ungenotyped trees in the immediate neighbourhood of focal trees can severely affect the main conclusions of García et al. (2005, 2007) as well as of several related publications on gene dispersal and mating patterns of P. mahaleb conducted on the same trees and relying on the same false premises of spatial isolation and exhaustive sampling.