Appendices

Supplementary material for: Urfus et al. (2024)

• Supplementary Data S1. – Relative genome sizes of the individuals sampled at the different localities.
• Supplementary Data S2. – R code describing the classification of the non-reference individuals into taxa.
• Supplementary Fig. S1. – Percentage of individuals classified as putative hybrids in response to the chosen level of the probability criterion in each of the populations.
• Supplementary Fig. S2. – Leaf with marked characters that were measured for plants included in this study.
• Supplementary Fig. S3. – Canonical discriminant analysis of individual plants of five groups predefined based on genome size and ploidy.
• Supplementary Fig. S4. – A. Fragment of ITS alignment (positions 419-560 bp) with the single parsimony informative position at 513 bp) based on which three ribotypes were defined.
• Supplementary Table S1. – List of localities.
• Supplementary Table S2. – Relative genome size of the Urtica samples analysed.
• Supplementary Table S3. – Results of canonical discriminant analyses of Urtica dioica, U. kioviensis, and their diploid and triploid hybrids.
• Supplementary Table S4. – Pollen viability of the parental species Urtica dioica and U. kioviensis