1999
DOI: 10.2307/2640837
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Genetic Diversity and Capillaria hepatica (Nematoda) Prevalence in Michigan Deer Mouse Populations

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
42
1

Year Published

2004
2004
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 46 publications
(46 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
3
42
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Prevalence observations reflect those from our previous experiment using a single resistant line of B. glabrata (Sandland et al 2007). Taken together, these prevalence results were somewhat unexpected given that outcrossing has been associated with reduced infection in other host-parasite systems (Meagher 1999;Acevedo-Whitehouse et al 2003). Two explanations may help to resolve these differences.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 33%
“…Prevalence observations reflect those from our previous experiment using a single resistant line of B. glabrata (Sandland et al 2007). Taken together, these prevalence results were somewhat unexpected given that outcrossing has been associated with reduced infection in other host-parasite systems (Meagher 1999;Acevedo-Whitehouse et al 2003). Two explanations may help to resolve these differences.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 33%
“…This could either be due to a change in the behavior of chipmunks or to a higher rate of dissemination in the native host populations. This result also suggests that chipmunks in H. Sellier Park may be less resistant against infection than other populations, as found for inbred populations of small rodents on small islands (Meagher 1999).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 58%
“…However, it has been suggested that populations experiencing bottleneck(s) may be less susceptible to future inbreeding depression because they would be 'purged' of deleterious recessive alleles (Crnokrak and Barrett 2002). Despite that 'purging' has been suggested as a possible tool in the management of endangered species in captive breeding programs, several factors make this approach highly unreliable (reviewed in (Leberg and Firmin 2007)): (i) the genetic basis of inbreeding depression is generally unknown and probably highly variable among species, (ii) laboratory experiments indicated a high variance in the response to purging among replicates, probably because drift causes stochastic, deleterious, changes in genetic composition, (iii) purging is more efficient with slow inbreeding and large population sizes, (iv) purging on some loci may be effective only in the environment in which purging occurred, and (v) purging may reduce both viability and adaptability (e.g., genetically variable populations can better withstand disease epidemics compared to less variable populations (Lively et al 1990;Coltman et al 1999;Meagher 1999)) as well as increase extinction risks. Given the unpredictability of purging, inbreeding is probably best avoided in captive breeding and restauration programs by maximizing variability (Montgomery et al 1997;Milinkovitch et al 2004;Leberg and Firmin 2007) and retaining the population structure observed in the wild (Tzika et al 2008).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%