Hybrid Zones, Genetic Isolation, and Systematics of Pocket Gophers (Genus<i>Geomys</i>) in Nebraska

Genoways, Hugh H.; Hamilton, Meredith J.; Bell, Darin M.; Chambers, Ryan R.; Bradley, Robert D.

doi:10.1644/07-mamm-a-408.1

Cited by 16 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Genetic analysis is required to distinguish between G. bursarius and Knox Jones's pocket gopher (G. knoxjonesi-Bradley and Baker 1999). G. bursarius is larger than G. lutescens (Genoways et al 2008). The karyotype of G. bursarius has a diploid number (2n) of 70-72 and a fundamental number (FN) of 68-74 (Hart 1978) that distinguishes it from G. lutescens (2n 5 70-72, FN 5 70-98- Hart 1978).…”

Section: Diagnosismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The karyotype of G. bursarius has a diploid number (2n) of 70-72 and a fundamental number (FN) of 68-74 (Hart 1978) that distinguishes it from G. lutescens (2n 5 70-72, FN 5 70-98- Hart 1978). At a contact zone in Nebraska, G. b. majusculus (2n 5 70, FN 5 68- Genoways et al 2008) is distinct from G. jugossicularis (2n 5 70, FN 5 72- Genoways et al 2008). In the northern portion of the range of G. bursarius, it can be distinguished from Thomomys by its grooved upper incisors (Merriam 1895).…”

Section: Diagnosismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Geomys bursarius occurs from southern Manitoba, Canada, throughout the Midwest of the United States from Minnesota to Texas, within portions of Indiana, and west to eastern Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico (Chambers et al 2009;Elrod et al 2000;Genoways et al 2008;Hall 1981;Fig. 3).…”

Section: Distributionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Order Rodentia, family Geomyidae, subfamily Geomyinae, tribe Geomyini. G. bursarius is 1 of 11 species in the genus Geomys (Genoways et al 2008;Patton 2005;Sudman et al 2006). The taxonomic status of the number of G. bursarius subspecies has been in question, especially the lutescens complex.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Geomys bursarius (Rodentia: Geomyidae)

Connior

2011

Mammalian Species

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Diagnosismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Diagnosismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Distributionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Geomys bursarius (Rodentia: Geomyidae)

Connior

2011

Mammalian Species

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This lack of introgression might be due to differences in the number of Robertsonian polymorphisms that occurs within B. brevicauda and B. hylophaga (Meylan 1967;Lee and Zimmerman 1969;Genoways et al 1977;George et al 1982;Oshida et al 2003), which likely reduces fitness (Searle 1993). Several hybrid zone studies have documented limited introgression between species with chromosomal rearrangements (Bradley et al 1991;Basset et al 2007;Genoways et al 2008). Hybrid zones in which hybrids have reduced fitness can reduce or impede introgression between species (Baker et al 1989;Searle 1993;Baker and Bradley 2006), which maintains the integrity of parental gene pools despite interbreeding (Bigelow 1965;Baker et al 1989).…”

Section: Extent Of Hybridization and Introgressionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification and characterization of the contact zone between short-tailed shrews (Blarina) in Iowa and Missouri

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Short-tailed shrews (genus Blarina Gray, 1838) are characterized by divergent karyotypes and are genetically distinct. Blarina species are similar morphologically but, in most cases, can be distinguished morphometrically. Blarina distributions tend to be parapatric along well-defined contact zones; however, it has been suggested that the northern short-tailed shrew (Blarina brevicauda (Say, 1823)) and Elliot's short-tailed shrew (Blarina hylophaga Elliot, 1899) occur sympatrically in Iowa and Missouri. To evaluate this possibility, 179 specimens were collected in southwestern Iowa and northwestern Missouri. Karyotypes and total length were used for field identification, and amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) analysis was used to verify field identifications and to investigate the extent of hybridization. One hundred seventyeight of 179 specimens were identified to species. The one exception had a karyotype of B. brevicauda (2n = 50, FN = 48); however, AFLP analysis indicated that this individual was likely an F1 hybrid. No backcrosses were detected, so it appears that introgression is minimal. The putative hybrid was trapped at a locality with B. brevicauda just north of a locality having only B. hylophaga. No locality contained both species. Therefore, these species are not broadly sympatric as has been suggested, but rather exhibit a distribution similar to the pattern of parapatry seen in most of the contact zones of Blarina.Résumé : Les musaraignes à queue courte (du genre Blarina Gray, 1838) se caractérisent par des caryotypes divergents et sont génétiquement distinctes. Les espèces de Blarina sont semblables morphologiquement, mais dans la plupart des cas, la morphométrie permet de les distinguer. Les répartitions des Blarina ont tendance à être parapatriques le long de zones de contact bien définies; on croit néanmoins que la grande musaraigne à queue courte (Blarina brevicauda (Say, 1823)) et la musaraigne à queue courte d'Elliot (Blarina hylophaga Elliot, 1899) se retrouvent en sympatrie en Iowa et au Missouri. Afin de vérifier cette possibilité, nous avons récolté 179 spécimens dans le sud-ouest de l'Iowa et le nord-ouest du Missouri. Les caryotypes et la longueur totale nous ont servi pour les identifications de terrain et une analyse du polymorphisme des longueurs des segments amplifiés (AFLP) a permis de confirmer les identifications de terrain et de déterminer l'importance de l'hybridation. Des 179 spécimens, 178 ont été identifiés à l'espèce. La seule exception avait un caryotype de B. brevicauda (2n = 50, FN = 48); cependant l'analyse de ALFP indique que cet individu est vraisemblablement un hybride de F1. Comme il n'y a aucune indication de rétrocroisement, l'introgression semble minimale. L'hybride putatif a été piégé dans une localité contenant B. brevicauda située juste au nord d'une localité où vit seulement B. hylophaga. Aucune localité ne contient les deux espèces. Les deux espèces ne possèdent donc pas une importante zone de sympatrie, comme on le croyait; ils ont plu...

show abstract

Size‐assortative choice and mate availability influences hybridization between red wolves (Canis rufus) and coyotes (Canis latrans)

Hinton

Gittleman

Manen

et al. 2018

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anthropogenic hybridization of historically isolated taxa has become a primary conservation challenge for many imperiled species. Indeed, hybridization between red wolves (Canis rufus) and coyotes (Canis latrans) poses a significant challenge to red wolf recovery. We considered seven hypotheses to assess factors influencing hybridization between red wolves and coyotes via pair‐bonding between the two species. Because long‐term monogamy and defense of all‐purpose territories are core characteristics of both species, mate choice has long‐term consequences. Therefore, red wolves may choose similar‐sized mates to acquire partners that behave similarly to themselves in the use of space and diet. We observed multiple factors influencing breeding pair formation by red wolves and found that most wolves paired with similar‐sized conspecifics and wolves that formed congeneric pairs with nonwolves (coyotes and hybrids) were mostly female wolves, the smaller of the two sexes. Additionally, we observed that lower red wolf abundance relative to nonwolves and the absence of helpers increased the probability that wolves consorted with nonwolves. However, successful pairings between red wolves and nonwolves were associated with wolves that maintained small home ranges. Behaviors associated with territoriality are energetically demanding and behaviors (e.g., aggressive interactions, foraging, and space use) involved in maintaining territories are influenced by body size. Consequently, we propose the hypothesis that size disparities between consorting red wolves and coyotes influence positive assortative mating and may represent a reproductive barrier between the two species. We offer that it may be possible to maintain wild populations of red wolves in the presence of coyotes if management strategies increase red wolf abundance on the landscape by mitigating key threats, such as human‐caused mortality and hybridization with coyotes. Increasing red wolf abundance would likely restore selection pressures that increase mean body and home‐range sizes of red wolves and decrease hybridization rates via reduced occurrence of congeneric pairs.

show abstract

Hybrid Zones, Genetic Isolation, and Systematics of Pocket Gophers (GenusGeomys) in Nebraska

Cited by 16 publications

References 26 publications

Geomys bursarius (Rodentia: Geomyidae)

Geomys bursarius (Rodentia: Geomyidae)

Identification and characterization of the contact zone between short-tailed shrews (Blarina) in Iowa and Missouri

Size‐assortative choice and mate availability influences hybridization between red wolves (Canis rufus) and coyotes (Canis latrans)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About