Noninvasive genetic sampling allows estimation of capercaillie numbers and population structure in the Bohemian Forest

Abstract

Wildlife conservation and management of endangered species requires reliable information on the size and structure of populations. One of the flagship species in European wildlife conservation is the forest-dwelling capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus), where several populations are endangered. In the Bohemian Forest, e.g., the population severely declined 30 years ago with only 100 birds remaining in 1985. Subsequently, breeding and release programs were conducted to supplement the local population. The current distribution and population size, however, remained unknown. With recent habitat changes and increasing recreational activities, a reliable population estimate to inform conservation plans was needed. A team of scientists and volunteers collected fresh capercaillie droppings covering an area of about 120,000 ha. We genotyped ten microsatellite loci to estimate the current population size and to determine the population's spatial and genetic structure.Population size and density estimators revealed a population size of approximately 500 individuals, which is thus one of the two largest relict populations in the low mountain ranges of temperate Europe. The population clustering revealed gene flow across the entire study area. Several genotypes were documented with multiple recaptures at spatial distances between 10 and 30 km additionally corroborating gene flow across the entire landscape of the study area. Males were more closely related than females on small spatial scales up to 3 km, indicating lower dispersal rates in males. We conclude that the population currently appears to have a viable size and shows unrestricted gene flow across state borders and management units of the entire Bohemian Forest. However, long-term viability of this population requires a transboundary strategy to sustainably protect and monitor this isolated capercaillie population in Central Europe.

Extraction of DNA from captive‐sourced feces and molted feathers provides a novel method for conservation management of New Zealand kiwi (Apteryxspp.)

“…However, this appeared to be enough to reliably amplify genotypes. While target nuclear DNA concentration and genotype quality achieved here are lower than the values obtained in mammals (see Figure and (Ramón‐Laca et al., )), amplification failure and ADO rates are comparable, and false allele occurrence was lower than in other avian studies (Tables and S2) (Bayard de Volo, Reynolds, Douglas, & Antolin, ; Horváth et al., ; Johansson, McMahon, & Höglund, ; Miño & Lama, ; Pérez et al., ; Regnaut, Lucas, & Fumagalli, ; Rösner et al., ; Segelbacher & Steinbruck, ; Segelbacher & Storch, ).…”

“…While target nuclear DNA concentration and genotype quality achieved here are lower than the values obtained in mammals (see Figure 5 and (Ramón-Laca et al, 2015)), amplification failure and ADO rates are comparable, and false allele occurrence was lower than in other avian studies F I G U R E 5 Log 10 -transformed target DNA concentration (measured in ng/μl) and quality index results for kiwi feces and shed feather samples compared with six mammalian species from (Ramón-Laca et al, 2015). QI scores range from 0 to 1, where 1 indicates complete agreement between all replicates (Tables 3 and S2) (Bayard de Volo, Reynolds, Douglas, & Antolin, 2008;Horváth et al, 2005;Johansson, McMahon, & Höglund, 2012;Miño & Lama, 2009;Pérez et al, 2011;Regnaut, Lucas, & Fumagalli, 2006;Rösner et al, 2014;Segelbacher & Steinbruck, 2001;Segelbacher & Storch, 2002).…”

“…Noninvasive samples have been used in many ecological and demographic avian surveys (e.g., molted feathers (Rodríguez-Muñoz, del Valle, Bañuelos, & Mirol, 2015), eggshells (Martín-Gálvez et al, 2011), regurgitations (González-Varo & Arroyo, 2014;Marrero, Fregel, Cabrera, & Nogales, 2009), and feces (Rösner, Brandl, Segelbacher, Lorenc, & Müller, 2014)). However, although increasing in popularity (Baumgardt et al, 2013;Pérez, Vázquez, Quirós, & Domínguez, 2011;Segelbacher, 2002), deriving population-level genetic information from noninvasive samples is not yet widespread in birds.…”

“…However, although increasing in popularity (Baumgardt et al, 2013;Pérez, Vázquez, Quirós, & Domínguez, 2011;Segelbacher, 2002), deriving population-level genetic information from noninvasive samples is not yet widespread in birds. While DNA extracted from bird feces has been used in phylogeographic and sex determination studies (Amada, 2012;Baumgardt et al, 2013;Huang, Zhou, Lin, Fang, & Chen, 2012;Idaghdour, Broderick, & Korrida, 2003;Robertson, Minot, & Lambert, 1999), there are fewer reports of using fecal DNA for estimating population parameters (Rösner et al, 2014). This is in contrast to the extensive fecal DNA work done with mammals (Broquet, Ménard, & Petit, 2006;Eggert, Maldonado, & Fleischer, 2005;Ramón-Laca, Soriano, Gleeson, & Godoy, 2015).…”

Large birds travel farther in homogeneous environments

“…Variation in moult patterns and their consequences for bird movement between species, populations and individuals were not considered here owing to lack of detailed moult data when movement was recorded. Reproduction is another vital part of an individual's life history and often involves a shift in movement patterns owing to the distribution of mates, lekking sites or availability of nesting sites or food resources (Cecere, Gaibani, & Imperio, 2014;Rösner, Brandl, Segelbacher, Lorenc, & Müller, 2014). Other environmental variables, such as wind speed and direction, were not included in our analyses, but might also account for some of the unexplained variance of our models (Harel, Horvitz, & Nathan, 2016;Mellone et al, 2015).…”