Population structure and gene flow in a newly harvested gray wolf (Canis lupus) population

Rick, Jessica A.; Moen, Ronald; Erb, John D.; Strasburg, Jared L.

doi:10.1007/s10592-017-0961-7

Cited by 15 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 82 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many carnivore populations experience human harvest, yet carnivore populations typically have smaller effective population sizes than species traditionally managed for sustained yield such as ungulates (Frankham, 1995). Thus, carnivore populations may be particularly sensitive to the potentially negative demographic and genetic effects related to harvest (Rick, Moen, Erb, & Starsburg, 2017) including impacts on social structure leading to undesirable hybridization (Bohling & Waits, 2015; Rutledge, White, Row, & Patterson, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does harvest affect genetic diversity in grey wolves?

Ausband

Waits

2020

Molecular Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Harvest can affect vital rates such as reproduction and survival, but also genetic measures of individual and population health. Grey wolves (Canis lupus) live and breed in groups, and effective population size is a small fraction of total abundance. As a result, genetic diversity of wolves may be particularly sensitive to harvest. We evaluated how harvest affected genetic diversity and relatedness in wolves. We hypothesized that harvest would (a) reduce relatedness of individuals within groups in a subpopulation but increase relatedness of individuals between groups due to increased local immigration, (b) increase individual heterozygosity and average allelic richness across groups in subpopulations and (c) add new alleles to a subpopulation and decrease the number of private alleles in subpopulations due to an increase in breeding opportunities for unrelated individuals. We found harvest had no effect on observed heterozygosity of individuals or allelic richness at loci within subpopulations but was associated with a small, biologically insignificant effect on within‐group relatedness values in grey wolves. Harvest was, however, positively associated with increased relatedness of individuals between groups and a net gain (+16) of alleles into groups in subpopulations monitored since harvest began, although the number of private alleles in subpopulations overall declined. Harvest likely created opportunities for wolves to immigrate into nearby groups and breed, thereby making groups in subpopulations more related over time. Harvest appears to affect genetic diversity in wolves at the group and population levels, but its effects are less apparent at the individual level given the population sizes we studied.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does harvest affect genetic diversity in grey wolves?

Ausband

Waits

2020

Molecular Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, approaches that incorporate recombination and linkage throughout the genome can produce accurate estimates of fine‐scale population structure using shared coancestry (Lawson et al., ; Leslie et al., ; Wallberg et al., ). These approaches have already demonstrated their utility for understanding connectivity in complex and human‐modified landscapes (Grummer & Leaché, ; Richardson et al., ; Richmond et al., ; Rick, Moen, Erb, & Strasburg, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial population genomics of the brown rat (Rattus norvegicus) in New York City

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human commensal species such as rodent pests are often widely distributed across cities and threaten both infrastructure and public health. Spatially explicit population genomic methods provide insights into movements for cryptic pests that drive evolutionary connectivity across multiple spatial scales. We examined spatial patterns of neutral genomewide variation in brown rats (Rattus norvegicus) across Manhattan, New York City (NYC), using 262 samples and 61,401 SNPs to understand (i) relatedness among nearby individuals and the extent of spatial genetic structure in a discrete urban landscape; (ii) the geographic origin of NYC rats, using a large, previously published data set of global rat genotypes; and (iii) heterogeneity in gene flow across the city, particularly deviations from isolation by distance. We found that rats separated by ≤200 m exhibit strong spatial autocorrelation (r = .3, p = .001) and the effects of localized genetic drift extend to a range of 1,400 m. Across Manhattan, rats exhibited a homogeneous population origin from rats that likely invaded from Great Britain. While traditional approaches identified a single evolutionary cluster with clinal structure across Manhattan, recently developed methods (e.g., fineS-TRUCTURE, sPCA, EEMS) provided evidence of reduced dispersal across the island's less residential Midtown region resulting in fine-scale genetic structuring (F ST = 0.01) and two evolutionary clusters (Uptown and Downtown Manhattan). Thus, while some urban populations of human commensals may appear to be continuously distributed, landscape heterogeneity within cities can drive differences in habitat quality and dispersal, with implications for the spatial distribution of genomic variation, population management and the study of widely distributed pests.

show abstract

“…Dispersing wolves travel through unfamiliar terrain, and sometimes through already held wolf territories, which increases their risk of being hunted or culled (Mech and Boitani 2003;Schmidt et al 2017). There is evidence that exploitation reduces local dispersal, emigration, and immigration of wolves, either as direct demographic compensation for human exploitation (Adams et al 2008) or as a consequence of reduced intraspecific competition (Rick et al 2017).…”

Section: Intrapopulation Differentiation and Genetic Statusmentioning

confidence: 99%