Population structure of California coyotes corresponds to habitat‐specific breaks and illuminates species history

Abstract

Little is known about the relationship between animal movements and the emergent structure of populations, especially for species occupying large continuous distributions. Some such mammals disperse disproportionately into habitat similar to their natal habitat, a behavioural bias that might be expected to lead to habitat-conforming genetic structure. We hypothesized that coyotes (Canis latrans) would exhibit such natal-biased dispersal, and used 13 microsatellite loci to test, correspondingly, whether genetic structure conformed to major habitat breaks. First, we used a model-based approach to assign coyote genotypes to distinct genetic clusters irrespective of geographical location. Visualization on a geographical information system revealed a strong concordance between the locations of cluster assignments and habitat bioregions, not explainable in terms of physical dispersal barriers or intervening low-quality habitat. Next, we used a multiple Mantel test, which controlled for effects of geographical distance (itself, marginally significant; P = 0.06), to statistically determine that genetic distance was indeed higher between than within bioregions (P < 0.001). Whereas previously published examples of landscape effects on gene flow have typically been explainable in terms of species-wide habitat affinities or dispersal barriers, our finding that genetic subdivisions were associated with unobstructed boundaries between contiguous habitats suggests a role for intraspecific variability in habitat affinities as a factor underlying genetic structure. In addition, our data combined with previously published data suggest a pattern of genetic isolation-by-distance throughout western North America, consistent with independent evidence that the western half of the coyote range predates European settlement.

Concordant mitochondrial and microsatellite DNA structuring between Polish lowland and Carpathian Mountain wolves

“…Natal-habitat biased dispersal seems a possible explanation in the case of Carpathian wolves, and is consistent with findings from Europe and North America (Geffen et al 2004;Sacks et al 2004;Pilot et al 2006). Population genetic structure consistent with the presence of highland and lowland habitats has been reported in coyotes (Sacks et al 2004(Sacks et al , 2005 and merits further attention in wolf populations from the Carpathians Mountains and surrounding lowland areas. Differences in the legal status and protection of the species in the Carpathians might also influence genetic structure, as only wolves in the Polish and Czech parts of the north-western edge of the Carpathian Mountains are protected.…”

“…The moderate F ST values (0.05-0.15) observed between a number of lowland regions require further investigation, as well as the high F ST value (0.156) seen between wolves in regions 6 and 7 that are separated by \50 km. Assessment of samples from contiguous regions, landscape features, and additional genetic markers could improve understanding of the extent to which these differences might be explained by landscape fragmentation or ecological differences resulting in natal habitat-biased dispersal (Geffen et al 2004;Sacks et al 2004;Pilot et al 2006).…”

Conservation implications for dingoes from the maternal and paternal genome: Multiple populations, dog introgression, and demography

“…It is possible that the two dingo populations have different ecological or biological characteristics relevant to the conservation and management of the species or its role in specific ecosystems. Patterns of genetic subdivision in other large carnivores have been linked to ecologically relevant characteristics such as neonatal dispersal (Sacks, Bannasch, Chomel, & Ernest, 2008; Sacks, Brown, & Ernest, 2004), prey specialization (Carmichael, Nagy, Larter, & Strobeck, 2001), environmental climes (Carmichael et al., 2001; Rueness, Jorde et al., 2003; Rueness, Stenseth et al., 2003; Stenseth et al., 2004), and sociality (Randall, Pollinger, Argaw, Macdonald, & Wayne, 2010). This is a key knowledge gap, which needs to be interrogated by future ecological research.…”

Differentiation of tundra/taiga and boreal coniferous forest wolves: genetics, coat colour and association with migratory caribou

“…Finally, Pilot et al (2006) found that genetic differentiation in European wolves was correlated with climate, habitat types, and diet composition and also suggested that natalhabitat biased dispersal was the underlying mechanism linking population ecology vntin genetic sb:xicture. Apparently, in large canids, ecotypic divergence may be the primary mode of differentiation (Carmichael et al 2001;Musiani 2003;Geffen et al 2004;Sacks et al 2004Sacks et al , 2005Pilot et al 2006;Carmichael et al in press) presenting an alternative to topographically induced population structure (Avise 2000).…”