Literature DB >> 19967877

Wolverine gene flow across a narrow climatic niche.

Michael K Schwartz1, Jeffrey P Copeland, Neil J Anderson, John R Squires, Robert M Inman, Kevin S McKelvey, Kristy L Pilgrim, Lisette P Waits, Samuel A Cushman.   

Abstract

Wolverines (Gulo gulo) are one of the rarest carnivores in the contiguous United States. Effective population sizes in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming, where most of the wolverines in the contiguous United States exist, were calculated to be 35 (credible limits, 28 52) suggesting low abundance. Landscape features that influence wolverine population substructure and gene flow are largely unknown. Recent work has identified strong associations between areas with persistent spring snow and wolverine presence and range. We tested whether a dispersal model in which wolverines prefer to disperse through areas characterized by persistent spring snow cover produced least-cost paths among all individuals that correlated with genetic distance among individuals. Models simulating large preferences for dispersing within areas characterized by persistent spring snow explained the data better than a model based on Euclidean distance. Partial Mantel tests separating Euclidean distance from spring snow-cover-based effects indicated that Euclidean distance was not significant in describing patterns of genetic distance. Because these models indicated that successful dispersal paths followed areas characterized by spring snow cover, we used these understandings to derive empirically based least-cost corridor maps in the U.S. Rocky Mountains. These corridor maps largely explain previously published population subdivision patterns based on mitochondrial DNA and indicate that natural colonization of the southern Rocky Mountains by wolverines will be difficult but not impossible.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19967877     DOI: 10.1890/08-1287.1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ecology        ISSN: 0012-9658            Impact factor:   5.499


  25 in total

1.  Prioritizing tiger conservation through landscape genetics and habitat linkages.

Authors:  Bibek Yumnam; Yadvendradev V Jhala; Qamar Qureshi; Jesus E Maldonado; Rajesh Gopal; Swati Saini; Y Srinivas; Robert C Fleischer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-11-13       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  Beyond the continuum: a multi-dimensional phase space for neutral-niche community assembly.

Authors:  Guillaume Latombe; Cang Hui; Melodie A McGeoch
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2015-12-22       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Landscape influences on dispersal behaviour: a theoretical model and empirical test using the fire salamander, Salamandra infraimmaculata.

Authors:  Arik Kershenbaum; Lior Blank; Iftach Sinai; Juha Merilä; Leon Blaustein; Alan R Templeton
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2014-03-20       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  The effect of map boundary on estimates of landscape resistance to animal movement.

Authors:  Erin L Koen; Colin J Garroway; Paul J Wilson; Jeff Bowman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-07-26       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Fine-scale landscape genetics of the American badger (Taxidea taxus): disentangling landscape effects and sampling artifacts in a poorly understood species.

Authors:  E M Kierepka; E K Latch
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2015-08-05       Impact factor: 3.821

6.  Fine-scale analysis reveals cryptic landscape genetic structure in desert tortoises.

Authors:  Emily K Latch; William I Boarman; Andrew Walde; Robert C Fleischer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-11-21       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Multiscale patterns of isolation by ecology and fine-scale population structure in Texas bobcats.

Authors:  Imogene A Cancellare; Elizabeth M Kierepka; Jan Janecka; Byron Weckworth; Richard T Kazmaier; Rocky Ward
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2021-06-03       Impact factor: 2.984

8.  Connectivity in a pond system influences migration and genetic structure in threespine stickleback.

Authors:  Mathew Seymour; Katja Räsänen; Rolf Holderegger; Bjarni K Kristjánsson
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2013-01-18       Impact factor: 2.912

9.  Where to restore ecological connectivity? Detecting barriers and quantifying restoration benefits.

Authors:  Brad H McRae; Sonia A Hall; Paul Beier; David M Theobald
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-12-27       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  The sensitivity of genetic connectivity measures to unsampled and under-sampled sites.

Authors:  Erin L Koen; Jeff Bowman; Colin J Garroway; Paul J Wilson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-02-08       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.