| Literature DB >> 31881935 |
Angelica Menchaca1,2, Natalia A Rossi3,4, Jeremy Froidevaux5, Isabela Dias-Freedman6, Anthony Caragiulo3, Claudia Wultsch3,7, Bart Harmsen8,9,10, Rebecca Foster8,10, J Antonio de la Torre11, Rodrigo A Medellin12, Salisa Rabinowitz3, George Amato13.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Connectivity among jaguar (Panthera onca) populations will ensure natural gene flow and the long-term survival of the species throughout its range. Jaguar conservation efforts have focused primarily on connecting suitable habitat in a broad-scale. Accelerated habitat reduction, human-wildlife conflict, limited funding, and the complexity of jaguar behaviour have proven challenging to maintain connectivity between populations effectively. Here, we used non-invasive genetic sampling and individual-based conservation genetic analyses to assess genetic diversity and levels of genetic connectivity between individuals in the Cockscomb Basin Wildlife Sanctuary and the Maya Forest Corridor. We used expert knowledge and scientific literature to develop models of landscape permeability based on circuit theory with fine-scale landscape features as ecosystem types, distance to human settlements and roads to predict the most probable jaguar movement across central Belize.Entities:
Keywords: Conservation genetics; Felidae; Functional habitat connectivity; Jaguar; Landscape permeability; Population structure
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31881935 PMCID: PMC6933898 DOI: 10.1186/s12863-019-0801-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Genet ISSN: 1471-2156 Impact factor: 2.797
The number of alleles (NA), allelic richness (AR), observed (HO) and expected heterozygosity (HE), fixation index (FIS), its standard error (SE), and P-value for the test of Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium for 12 microsatellite loci amplified for 50 jaguars
| Locus | NA | AR | HO | HE | FIS | SE | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FCA032 | 5 | 3.523 | 0.540 | 0.629 | 0.167 | 0.023 | 0.219 |
| FCA100 | 5 | 3.687 | 0.520 | 0.597 | 0.147 | 0.056 | 0.085 |
| FCA124 | 4 | 2.989 | 0.571 | 0.653 | 0.119 | 0.178 | 0.507 |
| FCA126 | 6 | 4.454 | 0.766 | 0.709 | −0.103 | 0.035 | 0.475 |
| FCA212 | 2 | 1.989 | 0.163 | 0.273 | 0.437 | 0.355 | |
| FCA229 | 6 | 4.172 | 0.596 | 0.729 | 0.240 | 0.313 | |
| FCA096 | 6 | 4.565 | 0.778 | 0.729 | −0.051 | 0.139 | 0.584 |
| FCA132 | 2 | 1.572 | 0.085 | 0.081 | 0.342 | 0.005 | 1.000 |
| FCA275 | 3 | 2.995 | 0.532 | 0.643 | 0.217 | 0.111 | |
| FCA075 | 10 | 6.852 | 0.612 | 0.844 | 0.261 | 0.051 | |
| FCA208 | 7 | 5.533 | 0.833 | 0.767 | −0.028 | 0.042 | 0.926 |
| FCA225 | 4 | 3.691 | 0.524 | 0.585 | 0.238 | 0.024 | 0.144 |
Bold values indicate loci not in Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium (p < 0.01) following Bonferroni correction. Estimates across all loci in italics
Fig. 1Genetic population structure of jaguars in central Belize. a Assignment probabilities of population structure as shown in STRUCTURE for K = 1 and K = 4, each bar represents a single jaguar individual; b Mantel’s test for correlation between genetic distance and geographic distance (km) showed low correlation, Rxy = 0.167, P-value = 0.010 from 10,000 randomizations; c Scatter plot of first two principal components (PCs) of the DACP analysis of genetic diversity, dots represent pairwise correlations between genetic and geographic distances. Bar plot displays the eigenvalues associated with the components; d GENELAND map of population membership probability for the most likely K = 1. Grayscale shading represents the posterior probability of belonging to a single cluster (K = 1). Basemap: DIVA-GIS, Belize map data©2019
Fig. 2Circuitscape cumulative current maps of the density of potential movement of P. onca as a factor of landscape resistance with the effect of habitat preference. a Omnidirectional connectivity between the Cockscomb Basin Wildlife Sanctuary and the Maya Forest corridor. b Closeup of main areas connecting the two study sites and Hummingbird highway. c Closeup for a region of two main pinch points crossing Hummingbird highway. Grey lines denote main roads. White circles denote the average location of individual jaguars identified with the genotype analysis. Brown areas represent the study area as calculated with a 95% minimum convex polygon (MCP95%). The amount of current flow through the landscape ranges from high in red to low in blue. Basemap: DIVA-GIS, Belize map data©2019
Fig. 3Predicted corridors for jaguar movement between the Cockscomb Basin Wildlife Sanctuary and the Maya Forest corridor that fall outside protected areas in central Belize. a Omnidirectional connectivity between the Cockscomb Basin Wildlife Sanctuary and the Maya Forest corridor with protected areas overlapping. b Closeup of potential jaguar movement corridors in unprotected areas east, west and south of Manatee Forest Reserve. c Closeup of potential jaguar movement corridors in unprotected areas northeast of Cockscomb Basin Wildlife Sanctuary and Mango Creek and east of Sittee River Forest Reserve. Black hatching represents the Maya Forest Corridor. Black-transparent areas represent protected areas. White circles denote the average location of individual jaguars identified with the genotype analysis. Brown areas represent the study area as calculated with a 95% minimum convex polygon (MCP95%). The amount of current flow through the landscape ranges from high in red to low in blue
Cost-values of jaguar habitat preference based on expert knowledge. Ecosystem names follow UNESCO’s classification system. Values range from 1 (not preferred) to 9 (highly preferred)
| Landscape feature | Preference |
|---|---|
| Lowland broad-leaved wet forest | 9 |
| Submontane broad-leaved wet forest | 8.8 |
| Lowland broad-leaved moist forest | 8.7 |
| Submontane broad-leaved moist forest | 8.7 |
| Lowland broad-leaved moist scrub forest | 7.4 |
| Lowland broad-leaved wet forest: Steep | 7.1 |
| Submontane broad-leaved wet forest: Steep | 7 |
| Lowland broad-leaved dry forest | 7 |
| Submontane broad-leaved moist forest: Steep | 6.9 |
| Lowland broad-leaved moist forest: Steep | 6.9 |
| Lowland broad-leaved moist scrub forest: Steep | 6.1 |
| Mangrove and littoral forest | 5.8 |
| Lowland pine forest | 5.7 |
| Wetland | 5.4 |
| Submontane pine forest | 5.4 |
| Water | 5.3 |
| Shrubland | 5.1 |
| Lowland savanna | 4.4 |
| Submontane pine forest: Steep | 3.9 |
| > 5 km distance from Highways | 9 |
| > 5 km distance from human settlements | 9 |
| > 3 and ≤ 5 km distance from Highways | 6.5 |
| > 3 and ≤ 5 km distance from human settlements | 6.5 |
| ≤ 3 km distance from Highways | 6.1 |
| ≤ 3 km distance from human settlements | 5.4 |
| Highway | 3.3 |
| Agricultural uses | 2.7 |
| Aquaculture | 2 |
| Wasteland | 1.8 |
| Urban | 1 |