Advertisement

Conservation Genetics

, Volume 6, Issue 6, pp 981–997 | Cite as

The effects of gene flow and population isolation on the genetic structure of␣reintroduced wild turkey populations: Are genetic signatures of source populations retained?

  • Emily K. Latch
  • Olin E. RhodesJr.
Article

Abstract

To counter losses of genetic diversity in reintroduced populations, species sometimes are reintroduced into networks of populations with the potential to exchange individuals. In reintroduced populations connected by gene flow, patterns of genetic structure initiated by the founding event may become obscured, and populations may eventually follow an isolation-by-distance model of genetic differentiation. Taking advantage of well-documented reintroduction histories of wild turkey populations in Indiana, we assessed the degree to which gene flow among reintroduced populations has obscured genetic signatures left by the founding events. Using a suite of nuclear microsatellite loci and sequence data from the mitochondrial control region, we characterized the level of genetic diversity and degree of genetic structure within and among: (1) reintroduced populations in isolated northern Indiana Fish and Wildlife Areas, (2) reintroduced populations in southern Indiana Fish and Wildlife Areas, where the distribution of populations is more continuous, and (3) source populations used for these reintroductions. We also utilized individual-based assignment tests to determine the relative contribution of source populations to the current distribution of alleles in reintroduced populations. Our results indicate that wild turkey reintroductions in Indiana have left distinct genetic signatures on populations that are detectable even after several decades. Although we found some case-specific evidence for gene flow, particularly in regions where populations are in close proximity, our data indicate on overall paucity of gene flow at a regional scale. Such post-reintroduction genetic monitoring has immediate implications for the design of optimal strategies to reintroduce wildlife for conservation and management.

Keywords

wild turkey translocation gene flow assignment microsatellite 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful for the technical assistance provided by Courtney Shattuck and Rochelle Jacques. We are indebted to Steve Backs from the Indiana Department of Natural Resources for his expertise in turkey biology and the management history of turkeys in Indiana, and to the numerous check station operators and wildlife biologists throughout our sampling area who helped us collect samples. We also would like to thank Jeff Glaubitz, Paul Leberg, Andrew DeWoody, and George Parker for helpful comments on earlier versions of the manuscript. We appreciate funding provided by Purdue University, the National Wild Turkey Federation, and the John S. Wright Endowment to the Department of Forestry and Natural Resources, Purdue University.

References

  1. Allendorf FW (1983) Isolation, gene flow, and genetic differentiation among populations. In: Schonewald-Cox CM, Chambers SM, MacBryde B, Thomas L (eds), Genetics and conservation: a reference for managing wild animal and plant populations. Benjamin/Cummings, Menlo Park, CA, pp. 51–65Google Scholar
  2. Backs SE, Eisfelder CH (1990) Criteria and guidelines for wild turkey release priorities in Indiana. Proceedings of the National Wild Turkey Symposium 6:134–143Google Scholar
  3. Baker AJ, Moeed A (1987) Rapid genetic differentiation and founder effect in colonizing populations of common mynahs (Acridotheres tristis). Evolution 41:525–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baker AJ (1992) Genetic and morphometric divergence in ancestral European and descendent New Zealand populations of chaffinches (Fringella coelebs). Evolution 46:1784–1800CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Depaulis F, Veuille M (1998). Neutrality tests based on the distribution of haplotypes under an infinite-site model. Mol. Biol. Evol. 15:1788–1790PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Fitzsimmons NN, Buskirk SW, Smith MH (1997) Genetic changes in reintroduced Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep populations. J. Wildlife Manag. 61:863–872CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fuerst PA, Maruyama T (1986) Considerations on the conservation of alleles and of genic heterozygosity in small managed populations. Zoo Biol. 5:171–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Glaubitz JC (2004) CONVERT (version 1.2): A user-friendly program to reformat diploid genotypic data for commonly used population genetic software packages. Mol. Ecol. Notes 4:309–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goudet J (2001) FSTAT, a program to estimate and test gene diversities and fixation indices (version 2.9.3). Available from http://www.unil.ch/izea/softwares/fstat.html.
  10. Hardy OJ, Vekemans X (2002). SPAGeDi: a versatile computer program to analyse spatial genetic structure at the individual or population levels. Mol. Ecol. Notes 2:618–620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Holm S (1979) A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scand. J. Statist., 6, 65–70.Google Scholar
  12. Huang HB, Song YQ, Hsel M, Zahorchak R, Chiu J, Teuscher C, Smith EJ (1999) Development and characterization of genetic mapping resources for the turkey (Meleagris gallopavo). J. Hered. 90:240–242CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Hurlbert SH (1971) The nonconcept of species diversity: a critique and alternative parameters. Ecology 52:577–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Latch EK, Smith EJ, Rhodes OE (2002) Isolation and characterization of microsatellite loci in wild and domestic turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo). Mol. Ecol. Notes 2:176–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Latch EK (2004) Population genetics of reintroduced wild turkeys: insights into hybridization, gene flow, and social structure. Dissertation, Purdue University, West Lafayette, INGoogle Scholar
  16. Latch EK, King JS, Harveson LA, Hobson MD, Rhodes OE (2005) Assessing hybridization in wildlife populations using molecular markers: A case study in wild turkeys. J. Wildlife Manag., in press.Google Scholar
  17. Leberg PL (1991) Effects of bottlenecks on genetic divergence in populations of the wild turkey. Conserv. Biol. 5:522–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Leberg PL, Stangel PW, Hillestad HO, Marchinton RL, Smith MH (1994) Genetic structure of reintroduced wild turkey and white-tailed deer populations. J. Wildlife Manag. 58:698–711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Leberg PL, Ellsworth DL (1999) Further evaluation of the genetic consequences of translocations on southeastern white-tailed deer populations. J. Wildlife Manag. 63:327–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lewis PO, Zaykin D (1999) Genetic data analysis: a computer program for the analysis of allelic data, version 1.1. Available at http://lewis.eeb.uconn.edu/lewishome/software.html.
  21. Luikart G, Allendorf FW, Cornuet JM, Sherwin WB (1998a) Distortion of allele frequency distributions provides a test for recent population bottlenecks. J. Hered. 89:238–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Luikart G, Sherwin WB, Steele BM, Allendorf FW (1998b) Usefulness of molecular markers for detecting population bottlenecks via monitoring genetic change. Mol. Ecol. 7:963–974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mantel N (1967) The detection of disease clustering and a generalized regression approach. Cancer Res. 27:209–220PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Maruyama T, Fuerst PA (1985) Population bottlenecks and nonequilibrium models in population genetics. 2. Number of alleles in a small population that was formed by a recent bottleneck. Genetics 111:675–689PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Merila J, Bjorklund M, Baker A (1996) The successful founder: genetics of introduced Caruelis chloris (greenfinch) populations in New Zealand. Heredity 77:410–422Google Scholar
  26. Mock KM, Latch EK, Rhodes OE (2004) Assessing losses of genetic diversity due to translocations: long-term case histories in Merriam’s turkey (Meleagris gallopavo merriami). Conserv. Genet. 5:631–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nei M, Li W-H (1973) Linkage disequilibrium in subdivided populations. Genetics 75:213–219PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Nei M, Maruyama T, Chakraborty R (1975) The bottleneck effect and genetic variability in populations. Evolution 29:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nei M (1987) Molecular Evolutionary Genetics. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Page RDM (1996) TREEVIEW: An application to display phylogenetic trees on personal computers. Comput. Appl. Biosci. 12:357–358PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Pearce J, Fields RL, Scribner KT (1997) Nest materials as a source of genetic data for avian behavioral studies. J. Field Ornithol., 68, 471–481Google Scholar
  32. Perez T, Albornoz J, Nores C, Dominguez A (1998) Evaluation of genetic variability in introduced populations of red deer (Cervus elaphus) using DNA fingerprinting. Hereditas 129:85–89CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Petit RJ, El Mousadik A, Pons O (1998) Identifying populations for conservation on the basis of genetic markers. Conserv. Biol. 12:844–855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P (2000) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155:945–959PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Raymond M, Rousset F (1995) GENEPOP (version 1.2): Population-genetics software for exact tests and ecumenicism. J. Hered. 86:248–249Google Scholar
  36. Rhodes OE, Buford DJ, Miller MS, Lutz RS (1995) Genetic structure of reintroduced Rio Grande wild turkeys in Kansas. J. Wildlife Manag. 59:771–775CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rhodes OE, Reat EP, Heffelfinger JR, DeVos JC (2001) Analysis of reintroduced pronghorn populations in Arizona using mitochondrial DNA markers. Proceedings of the Biennial Pronghorn Antelope Workshop 19:45–54Google Scholar
  38. Rousset F (1997) Genetic differentiation and estimation of gene flow from F-statistics under isolation by distance. Genetics 145:1219–1228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rousset F (1997) Genetic differentiation and estimation of gene flow from F-statistics under isolation by distance. Genetics 145:1219–1228PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Rowe GT, Beebee JC, Burke T (1998) Phylogeography of the natterjack toad Bufo calamita in Britain: genetic differentiation of native and translocated populations. Mol. Ecol. 7:751–760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rozas J, Sánchez-DelBarrio JC, Messeguer X, Rozas R (2003) DnaSP, DNA polymorphism analyses by the coalescent and other methods. Bioinformatics 19:2496–2497CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Scribner KT, Stuwe M (1994) Genetic relationships among alpine ibex Capra ibex populations re-established from a common ancestral source. Biol. Conserv. 69:137–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Slatkin M (1993) Isolation by distance in equilibrium and nonequilibrium populations. Evolution 47:264–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sokal RR, Wartenberg DE (1983) A test of spatial auto-correlation analysis using an isolation-by-distance model. Genetics 105:219–237PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Tajima F (1983) Evolutionary relationship of DNA sequences in finite populations. Genetics 105:437–460PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Weir BS, Cockerham CC (1984) Estimating F-Statistics for analysis of population structure. Evolution 38, 1358–1370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Williams RN, Rhodes OE, Serfass TL (2000) Assessment of genetic variance among source and reintroduced fisher populations. J. Mammal. 81:895–907CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Williams CL, Serfass TL, Cogan R, Rhodes OE (2002) Microsatellite variation in the reintroduced Pennsylvania elk herd. Mol. Ecol. 11:1299–1310CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Wright S (1978) Evolution and the genetics of populations, Vol. 4: variability within and among natural populations. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, ILGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Forestry and Natural ResourcesPurdue UniversityWest LafayetteUSA

Personalised recommendations