Conservation Genetics

, Volume 14, Issue 1, pp 231–236 | Cite as

Low genetic diversity of a high mountain burnet moth species in the Pyrenees

  • Petra Dieker
  • Claudia Drees
  • Thomas Schmitt
  • Thorsten Assmann
Short Communication


The burnet moth Zygaena anthyllidis, endemic to the high elevations of the Pyrenees, is vulnerable to land-use. In order to identify conservation priorities based on an assessment of genetic diversity within populations and gene flow among populations, we examined Z. anthyllidis’ genetic variability and differentiation based on allozyme electrophoresis from seven populations scattered across its entire range. In comparison to other mountain Lepidoptera, the populations studied exhibit a low level of genetic diversity. Remarkable between-population differentiation (F ST = 0.053), the presence of private alleles, and the lack of significant isolation-by-distance pattern characterises the genetic make-up of the species. We interpreted the pattern of genetic differentiation as a consequence of low dispersal power in combination with insufficient landscape connectivity. Ongoing land-use change might reinforce genetic differentiation due to habitat fragmentation and additionally affect negatively allozyme variability at shifting range margins, i.e. the capacity to adapt to changing environments. We therefore suggest creating a network of suitable habitats at the landscape scale to facilitate genetic exchange and to conserve the species’ overall genetic variability.


Allozymes Conservation genetics Genetic diversity Genetic differentiation Pyrenees Zygaena anthyllidis 



We are grateful to the respective authorities for the necessary permissions. PD was funded by the Scholarship Programme AFR of the National Research Fund (FNR), Luxembourg. Furthermore, we thank the National Museum of Natural History Luxembourg for financial support.


  1. Baguette M, van Dyck H (2007) Landscape connectivity and animal behavior: functional grain as a key determinant for dispersal. Landscape Ecol 22:1117–1129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Batllori E, Camarero JJ, Gutiérrez E (2010) Current regeneration patterns at the tree line in the Pyrenees indicate similar recruitment processes irrespective of the past disturbance regime. J Biogeogr 37:1938–1950Google Scholar
  3. Castric V, Bonney F, Bernatchez L (2001) Landscape structure and hierarchial genetic diversity in the brook charr, Salvelinus fontinalis. Evolution 55:1016–1028Google Scholar
  4. Cornuet JM, Luikart G (1996) Description and power analysis of two tests for detecting recent population bottlenecks from allele frequency data. Genetics 144:2001–2014PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Dieker P, Drees C, Assmann T (2011) Two high mountain burnet moth species react differently to the global change drivers climate and land-use. Biol Conserv 144:2810–2818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dirnböck T, Essel F, Rabitsch W (2011) Disproportional risk for habitat loss of high-altitude endemic species under climate change. Glob Change Biol 17:990–996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Excoffier L, Laval G, Schneider S (2005) Arlequin ver. 3.0: an integrated software package for population genetics data analysis. Evol Bioinform Online 1:47–50Google Scholar
  8. Forister ML, McCall AC, Sanders NJ, Fordyce JA, Thorne JH, O’Brien J, Waetjen DP, Shapiro AM (2010) Compounded effects of climate change and habitat alteration shift patterns of butterfly diversity. PNAS 107:2088–2092Google Scholar
  9. Frankham R (2003) Genetics and conservation biology. CR Biol 326:22–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gadeberg RME, Boomsma JJ (1997) Genetic population structure of the large blue butterfly Maculinea alcon in Denmark. J Insect Conserv 1:99–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gitzendanner MA, Soltis PS (2000) Patterns of genetic variation in rare and widespread plant congeners. Am J Bot 87:783–792PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Habel JC, Rödder D, Schmitt T, Nève G (2011) Global warming will affect the genetic diversity and uniqueness of Lycaena helle populations. Glob Change Biol 17:194–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Habel JC, Engler JO, Rödder D, Schmitt T (2012) Contrasting genetic and morphologic responses on recent population decline in two burnet moths (Lepidoptera, Zygaenidae). Conserv Genet 13:1293–1304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Haubrich K, Schmitt T (2007) Cryptic differentiation in alpine-endemic, high-altitude reveals down-slope glacial refugia. Mol Ecol 16:3643–3658PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hebert PDN, Beaton MJ (eds) (1993) Methodologies for allozyme analysis using cellulose acetate electrophoresis. Helena Laboratories, BeaumontGoogle Scholar
  16. Hill JK, Hughes CL, Dytham C, Searle JB (2006) Genetic diversity in butterflies: interactive effects of habitat fragmentation and climate-driven range expansion. Biol Lett 2:152–154PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Holzinger B, Hülber K, Camenisch M, Grabherr G (2008) Changes in plant species richness over the last century in the eastern Swiss Alps: elevational gradient, bedrock effects and migration rates. Plant Ecol 195:179–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hughes CL, Dytham C, HIll JK (2007) Modelling and analysing evolution of dispersal in populations at expanding range boundaries. Ecol Entomol 32:437–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Keyghobadi N, Roland J, Strobeck C (2005) Genetic differentiation and gene flow among populations of the alpine butterfly, Parnassius smintheus, vary with landscape connectivity. Mol Ecol 14:1897–1909PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lenoir J, Gégout J-C, Guisan A, Vittoz P, Wohlgemuth T, Zimmermann NE, Dullinger S, Pauli H, Willner W, Jens-Christian S (2010) Going against the flow: potential mechanisms for unexpected downslope range shifts in a warming climate. Ecography 33:295–303Google Scholar
  21. MacDonald D, Crabtree JR, Wiesinger G, Dax T, Stamou N, Fleury P, Gutierrez Lazpita J, Gibon A (2000) Agricultural abandonment in mountain areas of Europe: environmental consequences and policy response. J Environ Manag 59:47–69Google Scholar
  22. Matter SF, Doyle A, Illerbrun K, Wheeler J, Roland J (2011) An assessment of direct and indirect effects of climate change for populations of the Rocky Mountain Apollo butterfly (Parnassius smintheus Doubleday). Insect Sci 18:385–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Miller MP (2005) Alleles in space: computer software for the joint analysis of interindividual spatial and genetic information. J Hered 96:722–724PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Porter AH, Shapiro AM (1989) Genetics and biogeography of the Oeneis chryxus complex (Satyrinae) in California. J Res Lepidoptera 28:263–276Google Scholar
  25. Ronce O (2007) How does it feel to be like a rolling stone? Ten questions about dispersal evolution. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 38:231–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rosenzweig C, Karoly D, Vicarelli M, Neofotis P, Wu QG, Casassa G, Menzel A, Root TL, Estrella N, Seguin B, Tryjanowski P, Liu CZ, Rawlins S, Imeson A (2008) Attributing physical and biological impacts to anthropogenic climate change. Nature 453:353–357PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Schmitt T, Besold J (2010) Upslope movements and large scale expansions: the taxonomy and biogeography of the Coenonympha arcaniaC. darwinianaC. gardetta butterfly species complex. Zool J Linn Soc 159:890–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Schmitt T, Haubrich K (2008) The genetic structure of the mountain forest butterfly Erebia euryale unravels the late Pleistocene and postglacial history of the mountain coniferous forest biome in Europe. Mol Ecol 17:2194–2207Google Scholar
  29. Schmitt T, Hewitt GM (2004) Molecular biogeography of the arctic-alpine disjunct burnet moth species Zygaena exulans (Zygaenidae, Lepidoptera) in the Pyrenees and Alps. J Biogeogr 31:885–893CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Schmitt T, Cizek O, Konvicka M (2005) Genetics of a butterfly relocation: large, small and introduced populations of the mountain endemic Erebia epiphron silesiana. Biol Conserv 123:11–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Schmitt T, Hewitt GM, Müller P (2006) Disjunct distributions during glacial and interglacial periods in mountain butterflies: Erebia epiphron as an example. J Evol Biol 19:108–113PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. R Development Core Team (2011) R: A language and environment for statistical computing., downloaded June 18, 2011
  33. Van Loon EE, Cleary DFR, Fauvelot C (2007) ARES: software to compare allelic richness between uneven samples. Mol Ecol Notes 7:579–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Walther G-R, Post E, Convey P, Menzel A, Parmesan C, Beebee TJC, Fromentin J-M, Hoegh-Guldberg O, Bairlein F (2002) Ecological responses to recent climate change. Nature 416:389–395PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Petra Dieker
    • 1
    • 5
  • Claudia Drees
    • 2
  • Thomas Schmitt
    • 3
  • Thorsten Assmann
    • 4
  1. 1.National Museum of Natural History LuxembourgLuxembourgLuxembourg
  2. 2.Biocentre Grindel and Zoological MuseumUniversity of HamburgHamburgGermany
  3. 3.Department of BiogeographyTrier UniversityTrierGermany
  4. 4.Institute of EcologyLeuphana University LüneburgLüneburgGermany
  5. 5.Department of Community EcologyCentre for Environmental Research UFZHalle (Saale)Germany

Personalised recommendations