Optimizing dispersal and corridor models using landscape genetics

Summary 1. Better tools are needed to predict population connectivity in complex landscapes. ‘Least-cost modelling’ is one commonly employed approach in which dispersal costs are assigned to distinct habitat types and the least-costly dispersal paths among habitat patches are calculated using a geographical information system (GIS). Because adequate data on dispersal are usually lacking, dispersal costs are often assigned solely from expert opinion. Spatially explicit, high-resolution genetic data may be used to infer variation in animal movements. We employ such an approach to estimate habitatspecific migration rates and to develop least-cost connectivity models for desert bighorn sheep Ovis canadensis nelsoni . 2. Bighorn sheep dispersal is thought to be affected by distance and topography. We incorporated both factors into least-cost GIS models with different parameter values and estimated effective geographical distances among 26 populations. We assessed which model was correlated most strongly with gene flow estimates among those populations, while controlling for the effect of anthropogenic barriers. We used the bestfitting model to (i) determine whether migration rates are higher over sloped terrain than flat terrain; (ii) predict probable movement corridors; (iii) predict which populations are connected by migration; and (iv) investigate how anthropogenic barriers and translocated populations have affected landscape connectivity. 3. Migration models were correlated most strongly with migration when areas of at least 10% slope had 1/10th the cost of areas of lower slope; thus, gene flow occurred over longer distances when ‘escape terrain’ was available. Optimal parameter values were consistent across two measures of gene flow and three methods for defining population polygons. 4. Anthropogenic barriers disrupted numerous corridors predicted to be high-use dispersal routes, indicating priority areas for mitigation. However, population translocations have restored high-use dispersal routes in several other areas. Known intermountain movements of bighorn sheep were largely consistent with predicted corridors. 5. Synthesis and applications. Population genetic data provided sufficient resolution to infer how landscape features influenced the behaviour of dispersing desert bighorn sheep. Anthropogenic barriers that block high-use dispersal corridors should be mitigated, but population translocations may help maintain connectivity. We conclude that developing least-cost models from similar empirical data could significantly improve the utility of these tools.

[1]  Rob Roy Ramey,et al.  Highways block gene flow and cause a rapid decline in genetic diversity of desert bighorn sheep , 2005 .

[2]  R. Cowling,et al.  Designing Large‐Scale Conservation Corridors for Pattern and Process , 2006, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[3]  Pierre Joly,et al.  Habitat fragmentation and amphibian conservation: building a tool for assessing landscape matrix connectivity. , 2003, Comptes rendus biologies.

[4]  V. Bleich,et al.  Genetics and the conservation of mountain sheep ovis canadensis nelsoni , 1986 .

[5]  F. Rousset,et al.  ARE PARTIAL MANTEL TESTS ADEQUATE? , 2001, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[6]  M. Soulé,et al.  Benign neglect: A model of faunal collapse in the game reserves of East Africa , 1979 .

[7]  François Rousset,et al.  PARTIAL MANTEL TESTS: REPLY TO CASTELLANO AND BALLETTO , 2002 .

[8]  S. Castellano,et al.  IS THE PARTIAL MANTEL TEST INADEQUATE? , 2002, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[9]  S. Vignieri,et al.  Streams over mountains: influence of riparian connectivity on gene flow in the Pacific jumping mouse (Zapus trinotatus) , 2005, Molecular ecology.

[10]  A Coulon,et al.  Landscape connectivity influences gene flow in a roe deer population inhabiting a fragmented landscape: an individual–based approach , 2004, Molecular ecology.

[11]  Nicolas Ray,et al.  pathmatrix: a geographical information system tool to compute effective distances among samples , 2005 .

[12]  L. De Meester,et al.  Geographical and genetic distances among zooplankton populations in a set of interconnected ponds: a plea for using GIS modelling of the effective geographical distance , 2001, Molecular ecology.

[13]  D. Roff Introduction to Computer-Intensive Methods of Data Analysis in Biology: Randomization and Monte Carlo Methods , 2006 .

[14]  Aldina M. A. Franco,et al.  Prioritizing multiple-use landscapes for conservation: methods for large multi-species planning problems , 2005, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[15]  W. Härdle,et al.  Applied Nonparametric Regression , 1991 .

[16]  A. Storfer,et al.  Landscape genetics of the blotched tiger salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum melanostictum) , 2005, Molecular ecology.

[17]  Richard D. Hunter,et al.  Landscape-level Connectivity in Coastal Southern California, USA, as Assessed through Carnivore Habitat Suitability , 2003 .

[18]  J. Gentle,et al.  Randomization and Monte Carlo Methods in Biology. , 1990 .

[19]  D. H. Vuren,et al.  Detectability, philopatry, and the distribution of dispersal distances in vertebrates. , 1996, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[20]  Peter N. Duinker,et al.  BIODIVERSITY CONSIDERATIONS IN CONSERVATION SYSTEM PLANNING: MAP-BASED APPROACH FOR NOVA SCOTIA, CANADA , 2005 .

[21]  Sergio Castellano,et al.  IS THE PARTIAL MANTEL TEST INADEQUATE? , 2002, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[22]  M. Whitlock,et al.  Indirect measures of gene flow and migration: FST≠1/(4Nm+1) , 1999, Heredity.

[23]  Irene Keller,et al.  Recent habitat fragmentation caused by major roads leads to reduction of gene flow and loss of genetic variability in ground beetles , 2003, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[24]  M. Whitlock,et al.  Indirect measures of gene flow and migration: FST not equal to 1/(4Nm + 1). , 1999, Heredity.

[25]  J. Gamarra,et al.  Metapopulation Ecology , 2007 .

[26]  Wolfgang Härdle,et al.  Applied Nonparametric Regression , 1991 .

[27]  P. Nikolakaki,et al.  A GIS site-selection process for habitat creation: estimating connectivity of habitat patches , 2004 .

[28]  Pierre Joly,et al.  Modeling spatial distribution of amphibian populations: a GIS approach based on habitat matrix permeability , 2002, Biodiversity & Conservation.

[29]  M. Smulders,et al.  Genetic similarity as a measure for connectivity between fragmented populations of the moor frog (Rana arvalis) , 2001, Heredity.

[30]  Gary Fry,et al.  Modelling the benefits of farmland restoration: methodology and application to butterfly movement , 2003 .

[31]  Montgomery Slatkin,et al.  ISOLATION BY DISTANCE IN EQUILIBRIUM AND NON‐EQUILIBRIUM POPULATIONS , 1993, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[32]  J. Wehausen,et al.  Desert-dwelling Mountain Sheep: Conservation Implications of a Naturally Fragmented Distribution , 1990 .

[33]  Peter Beerli,et al.  Maximum likelihood estimation of a migration matrix and effective population sizes in n subpopulations by using a coalescent approach , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[34]  Erik Matthysen,et al.  The application of 'least-cost' modelling as a functional landscape model , 2003 .

[35]  R. Sokal,et al.  Multiple regression and correlation extensions of the mantel test of matrix correspondence , 1986 .

[36]  P. Waser,et al.  Genetic signatures of interpopulation dispersal. , 1998, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[37]  Pierre Taberlet,et al.  Landscape genetics: combining landscape ecology and population genetics , 2003 .