Modelling the loss of genetic diversity in vole populations in a spatially and temporally varying environment

Altering environmental conditions affects the genetic composition of populations via demographic and selective responses by creating of variety of population substructuring types. Classical genetic approaches can predict the genetic composition of populations under long-term or structurally stable conditions, but exclude factors such as animal behaviour, environmental structure, and breeding biology, all of which influence genetic diversity. Most populations are unique in some of these characteristics, and therefore may be unsuitable for the classical approach. Here, an alternative approach using a genetically explicit individual-based model (IBM) coupled to a dynamic landscape model was used to obtain measures for the genetic status of simulated vole populations. The rate of loss of expected heterozygosity (H e ) was calculated for simulated populations using two levels of spatial and temporal heterogeneity. Results showed that both spatial and temporal heterogeneity exerted an influence on the rate of loss of genetic diversity, but the precise effect was a balance between the effects of population sub-structuring, the frequency of founder effects and population size. These were in turn related to habitat availability and their influence on vole behaviour. Interaction between spatial and temporal dynamics altered the ratio of effective population size to census size. This indicates an altered reproductive potential, crucial in conservation biology applications. However, when the loss of heterozygosity was corrected for the harmonic mean of the population size, the rate of loss was almost identical in the four scenarios. Unlike classical genetic models, IBMs are flexible enough to mimic real population processes under a range of environmental and behavioural conditions. We conclude that IBMs incorporating explicit genetics provide a promising new approach to the evaluation of the effect of animal behaviour, and random and man-induced events on the genetic composition of populations. They also provide a new platform from which to investigate the implication of real world deviations from assumptions of traditional genetic models.

[1]  The effective number of a population that varies cyclically in size. II. Overlapping generations. , 2002, Mathematical biosciences.

[2]  Lael Parrott,et al.  A generic, individual-based approach to modelling higher trophic levels in simulation of terrestrial ecosystems , 2002 .

[3]  Stephen P. Ellner,et al.  SCALING UP ANIMAL MOVEMENTS IN HETEROGENEOUS LANDSCAPES: THE IMPORTANCE OF BEHAVIOR , 2002 .

[4]  W. Sutherland,et al.  Model complexity and population predictions. The alpine marmot as a case study , 2002 .

[5]  Miguel Delibes,et al.  Effects of an Attractive Sink Leading into Maladaptive Habitat Selection , 2001, The American Naturalist.

[6]  François Bousquet,et al.  Multiagent simulations of hunting wild meat in a village in eastern Cameroon , 2001 .

[7]  M. Sandell,et al.  Shifting spacing behaviour of male field voles (Microtus agrestis) over the reproductive season , 2001 .

[8]  H. Kokko,et al.  Ecological traps in changing environments: Ecological and evolutionary consequences of a behaviourally mediated Allee effect , 2001 .

[9]  How can maladaptive habitat choice generate source‐sink population dynamics? , 2000 .

[10]  D. Macdonald,et al.  Managing set-aside for field voles (Microtus agrestis) , 2000 .

[11]  P. Donnelly,et al.  Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. , 2000, Genetics.

[12]  Thorsten Wiegand,et al.  Finding the Missing Link between Landscape Structure and Population Dynamics: A Spatially Explicit Perspective , 1999, The American Naturalist.

[13]  Thomas Stephan,et al.  The extinction risk of a population exploiting a resource , 1999 .

[14]  L. Nunney THE EFFECTIVE SIZE OF A HIERARCHICALLY STRUCTURED POPULATION , 1999, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[15]  Armando Caballero,et al.  Developments in predicting the effective size of subdivided populations , 1999, Heredity.

[16]  R. Apeldoorn,et al.  Low genetic differentiation in north-west European populations of the locally endangered root vole, Microtus oeconomus , 1999 .

[17]  H. Ylönen,et al.  Counter-Strategies to Infanticide in Mammals: Costs and Consequences , 1998 .

[18]  M. Whitlock,et al.  The effective size of a subdivided population. , 1997, Genetics.

[19]  S. Heise,et al.  Role of female aggression in prevention of infanticidal behavior in male common voles, Microtus arvalis (Pallas, 1779) , 1997 .

[20]  R. Frankham Relationship of genetic variation to population size in wildlife , 1996 .

[21]  J Uchmański,et al.  Individual-based modelling in ecology: what makes the difference? , 1996, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[22]  P. Hedrick Bottleneck(s) or Metapopulation in Cheetahs , 1996 .

[23]  M Slatkin,et al.  A measure of population subdivision based on microsatellite allele frequencies. , 1995, Genetics.

[24]  J. Millar,et al.  Life histories of Clethrionomys and Microtus (Microtinae) , 1994 .

[25]  A. Caballero Review article Developments in the prediction of effective population size , 1994 .

[26]  Grady Booch,et al.  Object-oriented analysis and design with applications (2nd ed.) , 1993 .

[27]  Paul Harmon,et al.  Objects in action: commercial applications of object-oriented technologies , 1993 .

[28]  C. Cockerham,et al.  ESTIMATION OF GENE FLOW FROM F‐STATISTICS , 1993, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[29]  Robert C. Lacy,et al.  VORTEX: a computer simulation model for population viability analysis , 1993 .

[30]  M. Whitlock TEMPORAL FLUCTUATIONS IN DEMOGRAPHIC PARAMETERS AND THE GENETIC VARIANCE AMONG POPULATIONS , 1992, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[31]  Michael E. Gilpin,et al.  The genetic effective size of a metapopulation , 1991 .

[32]  S. Erlinge,et al.  Density-related home-range size and overlap in adult field voles (Microtus agrestis) in southern Sweden , 1990 .

[33]  Grady Booch,et al.  Object-Oriented Analysis and Design with Applications , 1990 .

[34]  R. Chakraborty,et al.  Description and validation of a method for simultaneous estimation of effective population size and mutation rate from human population data. , 1989, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[35]  M. Slatkin Population structure and evolutionary progress. , 1989, Genome.

[36]  O. Diekmann,et al.  The Dynamics of Physiologically Structured Populations , 1986 .

[37]  S. Levin Lectu re Notes in Biomathematics , 1983 .

[38]  D. Hartl,et al.  Principles of population genetics , 1981 .

[39]  Sewall Wright,et al.  Variability within and among natural populations , 1978 .

[40]  J. P. Grime,et al.  A QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF SHOOT PHENOLOGY AND DOMINANCE IN HERBACEOUS VEGETATION , 1977 .

[41]  A. Myllymaki Demographic mechanisms in the fluctuating populations of the field vole Microtus agrestis , 1977 .

[42]  L. Hansson Spatial Dynamics of Field Voles Microtus agrestis in Heterogeneous Landscapes , 1977 .

[43]  J. Clarke Long and short term changes in gonadal activity of field voles and bank voles , 1977 .

[44]  H. Grüneberg,et al.  Introduction to quantitative genetics , 1960 .

[45]  S. Wright,et al.  Isolation by Distance. , 1943, Genetics.

[46]  P. H. Leslie The mortality, fertility and rate of natural increase of the vole(Microtus agrestis), as observed in the laboratory. , 1940 .

[47]  S. Wright,et al.  Evolution in Mendelian Populations. , 1931, Genetics.