Why replication is important in landscape genetics: American black bear in the Rocky Mountains

We investigated how landscape features influence gene flow of black bears by testing the relative support for 36 alternative landscape resistance hypotheses, including isolation by distance (IBD) in each of 12 study areas in the north central U.S. Rocky Mountains. The study areas all contained the same basic elements, but differed in extent of forest fragmentation, altitude, variation in elevation and road coverage. In all but one of the study areas, isolation by landscape resistance was more supported than IBD suggesting gene flow is likely influenced by elevation, forest cover, and roads. However, the landscape features influencing gene flow varied among study areas. Using subsets of loci usually gave models with the very similar landscape features influencing gene flow as with all loci, suggesting the landscape features influencing gene flow were correctly identified. To test if the cause of the variability of supported landscape features in study areas resulted from landscape differences among study areas, we conducted a limiting factor analysis. We found that features were supported in landscape models only when the features were highly variable. This is perhaps not surprising but suggests an important cautionary note – that if landscape features are not found to influence gene flow, researchers should not automatically conclude that the features are unimportant to the species’ movement and gene flow. Failure to investigate multiple study areas that have a range of variability in landscape features could cause misleading inferences about which landscape features generally limit gene flow. This could lead to potentially erroneous identification of corridors and barriers if models are transferred between areas with different landscape characteristics.

[1]  S. Cushman,et al.  Use of Empirically Derived Source‐Destination Models to Map Regional Conservation Corridors , 2009, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[2]  Katherine C. Kendall,et al.  Demography and Genetic Structure of a Recovering Grizzly Bear Population , 2009 .

[3]  P. Smouse,et al.  genalex 6: genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research , 2006 .

[4]  Samuel A. Cushman,et al.  Effects of habitat loss and fragmentation on amphibians: A review and prospectus , 2006 .

[5]  L. Waits,et al.  Molecular road ecology: exploring the potential of genetics for investigating transportation impacts on wildlife , 2009, Molecular ecology.

[6]  Helene H. Wagner,et al.  Landscape Genetics , 2008 .

[7]  D. Lindenmayer,et al.  Genetic insights into population recovery following experimental perturbation in a fragmented landscape , 2006 .

[8]  Neil J. Anderson,et al.  Wolverine gene flow across a narrow climatic niche. , 2009, Ecology.

[9]  P. Legendre.  Spatial Autocorrelation: Trouble or New Paradigm? , 1993 .

[10]  L. Waits,et al.  Landscape genetics: where are we now? , 2010, Molecular ecology.

[11]  G. Luikart,et al.  Relationships between migration rates and landscape resistance assessed using individual‐based simulations , 2010, Molecular ecology resources.

[12]  David Paetkau,et al.  Genetic tagging of free-ranging black and brown bears , 1999 .

[13]  Falk Huettmann,et al.  Introduction: Ecological knowledge, theory and information in space and time [Chapter 1] , 2010 .

[14]  François Rousset,et al.  GENEPOP (version 1.2): population genetic software for exact tests and ecumenicism , 1995 .

[15]  J. Mccown,et al.  Genetic consequences of habitat fragmentation and loss: the case of the Florida black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) , 2007, Conservation Genetics.

[16]  Nicolas Ray,et al.  Rise of oceanographic barriers in continuous populations of a cetacean: the genetic structure of harbour porpoises in Old World waters , 2007, BMC Biology.

[17]  Samuel A. Cushman,et al.  Gene Flow in Complex Landscapes: Testing Multiple Hypotheses with Causal Modeling , 2006, The American Naturalist.

[18]  Kevin S. McKelvey,et al.  Why sampling scheme matters: the effect of sampling scheme on landscape genetic results , 2009, Conservation Genetics.

[19]  Katherine C. Kendall,et al.  A simulation test of the effectiveness of several methods for error‐checking non‐invasive genetic data , 2005 .

[20]  W. Gaines,et al.  Black bear resource selection in the northeast Cascades, Washington , 2003 .

[21]  I. Stirling,et al.  Microsatellite analysis of population structure in Canadian polar bears , 1995, Molecular ecology.

[22]  Sarah C. Goslee,et al.  The ecodist Package for Dissimilarity-based Analysis of Ecological Data , 2007 .

[23]  G. Luikart,et al.  Quantifying the lag time to detect barriers in landscape genetics , 2010, Molecular ecology.

[24]  F. Wei,et al.  The effect of landscape features on population genetic structure in Yunnan snub‐nosed monkeys (Rhinopithecus bieti) implies an anthropogenic genetic discontinuity , 2009, Molecular ecology.

[25]  Gordon Luikart,et al.  Landscape Genomics: A Brief Perspective , 2010 .

[26]  David Paetkau,et al.  Effectiveness of a Regional Corridor in Connecting Two Florida Black Bear Populations , 2006, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[27]  S. Cushman,et al.  Spurious correlations and inference in landscape genetics , 2010, Molecular ecology.

[28]  L. Waits,et al.  Putting the ‘landscape’ in landscape genetics , 2007, Heredity.

[29]  D. Onorato,et al.  Winter ecology of American black bears in a desert montane island , 2005 .

[30]  N Mantel,et al.  Ranking procedures for arbitrarily restricted observation. , 1967, Biometrics.

[31]  Kevin McGarigal,et al.  COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF EXPERIMENTAL APPROACHES TO THE STUDY OF HABITAT FRAGMENTATION EFFECTS , 2002 .

[32]  Samuel A. Cushman,et al.  Representing genetic variation as continuous surfaces: An approach for identifying spatial dependency in landscape genetic studies , 2008 .

[33]  J. Diniz‐Filho,et al.  Landscape genetics of Physalaemus cuvieri in Brazilian Cerrado: Correspondence between population structure and patterns of human occupation and habitat loss , 2007 .

[34]  R. Eisen,et al.  Landscape features influence genetic structure of black-tailed prairie dogs (Cynomys ludovicianus) , 2006, Landscape Ecology.

[35]  Samuel A. Cushman,et al.  Movement behavior explains genetic differentiation in American black bears , 2010, Landscape Ecology.

[36]  M. Hossaert-McKey,et al.  Small‐scale spatial genetic structure in the Central African rainforest tree species Aucoumea klaineana: a stepwise approach to infer the impact of limited gene dispersal, population history and habitat fragmentation , 2008, Molecular ecology.

[37]  H. Neville,et al.  Landscape attributes and life history variability shape genetic structure of trout populations in a stream network , 2006, Landscape Ecology.

[38]  Marie-Josée Fortin,et al.  Applications of landscape genetics in conservation biology: concepts and challenges , 2010, Conservation Genetics.

[39]  Aurélie Coulon,et al.  Identifying future research needs in landscape genetics: where to from here? , 2009, Landscape Ecology.

[40]  Nicolas Ray,et al.  Genetic isolation by distance and landscape connectivity in the American marten (Martes americana) , 2006, Landscape Ecology.

[41]  P. Smouse,et al.  The use of restriction fragment length polymorphisms in paternity analysis. , 1986, American journal of human genetics.

[42]  Justin S. Brashares,et al.  Optimizing dispersal and corridor models using landscape genetics , 2007 .

[43]  K. McGarigal,et al.  The Problem of Ecological Scaling in Spatially Complex, Nonequilibrium Ecological Systems , 2010 .

[44]  W. Buermann,et al.  Landscape genetics of California mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus): the roles of ecological and historical factors in generating differentiation , 2009, Molecular ecology.

[45]  D. P. A E T K A U,et al.  An empirical exploration of data quality in DNA-based population inventories , 2003 .

[46]  Kevin McGarigal,et al.  Habitat Fragmentation Effects Depend on Complex Interactions Between Population Size and Dispersal Ability: Modeling Influences of Roads, Agriculture and Residential Development Across a Range of Life-History Characteristics , 2010 .

[47]  Kevin McGarigal,et al.  Behavior of class-level landscape metrics across gradients of class aggregation and area , 2004, Landscape Ecology.

[48]  F. T. Manen,et al.  Identifying Habitat Linkages for American Black Bears in North Carolina, USA , 2007 .

[49]  F. James Rohlf,et al.  Biometry: The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research , 1969 .

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

[51]  Ellen I. Damschen,et al.  Seed predation, not seed dispersal, explains the landscape‐level abundance of an early‐successional plant , 2006 .

[52]  W. Gaines,et al.  Landscape evaluation of female black bear habitat effectiveness and capability in the North Cascades, Washington , 2005 .

[53]  H. Andrén,et al.  Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscapes with different proportions of suitable habitat: a review , 1994 .

[54]  G. Luikart,et al.  DNA Genotyping Suggests that Recent Brucellosis Outbreaks in the Greater Yellowstone Area Originated from Elk , 2009, Journal of wildlife diseases.

[55]  J. Evans,et al.  Quantifying Bufo boreas connectivity in Yellowstone National Park with landscape genetics. , 2010, Ecology.

[56]  D. Lindenmayer,et al.  Landscape modification and habitat fragmentation: a synthesis , 2007 .

[57]  Michael S. Mitchell,et al.  RESPONSE OF BLACK BEARS TO FOREST MANAGEMENT IN THE SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN MOUNTAINS , 2003 .

[58]  A Coulon,et al.  Genetic structure is influenced by landscape features: empirical evidence from a roe deer population , 2006, Molecular ecology.

[59]  Hailong Li,et al.  Application of least-cost path model to identify a giant panda dispersal corridor network after the Wenchuan earthquake - case study of Wolong Nature Reserve in China. , 2010 .