Limits...
Combining genetic and demographic information to prioritize conservation efforts for anadromous alewife and blueback herring.

Palkovacs EP, Hasselman DJ, Argo EE, Gephard SR, Limburg KE, Post DM, Schultz TF, Willis TV - Evol Appl (2013)

Bottom Line: We identified three distinct stocks in alewife and four stocks in blueback herring.Analysis of available time series data for spawning adult abundance and body size indicate declines across the US ranges of both species, with the most severe declines having occurred for populations belonging to the Southern New England and the Mid-Atlantic Stocks.While all alewife and blueback herring populations deserve conservation attention, those belonging to these genetic stocks warrant the highest conservation prioritization.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California Santa Cruz, CA, USA.

ABSTRACT
A major challenge in conservation biology is the need to broadly prioritize conservation efforts when demographic data are limited. One method to address this challenge is to use population genetic data to define groups of populations linked by migration and then use demographic information from monitored populations to draw inferences about the status of unmonitored populations within those groups. We applied this method to anadromous alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus) and blueback herring (Alosa aestivalis), species for which long-term demographic data are limited. Recent decades have seen dramatic declines in these species, which are an important ecological component of coastal ecosystems and once represented an important fishery resource. Results show that most populations comprise genetically distinguishable units, which are nested geographically within genetically distinct clusters or stocks. We identified three distinct stocks in alewife and four stocks in blueback herring. Analysis of available time series data for spawning adult abundance and body size indicate declines across the US ranges of both species, with the most severe declines having occurred for populations belonging to the Southern New England and the Mid-Atlantic Stocks. While all alewife and blueback herring populations deserve conservation attention, those belonging to these genetic stocks warrant the highest conservation prioritization.

No MeSH data available.


Alewife and blueback herring population structure and stock delineation inferred from Bayesian analyses. Individual specimens are indicated by a thin vertical line, which is partitioned into K-colored segments representing a specimen's estimated assignment fraction to each cluster. For alewife (A), analyses identified the most likely number of clusters at K = 3. For blueback herring (B), analyses identified the most likely number of clusters at K = 4.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3927884&req=5

fig03: Alewife and blueback herring population structure and stock delineation inferred from Bayesian analyses. Individual specimens are indicated by a thin vertical line, which is partitioned into K-colored segments representing a specimen's estimated assignment fraction to each cluster. For alewife (A), analyses identified the most likely number of clusters at K = 3. For blueback herring (B), analyses identified the most likely number of clusters at K = 4.

Mentions: For alewife, the maximum value of lnPr(X/K) using STRUCTURE was observed at K = 4 (−24465.20). However, this estimate was only slightly greater than at K = 3 (−24470.13) but had considerably more variation, suggesting that K = 3 was more accurate (Fig. S1a). BAPS corroborated this result with significant (P < 0.001) support for three genetically distinguishable clusters. Both methods identified the same three clusters (hereafter referred to as stocks): Northern New England, Southern New England, and Mid-Atlantic (Fig. 3A). Further investigation using hierarchical STRUCTURE (Vaha et al. 2007) and BAPS analyses failed to detect additional structure within any of these stocks. Estimates of ΔK revealed the largest increase in the likelihood of the number of clusters at K = 2 (Fig. S1a). amova revealed more variation among these three stocks (4.70%; P < 0.001) than among rivers within stock (1.30%; P < 0.001) (Table S5). The detection of significant variation among rivers within stocks is consistent with the significant genic differentiation detected among most populations (Table 2).


Combining genetic and demographic information to prioritize conservation efforts for anadromous alewife and blueback herring.

Palkovacs EP, Hasselman DJ, Argo EE, Gephard SR, Limburg KE, Post DM, Schultz TF, Willis TV - Evol Appl (2013)

Alewife and blueback herring population structure and stock delineation inferred from Bayesian analyses. Individual specimens are indicated by a thin vertical line, which is partitioned into K-colored segments representing a specimen's estimated assignment fraction to each cluster. For alewife (A), analyses identified the most likely number of clusters at K = 3. For blueback herring (B), analyses identified the most likely number of clusters at K = 4.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3927884&req=5

fig03: Alewife and blueback herring population structure and stock delineation inferred from Bayesian analyses. Individual specimens are indicated by a thin vertical line, which is partitioned into K-colored segments representing a specimen's estimated assignment fraction to each cluster. For alewife (A), analyses identified the most likely number of clusters at K = 3. For blueback herring (B), analyses identified the most likely number of clusters at K = 4.
Mentions: For alewife, the maximum value of lnPr(X/K) using STRUCTURE was observed at K = 4 (−24465.20). However, this estimate was only slightly greater than at K = 3 (−24470.13) but had considerably more variation, suggesting that K = 3 was more accurate (Fig. S1a). BAPS corroborated this result with significant (P < 0.001) support for three genetically distinguishable clusters. Both methods identified the same three clusters (hereafter referred to as stocks): Northern New England, Southern New England, and Mid-Atlantic (Fig. 3A). Further investigation using hierarchical STRUCTURE (Vaha et al. 2007) and BAPS analyses failed to detect additional structure within any of these stocks. Estimates of ΔK revealed the largest increase in the likelihood of the number of clusters at K = 2 (Fig. S1a). amova revealed more variation among these three stocks (4.70%; P < 0.001) than among rivers within stock (1.30%; P < 0.001) (Table S5). The detection of significant variation among rivers within stocks is consistent with the significant genic differentiation detected among most populations (Table 2).

Bottom Line: We identified three distinct stocks in alewife and four stocks in blueback herring.Analysis of available time series data for spawning adult abundance and body size indicate declines across the US ranges of both species, with the most severe declines having occurred for populations belonging to the Southern New England and the Mid-Atlantic Stocks.While all alewife and blueback herring populations deserve conservation attention, those belonging to these genetic stocks warrant the highest conservation prioritization.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California Santa Cruz, CA, USA.

ABSTRACT
A major challenge in conservation biology is the need to broadly prioritize conservation efforts when demographic data are limited. One method to address this challenge is to use population genetic data to define groups of populations linked by migration and then use demographic information from monitored populations to draw inferences about the status of unmonitored populations within those groups. We applied this method to anadromous alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus) and blueback herring (Alosa aestivalis), species for which long-term demographic data are limited. Recent decades have seen dramatic declines in these species, which are an important ecological component of coastal ecosystems and once represented an important fishery resource. Results show that most populations comprise genetically distinguishable units, which are nested geographically within genetically distinct clusters or stocks. We identified three distinct stocks in alewife and four stocks in blueback herring. Analysis of available time series data for spawning adult abundance and body size indicate declines across the US ranges of both species, with the most severe declines having occurred for populations belonging to the Southern New England and the Mid-Atlantic Stocks. While all alewife and blueback herring populations deserve conservation attention, those belonging to these genetic stocks warrant the highest conservation prioritization.

No MeSH data available.