Limits...
Linking genotype, ecotype, and phenotype in an intensively managed large carnivore.

Shafer AB, Nielsen SE, Northrup JM, Stenhouse GB - Evol Appl (2013)

Bottom Line: Fitness proxies were influenced by sex, age, and habitat use, and homozygosity had a positive effect on these proxies that could be indicative of outbreeding depression.We further documented over 300 translocations occurring in the province since the 1970s, often to areas with significantly different habitat.We argue this could be unintentionally causing the pattern of outbreeding, although the heterozygosity correlation may instead be explained by the energetic costs associated with larger body size.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Evolutionary Biology, Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala Universitet Uppsala, Sweden ; Department of Renewable Resources, University of Alberta Edmonton, AB, Canada.

ABSTRACT
Numerous factors influence fitness of free-ranging animals, yet often these are uncharacterized. We integrated GPS habitat use data and genetic profiling to determine their influence on fitness proxies (mass, length, and body condition) in a threatened population of grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) in Alberta, Canada. We detected distinct genetic and habitat use (ecotype) clusters, with individual cluster assignments, or genotype/ecotype, being correlated (Pearson r = 0.34, P < 0.01). Related individuals showed evidence of similar habitat use patterns, irrespective of geographic distance and sex. Fitness proxies were influenced by sex, age, and habitat use, and homozygosity had a positive effect on these proxies that could be indicative of outbreeding depression. We further documented over 300 translocations occurring in the province since the 1970s, often to areas with significantly different habitat. We argue this could be unintentionally causing the pattern of outbreeding, although the heterozygosity correlation may instead be explained by the energetic costs associated with larger body size. The observed patterns, together with the unprecedented human-mediated migrations, make understanding the link between genotype, ecotype, and phenotype and mechanisms behind the negative heterozygosity-fitness correlations critical for management and conservation of this species.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Map of grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) capture locations across the province of Alberta, Canada. Six management units are identified: (1) Castle, (2) Livingstone, (3) Clearwater, (4) Yellowhead, (5) Grande Cache, and 6) Swan Hills.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3927890&req=5

fig01: Map of grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) capture locations across the province of Alberta, Canada. Six management units are identified: (1) Castle, (2) Livingstone, (3) Clearwater, (4) Yellowhead, (5) Grande Cache, and 6) Swan Hills.

Mentions: Our study area consisted of the eastern slope of the Canadian Rocky Mountains in Alberta, Canada and contained six of the seven provincially recognized grizzly bear management units (Fig. 1). Alberta is estimated to have 691 grizzly bears, of which 87% are found within our study area (Festa-Bianchet and Kansas 2010). Grizzly bears were captured between 1999–2008 using a combination of culvert traps, leg-hold snares, and heli-darting following the protocol of Cattet et al. (2003a,2003b). Each animal was fitted with either an Advanced Telemetry Systems (ATS) GPS radiocollar or Televilt GPS-Simplex radiocollar and were scheduled to attempt to acquire a location at 1-h and 4-h (pre 2003) intervals. Root hairs were collected from each bear for DNA analysis, and a premolar was extracted for aging (Stoneberg and Jonkel 1966). Each bear was weighed, measured for overall straight-line body length (SLL) from nose to tail, and a body condition index (BCI), which is a function of SLL and mass, was calculated following Cattet et al. (2002). If bears were captured multiple times, only the data from the first capture was used to avoid confounding effects of multiple captures (Cattet et al. 2008; Nielsen et al. 2013bb). All captures were approved by the University of Saskatchewan's Animal Care Committee and are in accordance with guidelines for handling of wildlife (CCAC 2003).


Linking genotype, ecotype, and phenotype in an intensively managed large carnivore.

Shafer AB, Nielsen SE, Northrup JM, Stenhouse GB - Evol Appl (2013)

Map of grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) capture locations across the province of Alberta, Canada. Six management units are identified: (1) Castle, (2) Livingstone, (3) Clearwater, (4) Yellowhead, (5) Grande Cache, and 6) Swan Hills.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3927890&req=5

fig01: Map of grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) capture locations across the province of Alberta, Canada. Six management units are identified: (1) Castle, (2) Livingstone, (3) Clearwater, (4) Yellowhead, (5) Grande Cache, and 6) Swan Hills.
Mentions: Our study area consisted of the eastern slope of the Canadian Rocky Mountains in Alberta, Canada and contained six of the seven provincially recognized grizzly bear management units (Fig. 1). Alberta is estimated to have 691 grizzly bears, of which 87% are found within our study area (Festa-Bianchet and Kansas 2010). Grizzly bears were captured between 1999–2008 using a combination of culvert traps, leg-hold snares, and heli-darting following the protocol of Cattet et al. (2003a,2003b). Each animal was fitted with either an Advanced Telemetry Systems (ATS) GPS radiocollar or Televilt GPS-Simplex radiocollar and were scheduled to attempt to acquire a location at 1-h and 4-h (pre 2003) intervals. Root hairs were collected from each bear for DNA analysis, and a premolar was extracted for aging (Stoneberg and Jonkel 1966). Each bear was weighed, measured for overall straight-line body length (SLL) from nose to tail, and a body condition index (BCI), which is a function of SLL and mass, was calculated following Cattet et al. (2002). If bears were captured multiple times, only the data from the first capture was used to avoid confounding effects of multiple captures (Cattet et al. 2008; Nielsen et al. 2013bb). All captures were approved by the University of Saskatchewan's Animal Care Committee and are in accordance with guidelines for handling of wildlife (CCAC 2003).

Bottom Line: Fitness proxies were influenced by sex, age, and habitat use, and homozygosity had a positive effect on these proxies that could be indicative of outbreeding depression.We further documented over 300 translocations occurring in the province since the 1970s, often to areas with significantly different habitat.We argue this could be unintentionally causing the pattern of outbreeding, although the heterozygosity correlation may instead be explained by the energetic costs associated with larger body size.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Evolutionary Biology, Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala Universitet Uppsala, Sweden ; Department of Renewable Resources, University of Alberta Edmonton, AB, Canada.

ABSTRACT
Numerous factors influence fitness of free-ranging animals, yet often these are uncharacterized. We integrated GPS habitat use data and genetic profiling to determine their influence on fitness proxies (mass, length, and body condition) in a threatened population of grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) in Alberta, Canada. We detected distinct genetic and habitat use (ecotype) clusters, with individual cluster assignments, or genotype/ecotype, being correlated (Pearson r = 0.34, P < 0.01). Related individuals showed evidence of similar habitat use patterns, irrespective of geographic distance and sex. Fitness proxies were influenced by sex, age, and habitat use, and homozygosity had a positive effect on these proxies that could be indicative of outbreeding depression. We further documented over 300 translocations occurring in the province since the 1970s, often to areas with significantly different habitat. We argue this could be unintentionally causing the pattern of outbreeding, although the heterozygosity correlation may instead be explained by the energetic costs associated with larger body size. The observed patterns, together with the unprecedented human-mediated migrations, make understanding the link between genotype, ecotype, and phenotype and mechanisms behind the negative heterozygosity-fitness correlations critical for management and conservation of this species.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus