Publication details
Population genetics of chamois in the contact zone between the Alps and the Dinaric Mountains: uncovering the role of habitat fragmentation and past management
| Authors | |
|---|---|
| Year of publication | 2013 |
| Type | Article in Periodical |
| Magazine / Source | Conservation Genetics |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Web | http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/518/art%253A10.1007%252Fs10592-013-0469-8.pdf?auth66=1397639450_985fb33429bfcffefb80365fbd3ed28b&ext=.pdf |
| Doi | http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10592-013-0469-8 |
| Field | Zoology |
| Keywords | Rupicapra rupicapra; Microsatellites; Population structure; Fragmentation; Conservation management |
| Description | The chamois is a habitat specialist ungulate occupying "continental archipelagos" of fragmented rocky habitats which are frequently restricted to high altitudes. It is not clear whether forest habitats separating such population fragments act as barriers to gene flow. We studied the genetic makeup of the chamois in a topographically diverse landscape at the contact zone of two mountain ranges in Slovenia. Based on sequences of mitochondrial DNA, all Slovenian populations belong to a Northern chamois (Rupicapra r. rupicapra) subspecies. The range of chamois in Slovenia encompasses three different regions, each with unique topography, habitat connectivity and abundance of chamois: the Alps, the Dinaric Mts., and the Pohorje Mts. The habitat of the chamois is extensive and more or less continuous in the Alps, but suboptimal and fragmented in the remaining regions. In agreement with neutral genetic theory, large Northern chamois populations tended to have higher allelic richness and observed heterozygosity. Spatial clustering bears the differentiation into four geographically associated clusters within Slovenia and also revealed a strong substructure within all mountain ranges with suboptimal chamois habitat. Surprisingly, some small Dinaric populations have stayed genetically isolated in restricted habitat patches, even if they are geographically very close to each other. The four clusters, each having a unique demographic history, should be regarded as independent units for management purposes. |