Sample design effects in landscape genetics

An important research gap in landscape genetics is the impact of different field sampling designs on the ability to detect the effects of landscape pattern on gene flow. We evaluated how five different sampling regimes (random, linear, systematic, cluster, and single study site) affected the probabi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Conservation genetics 2013-04, Vol.14 (2), p.275-285
Hauptverfasser: Oyler-McCance, Sara J., Fedy, Bradley C., Landguth, Erin L.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 285
container_issue 2
container_start_page 275
container_title Conservation genetics
container_volume 14
creator Oyler-McCance, Sara J.
Fedy, Bradley C.
Landguth, Erin L.
description An important research gap in landscape genetics is the impact of different field sampling designs on the ability to detect the effects of landscape pattern on gene flow. We evaluated how five different sampling regimes (random, linear, systematic, cluster, and single study site) affected the probability of correctly identifying the generating landscape process of population structure. Sampling regimes were chosen to represent a suite of designs common in field studies. We used genetic data generated from a spatially-explicit, individual-based program and simulated gene flow in a continuous population across a landscape with gradual spatial changes in resistance to movement. Additionally, we evaluated the sampling regimes using realistic and obtainable number of loci (10 and 20), number of alleles per locus (5 and 10), number of individuals sampled (10–300), and generational time after the landscape was introduced (20 and 400). For a simulated continuously distributed species, we found that random, linear, and systematic sampling regimes performed well with high sample sizes (>200), levels of polymorphism (10 alleles per locus), and number of molecular markers (20). The cluster and single study site sampling regimes were not able to correctly identify the generating process under any conditions and thus, are not advisable strategies for scenarios similar to our simulations. Our research emphasizes the importance of sampling data at ecologically appropriate spatial and temporal scales and suggests careful consideration for sampling near landscape components that are likely to most influence the genetic structure of the species. In addition, simulating sampling designs a priori could help guide filed data collection efforts
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s10592-012-0415-1
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1348487040</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1348487040</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c349t-c08f1fe299667102afb1d6c078116c5de38e2a27988c8295f0dca231d8b2787c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kMFKxDAQhoMouK4-gLeCF0GiM0mbpEdZXBUWPKjnkE0nS5duW5vuwbc3az2I4GGYOXz_z_AxdolwiwD6LiIUpeCAaXIsOB6xGRZa8FJLfXy4leKgBJ6ysxi3AKiExhm7eXW7vqGsolhv2oxCID_GrG6zxrVV9K6nbEMtjbWP5-wkuCbSxc-es_flw9viia9eHp8X9yvuZV6O3IMJGEiUpVIaQbiwxkp50AZR-aIiaUg4oUtjvBFlEaDyTkiszFpoo72cs-uptx-6jz3F0e7q6KlJH1G3jxZlbnKjIYeEXv1Bt91-aNN3iRKyMFp_UzhRfuhiHCjYfqh3bvi0CPagz076bNJnD_pSeM7ElImJbTc0_Gr-N_QFNY5vqA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1323587740</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Sample design effects in landscape genetics</title><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><creator>Oyler-McCance, Sara J. ; Fedy, Bradley C. ; Landguth, Erin L.</creator><creatorcontrib>Oyler-McCance, Sara J. ; Fedy, Bradley C. ; Landguth, Erin L.</creatorcontrib><description>An important research gap in landscape genetics is the impact of different field sampling designs on the ability to detect the effects of landscape pattern on gene flow. We evaluated how five different sampling regimes (random, linear, systematic, cluster, and single study site) affected the probability of correctly identifying the generating landscape process of population structure. Sampling regimes were chosen to represent a suite of designs common in field studies. We used genetic data generated from a spatially-explicit, individual-based program and simulated gene flow in a continuous population across a landscape with gradual spatial changes in resistance to movement. Additionally, we evaluated the sampling regimes using realistic and obtainable number of loci (10 and 20), number of alleles per locus (5 and 10), number of individuals sampled (10–300), and generational time after the landscape was introduced (20 and 400). For a simulated continuously distributed species, we found that random, linear, and systematic sampling regimes performed well with high sample sizes (&gt;200), levels of polymorphism (10 alleles per locus), and number of molecular markers (20). The cluster and single study site sampling regimes were not able to correctly identify the generating process under any conditions and thus, are not advisable strategies for scenarios similar to our simulations. Our research emphasizes the importance of sampling data at ecologically appropriate spatial and temporal scales and suggests careful consideration for sampling near landscape components that are likely to most influence the genetic structure of the species. In addition, simulating sampling designs a priori could help guide filed data collection efforts</description><identifier>ISSN: 1566-0621</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1572-9737</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10592-012-0415-1</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Animal Genetics and Genomics ; Biodiversity ; Biomedical and Life Sciences ; Conservation Biology/Ecology ; Data collection ; Ecology ; Evolutionary Biology ; Gene flow ; Genetic structure ; Genetics ; Landscape ecology ; Life Sciences ; Plant Genetics and Genomics ; Population genetics ; Population structure ; Research Article ; Simulation</subject><ispartof>Conservation genetics, 2013-04, Vol.14 (2), p.275-285</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht (outside the USA) 2012</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c349t-c08f1fe299667102afb1d6c078116c5de38e2a27988c8295f0dca231d8b2787c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c349t-c08f1fe299667102afb1d6c078116c5de38e2a27988c8295f0dca231d8b2787c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10592-012-0415-1$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10592-012-0415-1$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904,41466,42535,51296</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Oyler-McCance, Sara J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fedy, Bradley C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Landguth, Erin L.</creatorcontrib><title>Sample design effects in landscape genetics</title><title>Conservation genetics</title><addtitle>Conserv Genet</addtitle><description>An important research gap in landscape genetics is the impact of different field sampling designs on the ability to detect the effects of landscape pattern on gene flow. We evaluated how five different sampling regimes (random, linear, systematic, cluster, and single study site) affected the probability of correctly identifying the generating landscape process of population structure. Sampling regimes were chosen to represent a suite of designs common in field studies. We used genetic data generated from a spatially-explicit, individual-based program and simulated gene flow in a continuous population across a landscape with gradual spatial changes in resistance to movement. Additionally, we evaluated the sampling regimes using realistic and obtainable number of loci (10 and 20), number of alleles per locus (5 and 10), number of individuals sampled (10–300), and generational time after the landscape was introduced (20 and 400). For a simulated continuously distributed species, we found that random, linear, and systematic sampling regimes performed well with high sample sizes (&gt;200), levels of polymorphism (10 alleles per locus), and number of molecular markers (20). The cluster and single study site sampling regimes were not able to correctly identify the generating process under any conditions and thus, are not advisable strategies for scenarios similar to our simulations. Our research emphasizes the importance of sampling data at ecologically appropriate spatial and temporal scales and suggests careful consideration for sampling near landscape components that are likely to most influence the genetic structure of the species. In addition, simulating sampling designs a priori could help guide filed data collection efforts</description><subject>Animal Genetics and Genomics</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Biomedical and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Conservation Biology/Ecology</subject><subject>Data collection</subject><subject>Ecology</subject><subject>Evolutionary Biology</subject><subject>Gene flow</subject><subject>Genetic structure</subject><subject>Genetics</subject><subject>Landscape ecology</subject><subject>Life Sciences</subject><subject>Plant Genetics and Genomics</subject><subject>Population genetics</subject><subject>Population structure</subject><subject>Research Article</subject><subject>Simulation</subject><issn>1566-0621</issn><issn>1572-9737</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kMFKxDAQhoMouK4-gLeCF0GiM0mbpEdZXBUWPKjnkE0nS5duW5vuwbc3az2I4GGYOXz_z_AxdolwiwD6LiIUpeCAaXIsOB6xGRZa8FJLfXy4leKgBJ6ysxi3AKiExhm7eXW7vqGsolhv2oxCID_GrG6zxrVV9K6nbEMtjbWP5-wkuCbSxc-es_flw9viia9eHp8X9yvuZV6O3IMJGEiUpVIaQbiwxkp50AZR-aIiaUg4oUtjvBFlEaDyTkiszFpoo72cs-uptx-6jz3F0e7q6KlJH1G3jxZlbnKjIYeEXv1Bt91-aNN3iRKyMFp_UzhRfuhiHCjYfqh3bvi0CPagz076bNJnD_pSeM7ElImJbTc0_Gr-N_QFNY5vqA</recordid><startdate>20130401</startdate><enddate>20130401</enddate><creator>Oyler-McCance, Sara J.</creator><creator>Fedy, Bradley C.</creator><creator>Landguth, Erin L.</creator><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>RC3</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20130401</creationdate><title>Sample design effects in landscape genetics</title><author>Oyler-McCance, Sara J. ; Fedy, Bradley C. ; Landguth, Erin L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c349t-c08f1fe299667102afb1d6c078116c5de38e2a27988c8295f0dca231d8b2787c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Animal Genetics and Genomics</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Biomedical and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Conservation Biology/Ecology</topic><topic>Data collection</topic><topic>Ecology</topic><topic>Evolutionary Biology</topic><topic>Gene flow</topic><topic>Genetic structure</topic><topic>Genetics</topic><topic>Landscape ecology</topic><topic>Life Sciences</topic><topic>Plant Genetics and Genomics</topic><topic>Population genetics</topic><topic>Population structure</topic><topic>Research Article</topic><topic>Simulation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Oyler-McCance, Sara J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fedy, Bradley C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Landguth, Erin L.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Conservation genetics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Oyler-McCance, Sara J.</au><au>Fedy, Bradley C.</au><au>Landguth, Erin L.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Sample design effects in landscape genetics</atitle><jtitle>Conservation genetics</jtitle><stitle>Conserv Genet</stitle><date>2013-04-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>275</spage><epage>285</epage><pages>275-285</pages><issn>1566-0621</issn><eissn>1572-9737</eissn><abstract>An important research gap in landscape genetics is the impact of different field sampling designs on the ability to detect the effects of landscape pattern on gene flow. We evaluated how five different sampling regimes (random, linear, systematic, cluster, and single study site) affected the probability of correctly identifying the generating landscape process of population structure. Sampling regimes were chosen to represent a suite of designs common in field studies. We used genetic data generated from a spatially-explicit, individual-based program and simulated gene flow in a continuous population across a landscape with gradual spatial changes in resistance to movement. Additionally, we evaluated the sampling regimes using realistic and obtainable number of loci (10 and 20), number of alleles per locus (5 and 10), number of individuals sampled (10–300), and generational time after the landscape was introduced (20 and 400). For a simulated continuously distributed species, we found that random, linear, and systematic sampling regimes performed well with high sample sizes (&gt;200), levels of polymorphism (10 alleles per locus), and number of molecular markers (20). The cluster and single study site sampling regimes were not able to correctly identify the generating process under any conditions and thus, are not advisable strategies for scenarios similar to our simulations. Our research emphasizes the importance of sampling data at ecologically appropriate spatial and temporal scales and suggests careful consideration for sampling near landscape components that are likely to most influence the genetic structure of the species. In addition, simulating sampling designs a priori could help guide filed data collection efforts</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Netherlands</pub><doi>10.1007/s10592-012-0415-1</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1566-0621
ispartof Conservation genetics, 2013-04, Vol.14 (2), p.275-285
issn 1566-0621
1572-9737
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1348487040
source SpringerLink Journals
subjects Animal Genetics and Genomics
Biodiversity
Biomedical and Life Sciences
Conservation Biology/Ecology
Data collection
Ecology
Evolutionary Biology
Gene flow
Genetic structure
Genetics
Landscape ecology
Life Sciences
Plant Genetics and Genomics
Population genetics
Population structure
Research Article
Simulation
title Sample design effects in landscape genetics
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-28T09%3A28%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Sample%20design%20effects%20in%20landscape%20genetics&rft.jtitle=Conservation%20genetics&rft.au=Oyler-McCance,%20Sara%20J.&rft.date=2013-04-01&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=275&rft.epage=285&rft.pages=275-285&rft.issn=1566-0621&rft.eissn=1572-9737&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10592-012-0415-1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1348487040%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1323587740&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true