Rapid growth and genetic diversity retention in an isolated reintroduced black bear population in the central appalachians

Animal reintroductions are important tools of wildlife management to restore species to their historical range, and they can also create unique opportunities to study population dynamics and genetics from founder events. We used non-invasive hair sampling in a systematic, closed-population capture-m...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of wildlife management 2015-07, Vol.79 (5), p.807-818
Hauptverfasser: Murphy, Sean M., Cox, John J., Clark, Joseph D., Augustine, Ben C., Hast, John T., Gibbs, Dan, Strunk, Michael, Dobey, Steven
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 818
container_issue 5
container_start_page 807
container_title The Journal of wildlife management
container_volume 79
creator Murphy, Sean M.
Cox, John J.
Clark, Joseph D.
Augustine, Ben C.
Hast, John T.
Gibbs, Dan
Strunk, Michael
Dobey, Steven
description Animal reintroductions are important tools of wildlife management to restore species to their historical range, and they can also create unique opportunities to study population dynamics and genetics from founder events. We used non-invasive hair sampling in a systematic, closed-population capture-mark-recapture (CMR) study design at the Big South Fork (BSF) area in Kentucky during 2010 and Tennessee during 2012 to estimate the demographic and genetic characteristics of the black bear (Ursus americanus) population that resulted from a reintroduced founding population of 18 bears in 1998. We estimated 38 (95% CI: 31–66) and 190 (95% CI: 170–219) bears on the Kentucky and Tennessee study areas, respectively. Based on the Tennessee abundance estimate alone, the mean annual growth rate was 18.3% (95% CI: 17.4–19.5%) from 1998 to 2012. We also compared the genetic characteristics of bears sampled during 2010–2012 to bears in the population during 2000–2002, 2–4 years following reintroduction, and to the source population. We found that the level of genetic diversity since reintroduction as indicated by expected heterozygosity (HE) remained relatively constant (HE(source, 2004) = 0.763, HE(BSF, 2000–2002) = 0.729, HE(BSF, 2010–2012) = 0.712) and the effective number of breeders (NB) remained low but had increased since reintroduction in the absence of sufficient immigration (NB(BSF, 2000–2002) = 12, NB(BSF, 2010–2012) = 35). This bear population appears to be genetically isolated, but contrary to our expectations, we did not find evidence of genetic diversity loss or other deleterious genetic effects typically observed from small founder groups. We attribute that to high initial genetic diversity in the founder group combined with overlapping generations and rapid population growth. Although the population remains relatively small, the reintroduction using a small founder group appears to be demographically and genetically sustainable. © 2015 The Wildlife Society.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/jwmg.886
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1701491630</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>24365824</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>24365824</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4236-25ed3082f099bc60ff74c9b3ba91ed092bcbe541b69910273450eefb5e813b8a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkV1rFDEYhQdRcK2Cf0AIeOPN1HzM5ONSFl1bq0KpbfEmJJl3utnOTsYk47r-elO27IU373nDeXJIOFX1muBTgjF9v9lt706l5E-qBVFM1FQS8bRaFIvWbUNun1cvUtpgzAiRfFH9vTST79BdDLu8RmYsK4yQvUOd_w0x-bxHETKM2YcR-bEgyKcwmAxdMfyYY-hmVw52MO4eWTARTWGaC_F4I68BuRIQzYDMNJnCrb0Z08vqWW-GBK8e9aT68enj1fJzffF9dbb8cFG7hjJe0xY6hiXtsVLWcdz3onHKMmsUgQ4rap2F8jPLlSKYCta0GKC3LUjCrDTspHp3yJ1i-DVDynrrk4NhMCOEOWkiMGkU4QwX9O1_6CbMcSyv04QrTKSUgheqPlA7P8BeT9FvTdxrgvVDA_qhAV0a0Oc3X1dFC__mwG9SDvHI04bxVpZ5zPMpw5-jb-K95oKJVt98W-mluL28uv5yrX-yf5KBlhc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1690188876</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Rapid growth and genetic diversity retention in an isolated reintroduced black bear population in the central appalachians</title><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><creator>Murphy, Sean M. ; Cox, John J. ; Clark, Joseph D. ; Augustine, Ben C. ; Hast, John T. ; Gibbs, Dan ; Strunk, Michael ; Dobey, Steven</creator><creatorcontrib>Murphy, Sean M. ; Cox, John J. ; Clark, Joseph D. ; Augustine, Ben C. ; Hast, John T. ; Gibbs, Dan ; Strunk, Michael ; Dobey, Steven</creatorcontrib><description>Animal reintroductions are important tools of wildlife management to restore species to their historical range, and they can also create unique opportunities to study population dynamics and genetics from founder events. We used non-invasive hair sampling in a systematic, closed-population capture-mark-recapture (CMR) study design at the Big South Fork (BSF) area in Kentucky during 2010 and Tennessee during 2012 to estimate the demographic and genetic characteristics of the black bear (Ursus americanus) population that resulted from a reintroduced founding population of 18 bears in 1998. We estimated 38 (95% CI: 31–66) and 190 (95% CI: 170–219) bears on the Kentucky and Tennessee study areas, respectively. Based on the Tennessee abundance estimate alone, the mean annual growth rate was 18.3% (95% CI: 17.4–19.5%) from 1998 to 2012. We also compared the genetic characteristics of bears sampled during 2010–2012 to bears in the population during 2000–2002, 2–4 years following reintroduction, and to the source population. We found that the level of genetic diversity since reintroduction as indicated by expected heterozygosity (HE) remained relatively constant (HE(source, 2004) = 0.763, HE(BSF, 2000–2002) = 0.729, HE(BSF, 2010–2012) = 0.712) and the effective number of breeders (NB) remained low but had increased since reintroduction in the absence of sufficient immigration (NB(BSF, 2000–2002) = 12, NB(BSF, 2010–2012) = 35). This bear population appears to be genetically isolated, but contrary to our expectations, we did not find evidence of genetic diversity loss or other deleterious genetic effects typically observed from small founder groups. We attribute that to high initial genetic diversity in the founder group combined with overlapping generations and rapid population growth. Although the population remains relatively small, the reintroduction using a small founder group appears to be demographically and genetically sustainable. © 2015 The Wildlife Society.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-541X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1937-2817</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/jwmg.886</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JWMAA9</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Bethesda: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Animal populations ; Appalachia ; Bears ; black bear ; Black bears ; demographics ; Ecological genetics ; founder event ; Genetic diversity ; Genetic effects ; Genetics ; Hair ; iteroparous ; Kentucky ; Management and Conservation ; Population estimates ; Population genetics ; Population growth ; Population size ; Reintroduction ; Species reintroduction ; Tennessee ; Ursus americanus ; Wildlife conservation ; Wildlife management</subject><ispartof>The Journal of wildlife management, 2015-07, Vol.79 (5), p.807-818</ispartof><rights>Copyright© 2015 The Wildlife Society</rights><rights>The Wildlife Society, 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4236-25ed3082f099bc60ff74c9b3ba91ed092bcbe541b69910273450eefb5e813b8a3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/24365824$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/24365824$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,1416,27922,27923,45572,45573,58015,58248</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Murphy, Sean M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cox, John J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clark, Joseph D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Augustine, Ben C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hast, John T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gibbs, Dan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strunk, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dobey, Steven</creatorcontrib><title>Rapid growth and genetic diversity retention in an isolated reintroduced black bear population in the central appalachians</title><title>The Journal of wildlife management</title><addtitle>Jour. Wild. Mgmt</addtitle><description>Animal reintroductions are important tools of wildlife management to restore species to their historical range, and they can also create unique opportunities to study population dynamics and genetics from founder events. We used non-invasive hair sampling in a systematic, closed-population capture-mark-recapture (CMR) study design at the Big South Fork (BSF) area in Kentucky during 2010 and Tennessee during 2012 to estimate the demographic and genetic characteristics of the black bear (Ursus americanus) population that resulted from a reintroduced founding population of 18 bears in 1998. We estimated 38 (95% CI: 31–66) and 190 (95% CI: 170–219) bears on the Kentucky and Tennessee study areas, respectively. Based on the Tennessee abundance estimate alone, the mean annual growth rate was 18.3% (95% CI: 17.4–19.5%) from 1998 to 2012. We also compared the genetic characteristics of bears sampled during 2010–2012 to bears in the population during 2000–2002, 2–4 years following reintroduction, and to the source population. We found that the level of genetic diversity since reintroduction as indicated by expected heterozygosity (HE) remained relatively constant (HE(source, 2004) = 0.763, HE(BSF, 2000–2002) = 0.729, HE(BSF, 2010–2012) = 0.712) and the effective number of breeders (NB) remained low but had increased since reintroduction in the absence of sufficient immigration (NB(BSF, 2000–2002) = 12, NB(BSF, 2010–2012) = 35). This bear population appears to be genetically isolated, but contrary to our expectations, we did not find evidence of genetic diversity loss or other deleterious genetic effects typically observed from small founder groups. We attribute that to high initial genetic diversity in the founder group combined with overlapping generations and rapid population growth. Although the population remains relatively small, the reintroduction using a small founder group appears to be demographically and genetically sustainable. © 2015 The Wildlife Society.</description><subject>Animal populations</subject><subject>Appalachia</subject><subject>Bears</subject><subject>black bear</subject><subject>Black bears</subject><subject>demographics</subject><subject>Ecological genetics</subject><subject>founder event</subject><subject>Genetic diversity</subject><subject>Genetic effects</subject><subject>Genetics</subject><subject>Hair</subject><subject>iteroparous</subject><subject>Kentucky</subject><subject>Management and Conservation</subject><subject>Population estimates</subject><subject>Population genetics</subject><subject>Population growth</subject><subject>Population size</subject><subject>Reintroduction</subject><subject>Species reintroduction</subject><subject>Tennessee</subject><subject>Ursus americanus</subject><subject>Wildlife conservation</subject><subject>Wildlife management</subject><issn>0022-541X</issn><issn>1937-2817</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpdkV1rFDEYhQdRcK2Cf0AIeOPN1HzM5ONSFl1bq0KpbfEmJJl3utnOTsYk47r-elO27IU373nDeXJIOFX1muBTgjF9v9lt706l5E-qBVFM1FQS8bRaFIvWbUNun1cvUtpgzAiRfFH9vTST79BdDLu8RmYsK4yQvUOd_w0x-bxHETKM2YcR-bEgyKcwmAxdMfyYY-hmVw52MO4eWTARTWGaC_F4I68BuRIQzYDMNJnCrb0Z08vqWW-GBK8e9aT68enj1fJzffF9dbb8cFG7hjJe0xY6hiXtsVLWcdz3onHKMmsUgQ4rap2F8jPLlSKYCta0GKC3LUjCrDTspHp3yJ1i-DVDynrrk4NhMCOEOWkiMGkU4QwX9O1_6CbMcSyv04QrTKSUgheqPlA7P8BeT9FvTdxrgvVDA_qhAV0a0Oc3X1dFC__mwG9SDvHI04bxVpZ5zPMpw5-jb-K95oKJVt98W-mluL28uv5yrX-yf5KBlhc</recordid><startdate>201507</startdate><enddate>201507</enddate><creator>Murphy, Sean M.</creator><creator>Cox, John J.</creator><creator>Clark, Joseph D.</creator><creator>Augustine, Ben C.</creator><creator>Hast, John T.</creator><creator>Gibbs, Dan</creator><creator>Strunk, Michael</creator><creator>Dobey, Steven</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201507</creationdate><title>Rapid growth and genetic diversity retention in an isolated reintroduced black bear population in the central appalachians</title><author>Murphy, Sean M. ; Cox, John J. ; Clark, Joseph D. ; Augustine, Ben C. ; Hast, John T. ; Gibbs, Dan ; Strunk, Michael ; Dobey, Steven</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4236-25ed3082f099bc60ff74c9b3ba91ed092bcbe541b69910273450eefb5e813b8a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Animal populations</topic><topic>Appalachia</topic><topic>Bears</topic><topic>black bear</topic><topic>Black bears</topic><topic>demographics</topic><topic>Ecological genetics</topic><topic>founder event</topic><topic>Genetic diversity</topic><topic>Genetic effects</topic><topic>Genetics</topic><topic>Hair</topic><topic>iteroparous</topic><topic>Kentucky</topic><topic>Management and Conservation</topic><topic>Population estimates</topic><topic>Population genetics</topic><topic>Population growth</topic><topic>Population size</topic><topic>Reintroduction</topic><topic>Species reintroduction</topic><topic>Tennessee</topic><topic>Ursus americanus</topic><topic>Wildlife conservation</topic><topic>Wildlife management</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Murphy, Sean M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cox, John J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clark, Joseph D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Augustine, Ben C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hast, John T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gibbs, Dan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strunk, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dobey, Steven</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>The Journal of wildlife management</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Murphy, Sean M.</au><au>Cox, John J.</au><au>Clark, Joseph D.</au><au>Augustine, Ben C.</au><au>Hast, John T.</au><au>Gibbs, Dan</au><au>Strunk, Michael</au><au>Dobey, Steven</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Rapid growth and genetic diversity retention in an isolated reintroduced black bear population in the central appalachians</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of wildlife management</jtitle><addtitle>Jour. Wild. Mgmt</addtitle><date>2015-07</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>79</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>807</spage><epage>818</epage><pages>807-818</pages><issn>0022-541X</issn><eissn>1937-2817</eissn><coden>JWMAA9</coden><abstract>Animal reintroductions are important tools of wildlife management to restore species to their historical range, and they can also create unique opportunities to study population dynamics and genetics from founder events. We used non-invasive hair sampling in a systematic, closed-population capture-mark-recapture (CMR) study design at the Big South Fork (BSF) area in Kentucky during 2010 and Tennessee during 2012 to estimate the demographic and genetic characteristics of the black bear (Ursus americanus) population that resulted from a reintroduced founding population of 18 bears in 1998. We estimated 38 (95% CI: 31–66) and 190 (95% CI: 170–219) bears on the Kentucky and Tennessee study areas, respectively. Based on the Tennessee abundance estimate alone, the mean annual growth rate was 18.3% (95% CI: 17.4–19.5%) from 1998 to 2012. We also compared the genetic characteristics of bears sampled during 2010–2012 to bears in the population during 2000–2002, 2–4 years following reintroduction, and to the source population. We found that the level of genetic diversity since reintroduction as indicated by expected heterozygosity (HE) remained relatively constant (HE(source, 2004) = 0.763, HE(BSF, 2000–2002) = 0.729, HE(BSF, 2010–2012) = 0.712) and the effective number of breeders (NB) remained low but had increased since reintroduction in the absence of sufficient immigration (NB(BSF, 2000–2002) = 12, NB(BSF, 2010–2012) = 35). This bear population appears to be genetically isolated, but contrary to our expectations, we did not find evidence of genetic diversity loss or other deleterious genetic effects typically observed from small founder groups. We attribute that to high initial genetic diversity in the founder group combined with overlapping generations and rapid population growth. Although the population remains relatively small, the reintroduction using a small founder group appears to be demographically and genetically sustainable. © 2015 The Wildlife Society.</abstract><cop>Bethesda</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1002/jwmg.886</doi><tpages>12</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0022-541X
ispartof The Journal of wildlife management, 2015-07, Vol.79 (5), p.807-818
issn 0022-541X
1937-2817
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1701491630
source JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; Wiley Online Library All Journals
subjects Animal populations
Appalachia
Bears
black bear
Black bears
demographics
Ecological genetics
founder event
Genetic diversity
Genetic effects
Genetics
Hair
iteroparous
Kentucky
Management and Conservation
Population estimates
Population genetics
Population growth
Population size
Reintroduction
Species reintroduction
Tennessee
Ursus americanus
Wildlife conservation
Wildlife management
title Rapid growth and genetic diversity retention in an isolated reintroduced black bear population in the central appalachians
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T21%3A40%3A05IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Rapid%20growth%20and%20genetic%20diversity%20retention%20in%20an%20isolated%20reintroduced%20black%20bear%20population%20in%20the%20central%20appalachians&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20wildlife%20management&rft.au=Murphy,%20Sean%20M.&rft.date=2015-07&rft.volume=79&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=807&rft.epage=818&rft.pages=807-818&rft.issn=0022-541X&rft.eissn=1937-2817&rft.coden=JWMAA9&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/jwmg.886&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E24365824%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1690188876&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=24365824&rfr_iscdi=true