Population structure of island and mainland populations of the quokka, Setonix brachyurus (Macropodidae): a comparison of AFLP and microsatellite markers

Erika Alacs, Peter Spencer, Paul de Tores, Siegfried Krauss

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Translocation and reintroduction are important tools for the conservation or recovery of species threatened with extinction in the wild. However, an understanding of the potential genetic consequences of mixing populations requires an understanding of the genetic variation within, and similarities among, donor and recipient populations. Genetic diversity was measured using two independent marker systems (microsatellites and AFLPs) for one island and four small remnant mainland populations of Setonix brachyurus, a threatened medium sized macropod restricted to fragmented habitat remnants and two off-shore islands in southwest Australia. Microsatellite diversity in the island population (R s = 3.2, H e = 71%) was similar to, or greater than, all mainland populations (R s = 2.1â¿¿3.9, H e = 34-71%). In contrast, AFLP diversity was significantly lower in the island population (PPL = 20.5; H j = 0.118) compared to all mainland populations (mean PPL = 79.5â¿¿89.7; mean H j = 0.23â¿¿0.29). Microsatellites differentiated all (mainland and island) populations from each other. However, AFLP only differentiated the island population from the mainland populationsâ¿¿all mainland populations were not significantly differentiated from each other for this marker. Given a known time since isolation of the island population from the mainland (6,000 years ago), and an overall more conservative rate of evolution of AFLP markers, our results are consistent with mainland populations fragmenting thousands of years ago (but
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)297-309
Number of pages13
JournalConservation Genetics
Volume12
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Macropodidae
Islands
Microsatellite Repeats
amplified fragment length polymorphism
population structure
microsatellite repeats
Population
reintroduction
marker
comparison
translocation
genetic variation
extinction
Endangered Species
threatened species
habitat fragmentation
habitat
Ecosystem

Cite this

@article{c054cb4d78e0434cbdb1f7c7908c83e3,
title = "Population structure of island and mainland populations of the quokka, Setonix brachyurus (Macropodidae): a comparison of AFLP and microsatellite markers",
abstract = "Translocation and reintroduction are important tools for the conservation or recovery of species threatened with extinction in the wild. However, an understanding of the potential genetic consequences of mixing populations requires an understanding of the genetic variation within, and similarities among, donor and recipient populations. Genetic diversity was measured using two independent marker systems (microsatellites and AFLPs) for one island and four small remnant mainland populations of Setonix brachyurus, a threatened medium sized macropod restricted to fragmented habitat remnants and two off-shore islands in southwest Australia. Microsatellite diversity in the island population (R s = 3.2, H e = 71{\%}) was similar to, or greater than, all mainland populations (R s = 2.1{\^a}¿¿3.9, H e = 34-71{\%}). In contrast, AFLP diversity was significantly lower in the island population (PPL = 20.5; H j = 0.118) compared to all mainland populations (mean PPL = 79.5{\^a}¿¿89.7; mean H j = 0.23{\^a}¿¿0.29). Microsatellites differentiated all (mainland and island) populations from each other. However, AFLP only differentiated the island population from the mainland populations{\^a}¿¿all mainland populations were not significantly differentiated from each other for this marker. Given a known time since isolation of the island population from the mainland (6,000 years ago), and an overall more conservative rate of evolution of AFLP markers, our results are consistent with mainland populations fragmenting thousands of years ago (but",
keywords = "Marsupial, Genetic variation, Historical fragmentation, Conservation, Management",
author = "Erika Alacs and Peter Spencer and {de Tores}, Paul and Siegfried Krauss",
year = "2011",
doi = "10.1007/s10592-010-0140-6",
language = "English",
volume = "12",
pages = "297--309",
journal = "Conservation Genetics",
issn = "1566-0621",
publisher = "Springer",

}

Population structure of island and mainland populations of the quokka, Setonix brachyurus (Macropodidae): a comparison of AFLP and microsatellite markers. / Alacs, Erika; Spencer, Peter; de Tores, Paul; Krauss, Siegfried.

In: Conservation Genetics, Vol. 12, 2011, p. 297-309.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Population structure of island and mainland populations of the quokka, Setonix brachyurus (Macropodidae): a comparison of AFLP and microsatellite markers

AU - Alacs, Erika

AU - Spencer, Peter

AU - de Tores, Paul

AU - Krauss, Siegfried

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - Translocation and reintroduction are important tools for the conservation or recovery of species threatened with extinction in the wild. However, an understanding of the potential genetic consequences of mixing populations requires an understanding of the genetic variation within, and similarities among, donor and recipient populations. Genetic diversity was measured using two independent marker systems (microsatellites and AFLPs) for one island and four small remnant mainland populations of Setonix brachyurus, a threatened medium sized macropod restricted to fragmented habitat remnants and two off-shore islands in southwest Australia. Microsatellite diversity in the island population (R s = 3.2, H e = 71%) was similar to, or greater than, all mainland populations (R s = 2.1â¿¿3.9, H e = 34-71%). In contrast, AFLP diversity was significantly lower in the island population (PPL = 20.5; H j = 0.118) compared to all mainland populations (mean PPL = 79.5â¿¿89.7; mean H j = 0.23â¿¿0.29). Microsatellites differentiated all (mainland and island) populations from each other. However, AFLP only differentiated the island population from the mainland populationsâ¿¿all mainland populations were not significantly differentiated from each other for this marker. Given a known time since isolation of the island population from the mainland (6,000 years ago), and an overall more conservative rate of evolution of AFLP markers, our results are consistent with mainland populations fragmenting thousands of years ago (but

AB - Translocation and reintroduction are important tools for the conservation or recovery of species threatened with extinction in the wild. However, an understanding of the potential genetic consequences of mixing populations requires an understanding of the genetic variation within, and similarities among, donor and recipient populations. Genetic diversity was measured using two independent marker systems (microsatellites and AFLPs) for one island and four small remnant mainland populations of Setonix brachyurus, a threatened medium sized macropod restricted to fragmented habitat remnants and two off-shore islands in southwest Australia. Microsatellite diversity in the island population (R s = 3.2, H e = 71%) was similar to, or greater than, all mainland populations (R s = 2.1â¿¿3.9, H e = 34-71%). In contrast, AFLP diversity was significantly lower in the island population (PPL = 20.5; H j = 0.118) compared to all mainland populations (mean PPL = 79.5â¿¿89.7; mean H j = 0.23â¿¿0.29). Microsatellites differentiated all (mainland and island) populations from each other. However, AFLP only differentiated the island population from the mainland populationsâ¿¿all mainland populations were not significantly differentiated from each other for this marker. Given a known time since isolation of the island population from the mainland (6,000 years ago), and an overall more conservative rate of evolution of AFLP markers, our results are consistent with mainland populations fragmenting thousands of years ago (but

KW - Marsupial

KW - Genetic variation

KW - Historical fragmentation

KW - Conservation

KW - Management

U2 - 10.1007/s10592-010-0140-6

DO - 10.1007/s10592-010-0140-6

M3 - Article

VL - 12

SP - 297

EP - 309

JO - Conservation Genetics

JF - Conservation Genetics

SN - 1566-0621

ER -