Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Beyond the beneficial effects of translocations as an effective tool for the genetic restoration of isolated populations

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Conservation Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Translocations are becoming increasingly popular as appropriate management strategies for the genetic restoration of endangered species and populations. Although a few studies have shown that the introduction of novel alleles has reversed the detrimental effects of inbreeding over the short-term (i.e., genetic rescue), it is not clear how effective such translocations are for both maintaining neutral variation that may be adaptive in the future (i.e., genetic restoration) and increasing population viability over the long-term. In addition, scientists have expressed concerns regarding the potential genetic swamping of locally adapted populations, which may eliminate significant components of genetic diversity through the replacement of the target population by the source individuals used for translocations. Here we show that bird translocations into a wild population of greater prairie-chickens (Tympanuchus cupido pinnatus) in southeastern Illinois were effective in both removing detrimental variation associated with inbreeding depression as well as restoring neutral genetic variation to historical levels. Furthermore, we found that although translocations resulted in immediate increases in fitness, the demographic recovery and long-term viability of the population appears to be limited by the availability of suitable habitat. Our results demonstrate that although translocations can be effective management tools for the genetic restoration of wild populations on the verge of extinction, their long-term viability may not be guaranteed unless the initial conditions that led to most species declines (e.g., habitat loss) are reversed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arrenda J, Walker CW, Sundqvist A-K, Hellborg L, Vilà C (2004) Genetic evaluation of an otter translocation program. Conserv Genet 5:79–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beier P, Vaughan MR, Conroy MJ, Quigley H (2006) Evaluating scientific inferences about the Florida panther. J Wildl Manage 70:236–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bellinger MR, Johnson JA, Dunn P (2003) Loss of genetic variation in Greater Prairie Chickens following a population bottleneck in Wisconsin, U.S.A. Conserv Biol 17:717–724

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger DD, Hamerstrom F, Hamerstrom FN (1962) The effects of raptors on prairie chickens on booming grounds. J Wildl Manage 27:778–791

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouzat JL, Lewin HA, Paige KN (1998a) The ghost of genetic diversity past: historical DNA analysis of the greater prairie chicken. Am Nat 152:1–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bouzat JL, Cheng HH, Lewin HA, Westemeier RL, Brawn J, Paige KN (1998b) Genetic evaluation of a demographic bottleneck in the greater prairie chicken. Conserv Biol 12:836–843

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caughley G (1994) Directions in conservation biology. J Anim Ecol 63:215–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clewell AF (2000) Restoring for natural authenticity. Ecol Restor 18:216–217

    Google Scholar 

  • Crandall KA, Bininda-Edmonds ORP, Mace GM, Wayne RK (2000) Considering evolutionary processes in conservation biology: an alternative to “evolutionary significant units”. Trends Ecol Evol 15:290–295

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Edmands S (2007) Between a rock and a hard place: evaluating the relative risks of inbreeding and outbreeding for conservation and management. Mol Ecol 16:463–475

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Excoffier L, Laval G, Schneider S (2005) Arlequin ver. 3.0: an integrated software package for population genetics data analysis. Evol Bioinform Online 1:47–50

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Frankham R, Ballou JD, Briscoe DA (2002) Introduction to conservation genetics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Goudet J (1995) FSTAT (version 1.2): a computer program to calculate F-statistics. J Heredity 86:485–486

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamerstrom FN Jr, Hamerstrom F (1973) The prairie chicken in Wisconsin-highlights of a 22-year study of counts, behavior, movements, turnover, and habitat. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Technical Bulletin No. 64, Madison

  • Hamerstrom FN Jr, Mattson OE, Hamerstrom F (1957) A guide to prairie chicken management. Wisconsin Conservation Department, Technical Wildlife Bulletin No. 15, Madison

  • Hamerstrom F, Berger DD, Hamerstrom FN (1964) The effects of mammals on prairie chickens on booming grounds. J Wildl Manage 29:536–542

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedrick PW (2000) Genetics of populations, 2nd edn. Johns and Bartlett Publishers, Inc., Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedrick PW (2004) Recent developments in conservation genetics. For Ecol Manage 197:3–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedrick PW (2005) ‘Genetic restoration:’ a more comprehensive perspective than ‘genetic rescue.’ Trends Ecol Evol 20:109

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hogg JT, Forbes SH, Steele BM, Luikart G (2006) Genetic rescue of an insular population of large mammals. Proc R Soc B 273:1491–1499

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hufford KM, Mazer SJ (2003) Plant ecotypes: genetic differentiation in the age of ecological restoration. Trends Ecol Evol 18:147–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnsgard PA (1983) The Grouse of the world. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson JA, Dunn PO (2006) Low genetic variation in the heath hen prior to extinction and implications for the conservation of prairie-chicken populations. Conserv Genet 7:37–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson JA, Toepfer JE, Dunn PO (2003) Contrasting patterns of mitochondrial and microsatellite population structure in fragmented populations of greater prairie-chickens. Mol Ecol 12:3335–3348

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson JA, Bellinger MR, Toepfer JE, Dunn PO (2004) Temporal changes in allele frequencies and low effective population size in greater prairie-chickens. Mol Ecol 13:2617–2630

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson JA, Dunn PO, Bouzat JL (2007) Effects of recent population bottlenecks on reconstructing the demographic history of prairie-chickens. Mol Ecol 16:2203–2222

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lande R (1998) Genetics and demography in biological conservation. Science 241:1455–1460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madsen T, Shine R, Olsson M, Wittzell H (1999) Restoration of an inbred adder population. Nature 402:34–35

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Maher DS, Crowley P, Cox JJ, Lacki MJ, Larkin JL, Hoctor TS, Harris LD, Hall PM (2006) Of cats and Haruspices: genetic intervention in the Florida panther. Response to Pimm et al. (2006). Anim Conserv 9:127–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nei M (1987) Molecular evolutionary genetics. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman D, Tallmon DA (2001) Experimental evidence for beneficial effects of gene flow in recently isolated populations. Conserv Biol 15:1054–1063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pimm SL, Doolar L, Bass OL Jr (2006) The genetic rescue of the Florida panther. Anim Conserv 9:115–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P (2000) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155:945–959

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rozas J, Sánchez-DelBarrio JC, Messeguer X, Rozas R (2003) DNA polymorphism analyses by the coalescent and other methods. Bioinformatics 19:2496–2497

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Saccheri I, Kuussaari M, Kankare M, Vikman P, Fortelius W, Hanski I (1998) Inbreeding and extinction in a butterfly metapopulation. Nature 392:491–494

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Soulé ME, Mills LS (1998) No need to isolate genetics. Science 282:1658–1659

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svedarsky WD, Hier RH, Silvy NJ (1999) The greater prairie chicken a national look. University of Minnesota, Miscellaneous Publication 99, Saint Paul

  • Swindell WR, Bouzat JL (2005) Modeling the adaptive potential of isolated populations: experimental simulations using Drosophila. Evolution 59:2159–2169

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Swindell WR, Bouzat JL (2006) Gene flow and adaptive potential in Drosophila melanogaster. Conserv Genet 7:79–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tajima F (1989) Statistical method for testing the neutral mutational hypothesis by DNA polymorphism. Genetics 123:585–595

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tallmon DA, Luikart G, Waples RS (2004) The alluring simplicity and complex reality of genetic rescue. Trends Ecol Evol 19:489–496

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Toepfer JE (2007) Status and management of the greater prairie-chicken in Wisconsin—2006. Passenger Pigeon 69:259–288

    Google Scholar 

  • Vance DR, Westemeier RL (1979) Interaction of pheasants and prairie chicken in Illinois. Wildl Soc Bull 7:221–225

    Google Scholar 

  • Vilà C, Sundqvist A-K, Flagstad Ø, Seddon J, Björnerfeldt S, Kojola I, Casulli A, Sand H, Wabakken P, Ellegren H (2003) Rescue of a severely bottlenecked wolf (Canis lupus) population by a single immigrant. Proc R Soc B 270:91–97

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Walk JW (2004) A plan for the recovery of the greater prairie-chicken in Illinois. Illinois Department of Natural Resources, Springfield

    Google Scholar 

  • Westemeier RL, Brawn JD, Simpson SA, Esker TL, Jansen RW, Walk JW, Kershner EL, Bouzat JL, Paige KN (1998a) Tracking the long-term decline and recovery of an isolated population. Science 282:1695–1698

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Westemeier RL, Buhnerkempe JE, Edwards WR, Brawn JD, Simpson SA (1998b) Parasitism of greater prairie-chicken nest by ring-necked pheasants. J Wildl Manage 62:854–863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wisdom MJ, Mills LS (1997) Sensitivity analysis to guide population recovery: prairie-chickens as an example. J Wildl Manage 61:302–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wisdom MJ, Mills LS, Doak DF (2000) Life stage simulation analysis: estimating vital-rate effects on population growth for conservation. Ecology 81:628–641

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wisely SM, Santymire RM, Livieri TM, Mueting SA, Howard J (2007) Genotypic and phenotypic consequences of reintroduction history in the black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes). Conserv Genet. doi:10.1007/s10592-007-9351-x

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Michael E. Soulé, L. Scott Mills, Phil Hedrick, Bob Wayne, Scott V. Edwards, and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments on the manuscript, and Mike Morrow and Robert Gillespie for their assistance in trapping prairie-chickens for the 2003 Illinois sampling. We thank the following institutions for providing access to historical specimens for DNA analyses: American Museum of Natural History (New York, NY), Field Museum of Natural History (Chicago, IL), Museum of Vertebrate Zoology (Berkeley, CA), National Museum of Natural History (Washington, D.C.), University of Michigan Museum of Zoology (Ann Arbor, MI), University of Kansas Natural History Museum, Cornell University Museum of Vertebrates, University of Missouri-Columbia, Illinois Natural History Survey (Champaign, IL), and Texas A&M University. Logistical and financial support for this research has been provided by Bowling Green State University, University of Michigan, Society of Tympanuchus Cupido Pinnatus, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Illinois Department of Natural Resources-Division of Natural Heritage, The Nature Conservancy, and Illinois Natural History Survey.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biological Sciences, Bowling Green State University, Life Science Building, Bowling Green, OH, 43403-0212, USA

    Juan L. Bouzat

  2. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Michigan Museum of Zoology, 1109 Geddes Avenue, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA

    Jeff A. Johnson

  3. Society of Tympanuchus Cupido Pinnatus, Plover, WI, 54467, USA

    John E. Toepfer

  4. Illinois Department of Natural Resources, Newton, IL, 62448, USA

    Scott A. Simpson & Terry L. Esker

  5. Illinois Natural History Survey, Effingham, IL, 62401, USA

    Ronald L. Westemeier

Authors
  1. Juan L. Bouzat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jeff A. Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. John E. Toepfer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Scott A. Simpson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Terry L. Esker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ronald L. Westemeier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Juan L. Bouzat.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bouzat, J.L., Johnson, J.A., Toepfer, J.E. et al. Beyond the beneficial effects of translocations as an effective tool for the genetic restoration of isolated populations. Conserv Genet 10, 191–201 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-008-9547-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-008-9547-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation