RESEARCH ARTICLE Genetic structure of the northwestern Russian wolf populations and gene flow between Russia and Finland
Abstract We examined the genetic diversity and struc-ture of wolf populations in northwestern Russia. Populations in Republic of Karelia and Arkhangelsk Oblast were sampled during 1995–2000, and 43 individuals were genotyped with 10 microsatellite markers. Moreover, 118 previously genotyped wolves f...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Text |
| Language: | English |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.547.8557 http://cc.oulu.fi/~jaspi/Russian_wolf_Conservation_Genetics.pdf |
| Summary: | Abstract We examined the genetic diversity and struc-ture of wolf populations in northwestern Russia. Populations in Republic of Karelia and Arkhangelsk Oblast were sampled during 1995–2000, and 43 individuals were genotyped with 10 microsatellite markers. Moreover, 118 previously genotyped wolves from the neighbouring Finnish population were used as a reference population. A relatively large amount of genetic variation was found in the Russian populations, and the Karelian wolf population tended to be slightly more polymorphic than the Arkhan-gelsk population. We found significant inbreeding (F = 0.094) in the Karelian, but not in the Arkhangelsk population. The effective size estimates of the Karelian wolf population based on the approximate Bayesian com-putation and linkage disequilibrium methods were 39.9 and 46.7 individuals, respectively. AMOVA-analysis and exact test of population differentiation suggested clear differen-tiation between the Karelian, Arkhangelsk and Finnish wolf populations. Indirect estimates of gene flow based on the level of population differentiation (/ST = 0.152) and frequency of private alleles (0.029) both suggested a low level of gene flow between the populations (Nm = 1.4 and Nm = 3.7, respectively). Assignment analysis of Karelian and Finnish populations suggested an even lower number of recent migrants (less than 0.03) between populations, with a larger amount of migration from Finland to Karelia than vice versa. Our findings emphasise the role of physical obstacles and territorial behaviour in creating barriers to gene flow between populations in relatively limited geo-graphical areas, even in large-bodied mammalian species with long-distance dispersal capabilities and an apparently continuous population structure. |
|---|