Wolf genetic diversity compared across Europe using the yardstick method

Integrating data across studies with traditional microsatellite genetic markers requires careful calibration and represents an obstacle for investigation of wide-ranging species where populations require transboundary management. We used the “yardstick” method to compare results published across Eur...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Scientific Reports
Main Authors: Jan, Maja, Stronen, Astrid Vik, Boljte, Barbara, Černe, Rok, Huber, Đuro, Iosif, Ruben, Kljun, Franc, Konec, Marjeta, Kos, Ivan, Krofel, Miha, Kusak, Josip, Luštrik, Roman, Majić Skrbinšek, Aleksandra, Promberger–Füerpass, Barbara, Potočnik, Hubert, Rigg, Robin, Trontelj, Peter, Skrbinšek, Tomaž
Format: Text
Language:English
Published: Nature Publishing Group UK 2023
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10444868/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37608038
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-40834-x
id ftpubmed:oai:pubmedcentral.nih.gov:10444868
record_format openpolar
spelling ftpubmed:oai:pubmedcentral.nih.gov:10444868 2023-09-26T15:17:01+02:00 Wolf genetic diversity compared across Europe using the yardstick method Jan, Maja Stronen, Astrid Vik Boljte, Barbara Černe, Rok Huber, Đuro Iosif, Ruben Kljun, Franc Konec, Marjeta Kos, Ivan Krofel, Miha Kusak, Josip Luštrik, Roman Majić Skrbinšek, Aleksandra Promberger–Füerpass, Barbara Potočnik, Hubert Rigg, Robin Trontelj, Peter Skrbinšek, Tomaž 2023-08-22 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10444868/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37608038 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-40834-x en eng Nature Publishing Group UK http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10444868/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37608038 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-40834-x © Springer Nature Limited 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . Sci Rep Article Text 2023 ftpubmed https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-40834-x 2023-08-27T01:09:21Z Integrating data across studies with traditional microsatellite genetic markers requires careful calibration and represents an obstacle for investigation of wide-ranging species where populations require transboundary management. We used the “yardstick” method to compare results published across Europe since 2002 and new wolf (Canis lupus) genetic profiles from the Carpathian Mountains in Central Europe and the Dinaric Mountains in Southeastern Europe, with the latter as our reference population. We compared each population with Dinaric wolves, considering only shared markers (range 4–17). For each population, we calculated standard genetic diversity indices plus calibrated heterozygosity (Hec) and allelic richness (Ac). Hec and Ac in Dinaric (0.704 and 9.394) and Carpathian wolves (0.695 and 7.023) were comparable to those observed in other large and mid-sized European populations, but smaller than those of northeastern Europe. Major discrepancies in marker choices among some studies made comparisons more difficult. However, the yardstick method, including the new measures of Hec and Ac, provided a direct comparison of genetic diversity values among wolf populations and an intuitive interpretation of the results. The yardstick method thus permitted the integration of diverse sources of publicly available microsatellite data for spatiotemporal genetic monitoring of evolutionary potential. Text Canis lupus PubMed Central (PMC) Scientific Reports 13 1
institution Open Polar
collection PubMed Central (PMC)
op_collection_id ftpubmed
language English
topic Article
spellingShingle Article
Jan, Maja
Stronen, Astrid Vik
Boljte, Barbara
Černe, Rok
Huber, Đuro
Iosif, Ruben
Kljun, Franc
Konec, Marjeta
Kos, Ivan
Krofel, Miha
Kusak, Josip
Luštrik, Roman
Majić Skrbinšek, Aleksandra
Promberger–Füerpass, Barbara
Potočnik, Hubert
Rigg, Robin
Trontelj, Peter
Skrbinšek, Tomaž
Wolf genetic diversity compared across Europe using the yardstick method
topic_facet Article
description Integrating data across studies with traditional microsatellite genetic markers requires careful calibration and represents an obstacle for investigation of wide-ranging species where populations require transboundary management. We used the “yardstick” method to compare results published across Europe since 2002 and new wolf (Canis lupus) genetic profiles from the Carpathian Mountains in Central Europe and the Dinaric Mountains in Southeastern Europe, with the latter as our reference population. We compared each population with Dinaric wolves, considering only shared markers (range 4–17). For each population, we calculated standard genetic diversity indices plus calibrated heterozygosity (Hec) and allelic richness (Ac). Hec and Ac in Dinaric (0.704 and 9.394) and Carpathian wolves (0.695 and 7.023) were comparable to those observed in other large and mid-sized European populations, but smaller than those of northeastern Europe. Major discrepancies in marker choices among some studies made comparisons more difficult. However, the yardstick method, including the new measures of Hec and Ac, provided a direct comparison of genetic diversity values among wolf populations and an intuitive interpretation of the results. The yardstick method thus permitted the integration of diverse sources of publicly available microsatellite data for spatiotemporal genetic monitoring of evolutionary potential.
format Text
author Jan, Maja
Stronen, Astrid Vik
Boljte, Barbara
Černe, Rok
Huber, Đuro
Iosif, Ruben
Kljun, Franc
Konec, Marjeta
Kos, Ivan
Krofel, Miha
Kusak, Josip
Luštrik, Roman
Majić Skrbinšek, Aleksandra
Promberger–Füerpass, Barbara
Potočnik, Hubert
Rigg, Robin
Trontelj, Peter
Skrbinšek, Tomaž
author_facet Jan, Maja
Stronen, Astrid Vik
Boljte, Barbara
Černe, Rok
Huber, Đuro
Iosif, Ruben
Kljun, Franc
Konec, Marjeta
Kos, Ivan
Krofel, Miha
Kusak, Josip
Luštrik, Roman
Majić Skrbinšek, Aleksandra
Promberger–Füerpass, Barbara
Potočnik, Hubert
Rigg, Robin
Trontelj, Peter
Skrbinšek, Tomaž
author_sort Jan, Maja
title Wolf genetic diversity compared across Europe using the yardstick method
title_short Wolf genetic diversity compared across Europe using the yardstick method
title_full Wolf genetic diversity compared across Europe using the yardstick method
title_fullStr Wolf genetic diversity compared across Europe using the yardstick method
title_full_unstemmed Wolf genetic diversity compared across Europe using the yardstick method
title_sort wolf genetic diversity compared across europe using the yardstick method
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
publishDate 2023
url http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10444868/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37608038
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-40834-x
genre Canis lupus
genre_facet Canis lupus
op_source Sci Rep
op_relation http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10444868/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37608038
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-40834-x
op_rights © Springer Nature Limited 2023
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-40834-x
container_title Scientific Reports
container_volume 13
container_issue 1
_version_ 1778138355010109440