News News

Human impact has contributed to the decline of the Eurasion lynx

Disentangling the contribution of long?term evolutionary processes and recent anthropogenic impacts to current genetic patterns of wildlife species is key to assessing genetic risks and designing conservation strategies. Eighty whole nuclear genomes and 96 mitogenomes from populations of the Eurasian lynx covering a range of conservation statuses, climatic zones and subspecies across Eurasia were used to infer the demographic history, reconstruct genetic patterns, and discuss the influence of long?term isolation and more recent human?driven changes. Results show that Eurasian lynx populations shared a common history until 100,000 years ago, when Asian and European populations started to diverge and both entered a period of continuous and widespread decline, with western populations, except Kirov (Russia), maintaining lower effective sizes than eastern populations. Population declines and increased isolation in more recent times probably drove the genetic differentiation between geographically and ecologically close westernmost European populations. By contrast, and despite the wide range of habitats covered, populations are quite homogeneous genetically across the Asian range, showing a pattern of isolation by distance and providing little genetic support for the several proposed subspecies. Mitogenomic and nuclear divergences and population declines starting during the Late Pleistocene can be mostly attributed to climatic fluctuations and early human influence, but the widespread and sustained decline since the Holocene is more probably the consequence of anthropogenic impacts which intensified in recent centuries, especially in western Europe. Genetic erosion in isolated European populations and lack of evidence for long?term isolation argue for the restoration of lost population connectivity between European and Asian poulations. informacion[at]ebd.csic.es: Lucena-Perez et al (2020). Genomic patterns in the widespread Eurasian lynx shaped by Late Quaternary climatic fluctuations and anthropogenic impacts. MOL ECOL 29(4) DOI 10.1111/mec.15366


https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/mec.15366
Average (0 Votes)

Latest News Latest News

Back

The costs of nestling begging behavior

The costs of nestling begging behavior

Many theoretical models on the evolution of nestling begging assume this behavior is costly, so that only nestlings in real need of food would profit from giving intensive signals to parents. However, evidence accumulated for the last 2 decades is either contradictory (growth costs) or scant (immunological cost). Here, the existence of both costs is experimentally tested in pied flycatcher nestlings, a species in which parents appropriately respond to honest begging signals. Nestlings were paired by nest of origin and similar body mass. In each pair, a nestling was forced to beg for 51s/meal, whereas the other begged for only 3.4s/meal, both receiving the same amount of food. Simultaneously, the nestling immune response to an antigen (phytohemagglutinin) was measured. Experimental nestlings showed reduced immunocompetence compared with control chicks, which in this species could be regarded as a genuine direct cost. High-begging nestlings also gained less mass during the daylight activity hours. However, they lost less mass while resting at night, resulting in similar mass gains for both groups across the whole daily cycle. This suggests that negative effects of excess begging on mass gain can be compensated for by nestlings, thus avoiding the negative fitness consequences (i.e., cost) of a retarded growth. Mixed results found in previous studies may reflect interspecific differences in compensatory changes in mass gain. But if such differences do not map into fitness consequences, they may be of little help to answer the question of whether begging entails direct growth costs. Redondo et al (2016) Pied flycatcher nestlings incur immunological but not growth begging costs. Behav Ecol doi: 10.1093/beheco/arw045


http://beheco.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2016/04/08/beheco.arw045.abstract?keytype=ref&ijkey=yWq6I8LCzowWIzD