Genetic variability of feral and ranch American mink Neovison vison in Poland

• Autorzy: Michalska-Parda A. , Brzezinski M. , Zalewski A. , Kozakiewicz M.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The diversity of 11 microsatellite loci was examined to estimate the genetic variability of ranch and feral American minkNeovison vison (Schreber, 1777) in Poland. Samples were collected from 10 mink farms (182 individuals) and from 5 areas in the north-eastern part of the country (87 individuals). At each examined locus the observed heterozygosity (H o) was lower than the expected heterozygosity (H e). Feral mink showed lower genetic variability than ranch mink; however, in the former group the mean value of the inbreeding coefficient (F IS=0.306) was higher than in the latter (0.242). These results demonstrated that feral and ranch mink belong to two genetically close but separate groups. Genetic differences were identified between mink colour breeds but not between animals from particular farms. The height of the modal values of ΔK indicated the presence of four genetic clusters: (1) farmed mink sapphire, (2) farmed mink standard and pastel, (3) farmed mink pearl and (4) feral mink. Assignment of mink individuals using assignment test, STRUCTURE and GeneClass 2.0. revealed that 12–16% of the feral mink group are likely to be ranch mink escapees. It may be concluded that approximately 30 years after the start of the expansion of feral mink in north-eastern Poland, this wild-living population exists without a major input of individuals bred on fur farms.

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Acta Theriologica
• Rocznik: 2009
• Tom: 54
• Numer: 1
• Opis fizyczny: p.1-10,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Michalska-Parda A.

• University of Warsaw, Banacha 2, 02-097 Warsaw, Poland

autor

Brzezinski M.

autor

Zalewski A.

autor

Kozakiewicz M.

Bibliografia

• Baker A. J. and Moeed A. 1987. Rapid genetic differentiation and founder effect in colonizing populations of common mynasAcridotheres tristis. Evolution 41: 525–538.
• Belliveau A., Farid A., O’Connell M. and Wright J. M. 1999. Assessment of genetic variability in captive and wild American mink (Mustela vison) using microsatellite markers. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 79: 7–16View Article
• Bevanger K. and Henriksen G. 1995. The distributional history and present status of the American mink (Mustela vison Schreber, 1777) in Norway. Annales Zoologici Fennici 32: 11–14.
• Bonesi L. and Palazon S. 2007. The American mink in Europe: status, impacts, and control. Biological Conservation 134: 470–483.
• Bowman J., Kidd A. G., Gorman R. M. and Schulte-Hostedde A. I. 2007. Assessing the potential for impacts by feral mink on wild mink in Canada. Biological Conservation 139: 12–18.
• Brzeziñski M. and Marzec M. 2003. The origin, dispersal and distribution of American minkMustela vison in Poland. Acta Theriologica 48: 505–514.
• Cuthbert J. H. 1973. The origin and distribution of feral mink in Scotland. Mammal Review 3: 97–103.
• Dunstone N. 1993. The mink. T & A D Poyser Natural History, London: 1–232.
• Evanno G., Regnaut S. and Goudet J. 2005. Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software STRUCTURE: a simulation study. Molecular Ecology 14: 2611–2620.PubMedView Article
• Fleming M. A, Ostrander E. A. and Cook J. A. 1999. Microsatellite markers for American mink (Mustela vison) and ermine (Mustela erminea). Molecular Ecology 8: 1352–1354.PubMedView Article
• Gerell R. 1967. Dispersal and acclimatization of the mink (Mustela vison Schreber) in Sweden. Viltrevy 5: 1–38.
• Gilligan D. M. and Frankham R. 2003. Dynamics of genetic adaptation to captivity. Conservation Genetics 4: 189–197.
• Golachowski M. 2002. [Ecological structure and genetic variability of American mink (Mustela vison) population in Mazurian Lakeland]. PhD thesis, Warsaw University, Warsaw: 1–41. [In Polish]
• Goudet J. 1995. Fstat version 1.2: a computer program to calculate F statistics. Journal of Heredity 86: 485–486.
• Goudet J. 2002. FSTAT, a program for Windows (95 and above) to estimate and test gene diversities and Fixation indices (version 2.9.3).http://​www2.​unil.​ch/​popgen/​softwares/​fstat.​htm
• Hammershoj M. 2004. Population ecology of free-ranging American minkMustela vison in Denmark. PhD thesis, National Environmental Research Institute, Kalo, Denmark: 1–30.
• Hammershoj M., Pertoldi C., Asferg T., Moller T. B. and Kristensen N. B. 2005. Danish free-ranging mink populations consist mainly of farm animals. Evidence from microsatellite and stable isotope analyses. Journal for Nature Conservation 13: 267–274.
• Hammershoj M., Travis J. M. J. and Stephenson C. M. 2006. Incorporating evolutionary processes into a spatially-explicit model: exploring the consequences of mink-farm closures in Denmark. Ecography 29: 465–476.
• Kauhala K. 1996. Distributional history of the American mink (Mustela vison) in Finland with special reference to the trends in otter (Lutra lutra) populations. Annales Zoologici Fennici 33: 283–291.
• Kumar S., Tamura K. and Nei M. 2004. MEGA3: Integrated software for Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis and sequence alignment. Briefings in Bioinformatics 5: 150–163.PubMedView Article
• Lisiecki H. and Sławoñ J. 1980. [Mink farming]. Third edition. PWRiL [Polish Agricultural Forestry Publisher], Warszawa: 1–309. [In Polish]
• Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development 2002. [A list of the fox, raccoon dog, mink, and polecat breeding stocks]. Breeding season 2002/2003. Warszawa. [In Polish]
• Paetkau D., Slade R., Burden M. and Estoup A. 2004. Genetic assignment methods for the direct, real-time estimation of migration rate: a simulation-based exploration of accuracy and power. Molecular Ecology 13: 55–65.PubMedView Article
• Peakall R. and Smouse P. E. 2006. GENEALEX 6: genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research. Molecular Ecology Notes 6: 288–295.
• Piry S., Alapetite A., Cornuet J.-M., Paetkau D., Baudouin L. and Estoup A. 2004. GeneClass2: A software for genetic assignment and first-generation migrant detection. Journal of Heredity 95: 536–539.PubMedView Article
• Pritchard J. K., Stephens M. and Donnelly P. 2000. Interference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155: 945–959.
• Rannala B. and Mountain J. L. 1997. Detecting immigration by using multilocus genotypes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 94: 9197–9201.PubMedView Article
• Raymond M. and Rousset F. 1995. Genepop (Version-1.2) — population-genetics software for exact tests and ecumenicism. Journal of Heredity 86: 248–249.
• Rice W. R. 1989. Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43: 223–225View Article
• Romanowski J., Kaszuba S. and Kożniewski P. 1984. [New data on the occurrence of mink (Mammalia, Mustelidae) in Poland]. Przegląd Zoologiczny 28: 221–223. [In Polish]
• Ruprecht A. L. 1996. Materials to the distribution of the members of the subgenusLutreola Wagner, 1841 (Carnivora: Mustelidae) in Poland. Przegląd Zoologiczny 40: 223–233. [In Polish]
• Ruprecht A. L., Buchalczyk T. and Wójcik J. M. 1983. The occurrence of minks (Mammalia: Mustelidae) in Poland. Przegląd Zoologiczny 27: 87–99. [In Polish]
• Sidorovich V. E. 1993. Reproductive plasticity of the American minkMustela vison in Belarus. Acta Theriologica 38: 175–183.