Conservation Genetics

, Volume 5, Issue 5, pp 631–645 | Cite as

Assessing losses of genetic diversity due to translocation: long-term case histories in Merriam's turkey (Meleagris gallopavo merriami)

  • Karen E. Mock
  • E.K. Latch
  • O.E. Rhodes


Translocation is a widely used tool in wildlife management, but populations established as a result of translocations may be subject to a range of genetic problems, including loss of genetic diversity and founder effects. The genetic impact of single translocation events can be difficult to assess because of complex management histories in translocated or source populations. Here we use molecular markers to assess the genetic impact of three well-documented translocation events, each occurring between 42 and 53 years ago and each originating from a native, extant source population that we also included in our study. Comparing translocated populations to their sources, we found genetic evidence of a recent bottleneck in all three translocated populations, including one which is now a very large, productive population. Based on our results, we recommend caution in (1) using short term census data to assess the long term success of a translocation and (2) conducting serial translocations (i.e., using translocated populations as the source for other translocations), which could exacerbate a genetic bottleneck. We also used the data on translocated populations to investigate the relative utility of three bottleneck detection methods. With this dataset, only assessment of the modal allele frequency distribution, described by Luikart et al. [Journal of Heredity, 89, 238–247 (1998)], provided evidence of a bottleneck in the absence of source population data.

bottleneck microsatellite translocation wild turkey 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Belkhir K, Borsa P, Goudet J, Chikhi L, and Bonhomme F (2000) GENETIX 4. 01, Logiciel Sous Windows Pour la Ge ´ne ´tique des Populations: Laboratoire Ge ´nome, Populations, Interactions, CNRS UMR 5000. Universite ´de Montpellier II, Montpellier, France.Google Scholar
  2. Bent AC (1963) Life Histories of North American Gallinaceous Birds. Dover Publications, New York, USA.Google Scholar
  3. Cornuet JM, Piry S, Luikart G, Estoup A, Solignac M (1999) New methods employing multilocus genotypes to select or exclude populations as origins of individuals. Genetics, 153, 1989–2000.Google Scholar
  4. Cornuet JM, Luikart G (1996) Description and power analysis of two tests for detecting recent population bottlenecks from allele frequency data. Genetics, 144, 2001–2014.Google Scholar
  5. Di Rienzo A, Peterson AC, Garza JC et al. (1994) Mutational processes of simple-sequence repeat loci in human populations. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA, 91, 3166–3170.Google Scholar
  6. Frankham R (1995) Conservation genetics. Annu. rev. Genet., 29, 305–327.Google Scholar
  7. Frankham R (1999) Quantitative genetics in conservation biology. Genet. Res., 74, 237–244.Google Scholar
  8. Garza JC, Williamson EG (2001) Detection of reduction in population size using data from microsatellite loci. Mol. Ecol., 10, 305–318.Google Scholar
  9. Griffith B, Scott JM, Carpenter JW, Reed C (1989) Translocation as a species conservation tool: status and strategy. Science, 245, 477–480.Google Scholar
  10. Haig SM, Ballou JD, Derrickson SR (1990) Management options for preserving genetic diversity: Reintroduction of Guam rails to the wild. Conserv. Biol., 4, 290–300.Google Scholar
  11. Hammer Ø, Harper DAT, Ryan PD (2001) PAST: Paleontological Statistics Software Package for Education and Data Analysis. Palaeontologia Electronica, 4(1), article 4: http: // folk. uio. no/ohammer/past/.Google Scholar
  12. Hansson B, Westerberg L (2002) On the correlation between heterozygosity and fitness in natural populations. Mol. Ecol., 11, 2467–2474.Google Scholar
  13. Hedrick PW (2000) Genetics of Populations, Jones and Bartlett Publishers, Boston, Maryland, USA.Google Scholar
  14. Hoelzel AR, Fleisher RC, Campagna C, Le Boef BJ, Alvord G (2002) Impact of a population bottleneck on symmetry and genetic diversity in the northern elephant seal. J. Evol. Biol., 15, 567–575.Google Scholar
  15. Huang HB, Song YO, Hsei M, Zahorchak R, Chiu J, Teuscher C, Smith EJ (1999) Development and characterization of genetic mapping resources for the turkey (Meleagris gallop-avo). J. Hered., 90, 240–242.Google Scholar
  16. Hurlbert SH (1971) The nonconcept of species diversity: a cri-tique and alternative parameters. Ecology, 52, 577–586.Google Scholar
  17. Jime ´nez JA, Hughes KA, Alaks G, Graham L, Lacy RC (1994) An experimental study of inbreeding depression in a natural habitat. Science, 266, 271–273.Google Scholar
  18. Keller L, Arcese P, Smith JNM, Hochachka WM, Stearns SC (1994) Selection against inbred song sparrows during a natural population bottleneck. Nature, 372, 356–357.Google Scholar
  19. Kennamer JE, Kennamer M, Brenneman R (1992) History. In: The Wild Turkey: Biology and Management (ed. Dickson JG), pp. 6–17. Stackpole Books, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  20. Krebs CJ (1989) Ecological Methodology. Harper and Row, New York.Google Scholar
  21. Lacy RC (1987) Loss of genetic diversity from managed populations: interacting effects of drift, mutation, immigration, selection, and population subdivision. Conserv. Biol., 1, 143–158.Google Scholar
  22. Lande R (1988) Genetics and demography in biological conservation. Science, 241, 1455–1460.Google Scholar
  23. Latch EK, Smith EJ, Rhodes OE, Jr. (2002) Isolation and characterization of microsatellite loci in wild and domestic turkeys (Melegris gallopavo). Mol. Ecol. Notes, 2, 176–178.Google Scholar
  24. Leberg PL (1990) Genetic considerations in the design of introduction programs. Trans. 55th North Am. Wildl. Nat. Res. Conf., 55, 609–619.Google Scholar
  25. Leberg PL (1991) Influence of fragmentation and bottlenecks on genetic divergence of wild turkey populations. Conserv. Biol., 5, 522–530.Google Scholar
  26. Leberg PL (1992) Effects of population bottlenecks on genetic diversity as measured by allozyme electrophoresis. Evolution, 46, 477–494.Google Scholar
  27. Leberg PL, Stangel PW, Hillstad HO, Marchinton RL, Smith MH(1994) Genetic structure of reintroduced wild turkey and white-tailed deer populations. J. Wildl. Manag., 58, 698–711.Google Scholar
  28. Leberg PL, Ellsworth DL (1999) Further evaluation of the genetic consequences of translocations on southeastern white-tailed deer populations. J. Wildl. Manag., 58, 698–711.Google Scholar
  29. LePage SL, Livermore RA, Cooper DW, Taylor AC (2000) Genetic analysis of a documented population bottleneck: introduced Bennett 's wallabies (Macropus rufogriseus rufo-griseus) in New Zealand. Mol. Ecol., 9, 753–763.Google Scholar
  30. Longmire JL, Lewis AK, Brown NC, et al. (1988) Isolation and molecular characterization of a highly centromeric tandem repeat in the family Falconidae. Genomics, 2, 14–24.Google Scholar
  31. Luikart G, Cornuet JM (1998) Empirical evaluation of a test for identifying recently bottlenecked populations from allele frequency data. Conserv. Biol., 12, 228–237.Google Scholar
  32. Luikart G, Allendorf FW, Corunet JM, Sherwin WB (1998) Distortion of allele frequency distributions provides a test for recent population bottlenecks. J. Hered., 89, 238–247.Google Scholar
  33. Maruyama T, Fuerst PA (1985) Population bottlenecks and non equilibrium models in population genetics. II. Number of alleles in a small population that was formed by a recent bottleneck. Genetics, 111, 675–689.Google Scholar
  34. Miller MP (1997) Tools for population genetic analysis (TFPGA) 1. 3: a Windows program for the analysis of allo-zyme and molecular population genetic data. computer software distributed by the author (http: //bioweb. usu. edu/ mpmbio).Google Scholar
  35. Mock KE, Theimer TC, Wakeling BF, Rhodes OE, Jr., Greenberg DL, Keim P. (2001) Verifying the origins of a reintroduced population of Gould 's wild turkey. J. Wildl. Manag., 65, 871–879.Google Scholar
  36. Mock KE, Theimer TC, Rhodes OE, Jr., Greenberg DL, Keim P (2002) Genetic variation across the historical range of the wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo). Mol. Ecol., 11, 643–657.Google Scholar
  37. Mosby HS, Handley CO (1943) The wild turkey in Virginia: its ' status, life history and management. Virginia Division of Game; Commission of Game and Inland Fisheries. P-R Projects.Google Scholar
  38. Mosby HS (1949) The status of the wild turkey in 1974. Proceedings of the Nat. Wild Turkey Symp., 3, 22–26.Google Scholar
  39. Mosby HS (1959) General status of the wild turkey and its management in the United States, 1958. Proc. Nat. Wild Turkey Symp., 1, 1–11.Google Scholar
  40. Mullenbach RP, Lagoda L, Welter C (1989) An efficient salt-chloroform extraction of DNA from blood and tissues. Trends Genet., 5, 391.Google Scholar
  41. Nei M (1972) Genetic distance between populations. Am. Nat., 106, 283–292.Google Scholar
  42. Nei M (1978) Estimation of average heterozygosity and genetic distance from small numbers of individuals. Genetics, 89, 583–590.Google Scholar
  43. Nei M, Li W-H (1976) The transient distribution of allele fre-quencies under mutation pressure. Genet. Res., 28, 205–214.Google Scholar
  44. Nei M, Maruyama T, Chakraborty R(1975) The bottleneck effect and genetic variability in populations. Evolution, 29, 1–10.Google Scholar
  45. Newman D, Pilson D (1997) Increased probability of extinction due to decreased genetic effective population size: experimental populations of Clarkia pulchella. Evolution, 51, 354–362.Google Scholar
  46. Petit RJ, El Mousadik A, Pons O (1998) Identifying populations for conservation on the basis of genetic markers. Conserv. Biol., 4, 844–855.Google Scholar
  47. Raymond M, Rousset F (1995) GENEPOP version 1. 2. A population genetics software for exact tests and ecumenicism. J. Hered., 86, 248–249.Google Scholar
  48. Rhodes OE, Jr., Reat EP, Heffelfinger JR, deVos JC, Jr. (2001) Analysis of reintroduced pronghorn populations in Arizona using mitochondrial DNA markers. In: Proceedings of the 19th Biennial Pronghorn Antelope Workshop, 19, 45–54.Google Scholar
  49. Rowe G, Beebee TJC, Burke T (1998) Phylogeography of the natterjack toad Bufo calamita in Britain: genetic differffentiation of native and translocated populations. Molecular Ecology 7, 751–760.Google Scholar
  50. Saccheri I, Kuussaari M, Kankare M, Vikman P, Fortelius W, Hanski I (1998) Inbreeding and extinction in a butterfly metapopulation. Nature, 392, 491–494.Google Scholar
  51. Schorger AW (1966) The Wild Turkey: Its History and Domestication. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, USA.Google Scholar
  52. Singer FJ, Papouchis CM, Symonds KK (2000) Translocations as a tool for restoring populations of bighorn sheep. Restoration Ecol., 8 (Suppl), 6–13.Google Scholar
  53. Sokal R, Rohlf FJ (1995) Biometry. 3rd edition. W. H. Freeman and Co., New York.Google Scholar
  54. Spencer CC, Neigel JE, Leberg PL (2000) Experimental evaluation of the usefulness of microsatellite DNA for detecting demographic bottlenecks. Mol. Ecol., 9, 1517–1528.Google Scholar
  55. Tapley JL, Abernethy RK, Kennamer JE (2001) Status and Distribution of the Wild Turkey in 1999. Proc. Nat. Wild Turkey Symp., 8, 15–22.Google Scholar
  56. Walker EA (1949) The status of the wild turkey west of he Mississippi River. Trans. North Am. Wildl. Conf., 14, 336–345.Google Scholar
  57. Westemeier RL, Brawn JD, Simkpson SA, Esker TL, Jansen RW, Walk JW, Kershner EL, Bouzat JL, Paige KN (1998) Tracking the long-term decline and recovery of an isolated population. Science, 282, 1695–1698.Google Scholar
  58. Williams CL, Serfass TL, Cogan R, Rhodes OE, Jr. (2002) Microsatellite variation in the reintroduced Pennsylvania elk herd. Mol. Ecol., 11, 1299–1310.Google Scholar
  59. Williams LE, Jr. (1981) The Book of the Wild Turkey. Winchester Press, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA.Google Scholar
  60. Williams RN, Rhodes OE, Jr., Serfass TL (2000) Assessment of genetic variance among source and reintroduced sher populations. J. Mammal., 8, 895–907.Google Scholar
  61. Zar JH (1984) Biostatistical Analysis, 2nd edition. Prentice Hall, New Jersey, USA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Karen E. Mock
    • 1
  • E.K. Latch
    • 1
  • O.E. Rhodes
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Forest, Range, and Wildlife SciencesUtah State UniversityLoganUSA

Personalised recommendations