Conservation Genetics

, Volume 9, Issue 4, pp 933–938 | Cite as

Ancient DNA reveals genotypic relationships among Oregon populations of the sea otter (Enhydra lutris)

  • Kim Valentine
  • Deborah A. Duffield
  • Lorelei E. Patrick
  • David R. Hatch
  • Virginia L. Butler
  • Roberta L. Hall
  • Niles Lehman
Short Communication


The sea otter has experienced a dramatic population decline caused by intense human harvesting, followed by a century of recovery including relocation efforts to reestablish the species across its former range in the eastern Pacific. Although the otter was historically present along the coast in Oregon, there are currently no populations in this region and reintroduction efforts have failed. We examined the mtDNA genotypes of 16 pre-harvest otter samples from two Oregon locations in an attempt to determine the best genotypic match with extant populations. Our amplifications of a 222 base-pair portion of the control region from otters ranging in age from approximately 175–2000 years revealed four genotypes. The genotypic composition of pre-harvest otter populations appears to match best with those of contemporary populations from California and not from Alaska, where reintroduction stocks are typically derived.


Enhydra lutris Ancient DNA Mitochondrial DNA Sea otter Historical distribution 


  1. Avise JC, Arnold J, Ball RM, Bermingham E, Lamb T, Neigel J, Reeb C, Saunders N (1987) Intraspecific phylogeography: The mitochondrial DNA bridge between population genetics and systematics. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 18:489–522Google Scholar
  2. Bandelt H-J, Forster P, Röhl A (1999) Median-joining networks for inferring intraspecific phylogenies. Mol Biol Evol 16:37–48PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bodkin JL, Ballachey BE, Cronin MA, Scribner KT (1999) Population demographics and genetic diversity in remnant and translocated populations of sea otters. Conserv Biol 13:1378–1385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Butler VL, Bowers NJ (1998) Ancient DNA from salmon bone: a preliminary study. Anc Biomol 2:17–26Google Scholar
  5. Clark L (1991) Archaeology of seal rock (35Lnc14). In: Lyman RL (ed) The prehistory of the oregon coast: The effects of excavation strategies and assemblage size on archaeological inquiry. Academic Press, New York, pp 175–240Google Scholar
  6. Cronin MA, Bodkin J, Ballachey B, Estes J, Patton JC (1996) Mitochondrial-DNA variation among subspecies and populations of sea otters (Enhydra lutris). J Mammal 77:546–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Davis J, Lidicker WZ Jr. (1975) The taxonomic status of the southern sea otter. Proc Calif Acad Sci 40:429–437Google Scholar
  8. Gilbert MTP, Bandelt H-J, Hofreiter M, Barnes I (2005) Assessing ancient DNA studies. Trends Ecol Evol 20:541–544PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gorbics CS, Bodkin JL (2001) Stock structure of sea otters (Enhydra lytris kenyoni) in Alaska. Mar Mamm Sci 17:632–647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hall RL (1995) People of the Coquille Estuary. Words and Pictures Unlimited, Corvallis, ORGoogle Scholar
  11. Jameson RJ, Kenyon KW, Johnson AM, Wight HW (1982) History and status of translocated sea otter populations in North America. Wildl Soc Bull 10:100–107Google Scholar
  12. Kenyon KW (1969) The sea otter in the eastern Pacific Ocean. North Am Fauna 68:1–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Larson S, Jameson R, Bodkin J, Staedler M, Bentzen P (2002a) Microsatellite DNA and mitochondrial DNA variation in remnant and translocated sea otter (Enhydra lutris) populations. J Mammal 83:893–906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Larson S, Jameson R, Etnier M, Flemings M, Bentzen P (2002b) Loss of genetic diversity in sea otters (Enhydra lutris) associated with the fur trade of the 18th and 19th centuries. Mol Ecol 11:1899–1903PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lyman RL (1988) Zoogeography of Oregon coast marine mammals: the last 3,000 years. Mar Mamm Sci 4:247–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lyman RL (1996) Applied zooarchaeology: the relevance of faunal analysis to wildlife management. World Archaeol 28:110–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. O’Brien SJ, Mayr E (1991) Bureaucratic mischief: recognizing endangered species and subspecies. Science 251:1187–1188PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Riedman ML, Estes JA (1990) The sea otter (Enhydra lutris): behavior, ecology, and natural history. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Biology Report 90,126 ppGoogle Scholar
  19. Rotterman LM (1992) Patterns of genetic variability in sea otters after severe population subdivision and reduction. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 227 ppGoogle Scholar
  20. Rozas J, Rozas R (1999) DnaSP version 3: an integrated program for moleulcar population genetic and molecular evolution analysis. Bioinformatics 15:174–175PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Scribner KT, Bodkin J, Ballachey B, Fain SR, Cronin MA, Sanchez M (1997) Population genetic studies of the sea otter (Enhydra lutris): a review and interpretation of available data. Mol Gen Mar Mamm 3:197–208Google Scholar
  22. Tul’skaya OL, Derenko MV, Malyarchuk BA (1999) Low level of mitochondrial DNA variation in sea otter populations from Kamchatka and Komandor Islands. Russ J Genetics 35:17–21Google Scholar
  23. Weber DS, Stewart BS, Garza JC, Lehman N (2000) An empirical genetic assessment of the severity of the northern elephant seal population bottleneck. Curr Biol 10:1287–1290PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Weber DS, Stewart BS, Lehman N (2004) Genetic consequences of a severe population bottleneck in the Guadalupe fur seal (Arctocephalus townsendi). J Hered 95:144–153PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wilson DE, Bogan MA, Brownell RL Jr, Burdin AM, Maminov MK (1991) Geographic variation in the sea otters, Enhydra lutris. J Mammal 72:22–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Yang DY, Eng B, Waye JS, Dudar JC, Saunders SR (1998) Improved DNA extractions from ancient bones using silica-based spin columns. Am J Phys Anthropol 105:539–543PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Yu W, Rusterholtz KJ, Krummel AT, Lehman N (2006) Detection of high levels of recombination generated during PCR amplification of RNA templates. BioTechniques 40:499–507PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kim Valentine
    • 1
  • Deborah A. Duffield
    • 1
  • Lorelei E. Patrick
    • 1
  • David R. Hatch
    • 2
  • Virginia L. Butler
    • 3
  • Roberta L. Hall
    • 4
  • Niles Lehman
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of BiologyPortland State UniversityPortlandUSA
  2. 2.Elakha AlliancePortlandUSA
  3. 3.Department of AnthropologyPortland State UniversityPortlandUSA
  4. 4.Department of AnthropologyOregon State UniversityCorvallisUSA
  5. 5.Department of ChemistryPortland State UniversityPortlandUSA

Personalised recommendations