Conservation Genetics

, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 845–857 | Cite as

Comparative analysis of riverscape genetic structure in rare, threatened and common freshwater mussels

  • Heather S. Galbraith
  • David T. Zanatta
  • Chris C. Wilson
Research Article

Abstract

Freshwater mussels (Bivalvia: Unionoida) are highly imperiled with many species on the verge of local extirpation or global extinction. This study investigates patterns of genetic structure and diversity in six species of freshwater mussels in the central Great Lakes region of Ontario, Canada. These species vary in their conservation status (endangered to not considered at risk), life history strategy, and dispersal capabilities. Evidence of historical genetic connectivity within rivers was ubiquitous across species and may reflect dispersal abilities of host fish. There was little to no signature of recent disturbance events or bottlenecks, even in endangered species, likely as a function of mussel longevity and historical population sizes (i.e., insufficient time for genetic drift to be detectable). Genetic structure was largely at the watershed scale suggesting that population augmentation via translocation within rivers may be a useful conservation tool if needed, while minimizing genetic risks to recipient sites. Recent interest in population augmentation via translocation and propagation may rely on these results to inform management of unionids in the Great Lakes region.

Keywords

Unionid mussels Scale Multi-species comparison Conservation genetics 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was made possible through funding from the Endangered Species Recovery Fund of World Wildlife Fund Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, and Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Friedrich Fischer, Ryan and Kirsty Hill, Anne Kidd, Phillip Mathias, Caleigh Smith, Daniel Spooner, and Kristyne Wozney provided valuable assistance with both field and laboratory work. This article is contribution #43 of the Central Michigan University Institute for Great Lakes Research. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Supplementary material

10592_2015_705_MOESM1_ESM.docx (88 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 88 kb)

References

  1. Barnhart MC, Haag WR, Roston WN (2008) Adaptations to host infection and larval parasitism in Unionoida. J N Am Benthol Soc 27:370–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berg DJ, Haag WR, Guttman SI, Sickel JB (1995) Mantle biopsy: a technique for nondestructive tissue-sampling of freshwater mussels. J N Am Benthol Soc 14:577–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berg DJ, Contonwine EG, Hoeh WR, Guttman SI (1998) Genetic structure of Quadrula quadrula (Bivalvia: Unionidae): little variation across large distances. J Shellfish Res 17:1365–1373Google Scholar
  4. Berg DJ, Christian AD, Guttman SI (2007) Population genetic structure of three freshwater mussel (Unionidae) species within a small stream system: significant variation at local spatial scales. Freshw Biol 52:1427–1439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berg DJ, Levine TD, Stoeckel JA (2008) A conceptual model linking demography and population genetics of freshwater mussels. J N Am Benthol Soc 27:395–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brookfield JFY (1996) A simple new method for estimating null allele frequency from heterozygote deficiency. Mol Ecol 5:453–455PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cornuet JM, Luikart G (1996) Description and power analysis of two tests for detecting recent population bottlenecks from allele frequency data. Genetics 144:2001–2014PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. COSEWIC (2003) COSEWIC assessment and status report on the kidneyshell Ptychobranchus fasciolaris in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, Ottawa, p 32Google Scholar
  9. COSEWIC (2006) COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Mapleleaf Mussel Quadrula quadrula (Saskatchewan-Nelson population and Great Lakes-Western St. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, OttawaGoogle Scholar
  10. COSEWIC (2010) COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Wavy-rayed Lampmussel Lampsilis fasciola in Canada. Committee on the Status of Ednagered Wildlife in Canada, Ottawa, p 60Google Scholar
  11. COSEWIC (2012) COSEWIC Candidate Wildlife Species. Committee on the Status of Ednagered Wildlife in Canada, OttawaGoogle Scholar
  12. Crawford NG (2010) SMOGD: software for the measurement of genetic diversity. Mol Ecol Resour 10:556–557PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cummings KW, Watters GT (2010) Mussel/host database. Molluscs Division of the Museum of Biological Diversity at the Ohio State University, ColumbusGoogle Scholar
  14. DeHaan PW, Libants SV, Elliott RF, Scribner KT (2006) Genetic population structure of remnant Lake Sturgeon populations in the upper Great Lakes Basin. T Am Fish Soc 135:1478–1492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Di Rienzo A, Peterson A, Garza J, Valdes A, Slatkin M, Freimer N (1994) Mutational processes of simple-sequence repeat loci in human populations. PNAS 91:3166–3170PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Díaz-Ferguson E, Williams A, Moyer G (2011) Isolation and characterization of microsatellite loci in the federally endangered fat threeridge mussel (Amblema neislerii). Conserv Genet Resour 3:757–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dudgeon D, Arthington AH, Gessner MO, Kawabata ZI, Knowler DJ, Lévêque C, Naiman RJ, Prieur-Richard AH, Soto D, Stiassny MLJ, Sullivan CA (2006) Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges. Biol Rev 81:163–182PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eackles MS, King TL (2002) Isolation and characterization of microsatellite loci in Lampsilis abrupta (Bivalvia: Unionidae) and cross-species amplification within the genus. Mol Ecol Notes 2:559–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Earl D, vonHoldt B (2012) STRUCTURE HARVESTER: a website and program for visualizing STRUCTURE output and implementing the Evanno method. Conserv Genet Resour 4:359–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Edwards AL, Wyatt R (1994) Population genetics of the rare Asclepias texana and its widespread sister species A. perennis. Syst Bot 19:291–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Elderkin C, Christian A, Vaughn C, Metcalfe-Smith J, Berg D (2007) Population genetics of the freshwater mussel, Amblema plicata (Say 1817) (Bivalvia: Unionidae): evidence of high dispersal and post-glacial colonization. Conserv Genet 8:355–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Elderkin CL, Christian AD, Metcalfe-Smith JL, Berg DJ (2008) Population genetics and phylogeography of freshwater mussels in North America, Elliptio dilatata and Actinonaias ligamentina (Bivalvia: Unionidae). Mol Ecol 17:2149–2163PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Evanno G, Regnaut S, Goudet J (2005) Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software structure: a simulation study. Mol Ecol 14:2611–2620PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Falush D, Stephens M, Pritchard JK (2003) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data: linked loci and correlated allele frequencies. Genetics 164:1567–1587PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Ferguson CD, Blum MJ, Raymer ML, Eackles MS, Krane DE (2013) Population structure, multiple paternity, and long-distance transport of spermatozoa in the freshwater mussel Lampsilis cardium (Bivalvia:Unionidae). Freshw Sci 32:267–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Galbraith HS (2009) Reproduction in a changing environment: mussels, impoundments, and conservation. Doctorate of Philosophy Thesis, Department of Zoology, University of Oklahoma, NormanGoogle Scholar
  27. Galbraith HS, Smith CM, Wozney KM, Zanatta DT, Wilson CC (2011a) Development and characterization of nine microsatellite loci for the endangered Kidneyshell, Ptychobranchus fasciolaris, and cross-amplification in closely-related lampsilines (Bivalvia: Unionoida). Conserv Genet Resour 3:533–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Galbraith HS, Wozney KM, Smith CM, Zanatta DT, Wilson C (2011b) Isolation and characterization of microsatellite loci in the freshwater mussel Lasmigona costata (Bivalvia: Unionoida). Conserv Genet Resour 3:9–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Goudet J (1995) A computer program to calculate F-statistics. J Hered 86:485–486Google Scholar
  30. Hemmingsen AH, Roe KJ, Serb JM (2009) Isolation and characterization of nine microsatellite markers for the endangered winged-mapleleaf mussel, Quadrula fragosa (Bivalvia, Unionidae). Mol Ecol Resour 9:1460–1466PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Henley WF, Grobler PJ, Neves RJ (2006) Non-invasive method to obtain DNA from freshwater mussels (Bivalvia: Unionidae). J Shellfish Res 25:975–977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hoftyzer E, Ackerman JD, Morris TJ, Mackie GL (2008) Genetic and environmental implications of reintroducing laboratory-raised unionid mussels to the wild. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 65:1217–1229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jakobsson M, Rosenberg NA (2007) CLUMPP: a cluster matching and permutation program for dealing with label switching and multimodality in analysis of population structure. Bioinformatics 23:1801–1806PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jones JW, Hallerman EM, Neves RJ (2006) Genetic management guidelines for captive propagation of freshwater mussels (Unionoidea). J Shellfish Res 25:527–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Jost L (2008) G ST and its relatives do not measure differentiation. Mol Ecol 17:4015–4026PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kelly MW, Rhymer JM (2005) Population genetic structure of a rare unionid (Lampsilis cariosa) in a recently glaciated landscape. Conserv Genet 6:789–802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Keyghobadi N (2007) The genetic implications of habitat fragmentation for animals. Can J Zool 85:1049–1064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kurth J, Loftin C, Zydlewski J, Rhymer J (2007) PIT tags increase effectiveness of freshwater mussel recaptures. J N Am Benthol Soc 26:253–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lande R (1988) Genetics and demography in biological conservation. Science 241:1455–1460PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lydeard C, Cowie RH, Ponder WF, Bogan AE, Bouchet P, Clark SA, Cummings KW, Frest TJ, Gargominy O, Herbert DG, Hershler R, Perez KE, Roth B, Seddon M, Strong EE, Thompson FG (2004) The global decline of nonmarine mollusks. Bioscience 54:321–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Maki M, Horie S, Yokoyama J (2002) Comparison of genetic diversity between narrowly endemic shrub Menziesia goyozanensis and its widespread congener M. pentandra (Ericaceae). Conserv Genet 3:421–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mandrak NE, Crossman EJ (1992) A checklist of Ontario freshwater fishes: Annotated with distribution maps. Royal Ontario Museum, TorontoGoogle Scholar
  43. Master LL, Stein BA, Kutner LS, Hammerson GA (2000) Vanishing assets: conservation status of U.S. species. In: Stein BA, Kutner LS, Adams JS (eds) Precious heritage: the status of biodiversity in the United States. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 93–118Google Scholar
  44. McMahon RF, Bogan AE (2001) Mollusca: Bivalvia. In: Thorp JH, Covich AP (eds) Ecology and classification of North American freshwater invertebrates. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 331–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. McNichols KA (2007) Implementing recovery strategies for mussel species at risk in Ontario. Master’s Thesis. University of Guelph, Guelph, OntarioGoogle Scholar
  46. Meffe GK (1986) Conservation genetics and the management of endangered fishes. Fisheries 11:14–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Metcalfe-Smith JL, Staton SK, Mackie GL, Lane NM (1998) Changes in the biodiversity of freshwater mussels in the Canadian waters of the lower Great Lakes drainage basin over the past 140 years. J Great Lakes Res 24:845–858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Morris TJ, Burridge M (2006) Recovery strategy for Northern Riffleshell, Snuffbox, Round Pigtoe. Mudpuppy Mussel and Rayed Bean in Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Ottawa, p 76 Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy SeriesGoogle Scholar
  49. NatureServe (2011) NatureServe explorer: an online encyclopedia of life. Kendall/Hunt Publishing, DubuqueGoogle Scholar
  50. Newton TJ, Woolnough DA, Strayer DL (2008) Using landscape ecology to understand and manage freshwater mussel populations. J N Am Benthol Soc 27:424–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Parmalee PW, Bogan AE (1998) The freshwater mussels of Tennessee. The University of Tennessee Press, KnoxvilleGoogle Scholar
  52. Peacock E, Haag WR, Warren MLJ (2005) Prehistoric decline in freshwater mussels coincident with the advent of maize agriculture. Conserv Biol 19:547–551CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Peakall R, Smouse PE (2006) GENALEX 6: genetic analysis in excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research. Mol Ecol Notes 6:288–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pemberton JM, Slate J, Bancroft DR, Barrett JA (1995) Nonamplifying alleles at microsatellite loci: a caution for parentage and population studies. Mol Ecol 4:249–252PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Petit RJ, El Mousadik A, Pons O (1998) Identifying populations for conservation on the basis of genetic markers. Conserv Biol 12:844–855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P (2000) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155:945–949PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Rasic G, Keyghobadi N (2012) From broadscale patterns to fine-scale processes: habitat structure influences genetic differentiation in the pitcher plant midge across multiple spatial scales. Mol Ecol 21:223–236PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Raymond M, Rousset F (1995) GENEPOP (Version 1.2): population genetics software for exact tests and ecumenicism. J Hered 86:248–249Google Scholar
  59. Reagan K (2008) Relatedness of Amblema plicata within and between rivers. Master’s thesis. University of Oklahoma, NormanGoogle Scholar
  60. Rosenberg NA (2004) distruct: a program for the graphical display of population structure. Mol Ecol Notes 4:137–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rousset F (2008) GENEPOP’007: a complete re-implementation of the GENEPOP software for Windowns and Linux. Mol Ecol Resour 8:103–106PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sambrook J, Fritsch EF, Maniatis T (1989) Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual, 2nd edn. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, PlainviewGoogle Scholar
  63. Schloesser DW, Metcalfe-Smith JL, Kovalak WP, Longton GD, Smithee RD (2006) Extirpation of freshwater mussels (Bivalvia: Unionidae) following the invasion of dreissenid mussels in an interconnecting river of the Laurentian Great Lakes. Am Mid Nat 155:307–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Schuelke M (2000) An economic method for the fluorescent labeling of PCR fragments: a poor man’s approach to genotyping for research and high-throughput diagnostics. Nat Biotechnol 18:233–234PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Schwalb A, Poos M, Ackerman J (2011a) Movement of logperch—the obligate host fish for endangered snuffbox mussels: implications for mussel dispersal. Aquat Sci 73:223–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Schwalb AN, Cottenie K, Poos MS, Ackerman JD (2011b) Dispersal limitation of unionid mussels and implications for their conservation. Freshw Biol 56:1509–1518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Scott WB, Crossman EJ (1978) Freshwater fishes of Canada. Fisheries Research Board of Canada Bulletin No. 184, OttawaGoogle Scholar
  68. Sexton JP, McIntyre PJ, Angert AL, Rice KJ (2009) Evolution and ecology of species range limits. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 40:415–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Spooner DE, Vaughn CC (2006) Context-dependent effects of freshwater mussels on stream benthic communities. Freshw Biol 51:1016–1024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Spooner DE, Xenopoulos MA, Schneider C, Woolnough DA (2011) Coextirpation of host-affiliate relationships in rivers: the role of climate change, water withdrawal, and host-specificity. Glob Change Biol 17:1720–1732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Staton SK, Dextrase A, Metcalfe-Smith JL, Di Maio J, Nelson M, Parish J, Kilgour B, Holm E (2003) Status and trends of Ontario’s Sydenham River ecosystem in relation to aquatic species at risk. Environ Monit Assess 88:283–310PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Strayer DL, Downing JA, Haag WR, King TL, Layzer JB, Newton TJ, Nichols SJ (2004) Changing perspectives on pearly mussels, North America’s most imperiled animals. Bioscience 54:429–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Szumowski SC, Boyer SL, Hornbach DJ, Hove MC (2012) Genetic diversity of two common freshwater mussels, Lampsilis cardium and Quadrula pustulosa (Bivalvia, Unionidae), in a large federally protected waterway (St. Croix River, Minnesota/Wisconsin, USA). Am Malacol Bull 30:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. The National Native Mussel Conservation Committee (1998) National strategy for the conservation of native freshwater mussels. J Shellfish Res 17:1419–1428Google Scholar
  75. van Oosterhout C, Hutchinson WF, Wills DPM, Shipley P (2004) MICRO-CHECKER: software for identifying and correcting genotyping errors in microsatellite data. Mol Ecol Notes 4:535–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Vaughn CC (2010) Biodiversity losses and ecosystem function in freshwaters: emerging conclusions and research directions. Bioscience 60:25–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Whitely AR, Spruell P, Allendorf FW (2006) Can common species provide valuable information for conservation? Mol Ecol 15:2767–2786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Williams JD, Warren MLJ, Cummings KW, Harris JL, Neves RJ (1993) Conservation status of freshwater mussels of the United States and Canada. Fisheries 18:6–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Wilson CC, Lavender M, Black J (2007) Genetic assessment of walleye (Sander vitreus) restoration efforts and options in Nipigon Bay and Black Bay, Lake Superior. J Great Lakes Res 33:133–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Zanatta DT, Murphy RW (2006) Development and characterization of microsatellite markers for the endangered riffleshell mussel Epioblasma torulosa rangiana (Bivalvia: Unionidae). Mol Ecol Notes 6:850–852CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Zanatta DT, Murphy RW (2007) Range-wide population genetic analysis of the endangered northern riffleshell mussel, Epioblasma torulosa rangiana (Bivalvia: Unionoida). Conserv Genet 8:1393–1404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Zanatta DT, Murphy RW (2008) The phylogeographical and management implications of genetic population structure in the imperiled snuffbox mussel, Epioblasma triquetra (Bivalvia: Unionidae). Biol J Linn Soc 93:371–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Zanatta DT, Wilson CC (2011) Testing congruency of geographic and genetic population structure for a freshwater mussel (Bivalvia: Unionoida) and its host fish. Biol J Linn Soc 102:669–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Zanatta DT, Fraley SJ, Murphy RW (2007) Population structure and mantle display polymorphisms in the wavy-rayed lampmussel, Lampsilis fasciola (Bivalvia: Unionidae). Can J Zool 85:1169–1181CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht (outside the USA) 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Heather S. Galbraith
    • 1
    • 4
  • David T. Zanatta
    • 2
  • Chris C. Wilson
    • 3
  1. 1.Biology DepartmentTrent UniversityPeterboroughCanada
  2. 2.Biology Department, Institute for Great Lakes ResearchCentral Michigan UniversityMount PleasantUSA
  3. 3.Aquatic Research Section, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and ForestryTrent UniversityPeterboroughCanada
  4. 4.Northern Appalachian Research LaboratoryUSGS Leetown Science CenterWellsboroUSA

Personalised recommendations