Biodiversity and Conservation

, Volume 18, Issue 9, pp 2351–2360 | Cite as

Preserving genetic integrity in a hybridising world: are European Wildcats (Felis silvestris silvestris) in eastern France distinct from sympatric feral domestic cats?

  • John O’Brien
  • Sébastien Devillard
  • Ludovic Say
  • Hadrien Vanthomme
  • Francois Léger
  • Sandrine Ruette
  • Dominique PontierEmail author
Original Paper


We investigate the genetic profile of putative European Wildcats in north-eastern France, possessing the wildcat phenotype, but sampled in an area where they are sympatric with free-roaming domestic cats and, thus, are exposed to potential hybridisation. From a sample of 209 cats, the programme STRUCTURE clearly identified two distinct genetic clusters that corresponded to European Wildcats and domestic cats. The cats from these two clusters were clearly differentiated from each other (F ST  = 0.16). However, the genotypes of some individual cats were split between the two clusters, indicative of genetic admixture. Our analysis demonstrates that a genetically distinct population of cats that possess the European Wildcat phenotype persists in north-eastern France, but that there is a low, yet real, risk of hybridisation with sympatric domestic cats. These European Wildcats warrant conservation efforts to protect their genetic integrity.


Bayesian admixture analysis Conservation genetics European Wildcats Felis silvestris Hybridization Domestic cats 



We thank Estelle Germain (CERFE), Luc Baudot, Olivier Hubert, Emmanuel Lienard and all the technicians for their help in the collection of cats and in the laboratory work. This study was supported by the Office National de la Chasse et de la Faune Sauvage and the CNRS.


  1. Barilani M, Sfougaris A, Giannakopoulos A, Mucci N, Tabarroni C, Randi E (2007) Detecting introgressive hybridisation in rock partridge populations (Alectoris graeca) in Greece through Bayesian admixture analyses of multilocus genotypes. Conserv Genet 8:343–354. doi: 10.1007/s10592-006-9174-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beaumont M, Barratt EM, Gottelli D, Kitchener AC, Daniels MJ, Pritchard JK, Bruford MW (2001) Genetic diversity and introgression in the Scottish wildcat. Mol Ecol 10:319–336. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-294x.2001.01196.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Belkhir K, Borsa P, Goudet J, Chikhi L, Bonhomme F (1996–2000) Genetix, logiciel sous WindowsTM pour la génétique des populations. Université de Montpellier II, Montpellier, France.
  4. Biró Z, Szemethy L, Heltai M (2004) Home range sizes of wildcats (Felis silvestris) and feral domestic cats (Felis silvestris catus) in a hilly region of Hungary. Mamm Biol 69:302–310. doi: 10.1078/1616-5047-00149 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Briscoe D, Stephens J, O’Brien S (1994) Linkage disequilibrium in admixed populations: applications in gene mapping. J Hered 85:59–63PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Chakraborty R, Weiss K (1988) Admixture as a tool for finding linked genes and detecting that difference from allelic association between loci. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 85:9119–9123. doi: 10.1073/pnas.85.23.9119 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Daniels MJ, Balharry D, Hirst D, Kitchener AC, Aspinall RJ (1998) Morphological and pelage characteristics of wild living cats in Scotland: implications for defining the ‘wildcat’. J Zool (Lond) 244:231–247Google Scholar
  8. Driscoll CA, Menotti-Raymond M, Roca AL, Hupe K, Johnson WE, Geffen E, Harley EH, Delibes M, Pontier D, Kitchener AC, Yamaguchi N, O’Brien SJ, Macdonald DW (2007) The near eastern origin of cat domestication. Science 317:519–523. doi: 10.1126/science.1139518 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Eckert I (2003) DNA-Analysen zum genetischen Status der wildkatze (Felis silvestris) in Deutschland. PhD Thesis, Christian-Albrechts Universtät, Kiel, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  10. EUROP (1992) Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21st May 1992 on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora. Appendix IV. Office for Official Publications of the European Union. Accessed 20 March 2006
  11. Evanno G, Regnaut S, Goudet J (2005) Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software structure: a simulation study. Mol Ecol 14:2611–2620. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2005.02553.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. French DD, Corbett LK, Easterbee N (1988) Morphological discriminants of Scottish wildcats (Felis silvestris), domestic cats (Felis catus) and their hybrids. J Zool (Lond) 214:235–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Garnier S, Alibert P, Audiot P, Prieur B, Rasplus J-Y (2004) Isolation by distance and sharp discontinuities in gene frequencies: implications for the phylogeography of an alpine insect species Carabus solieri. Mol Ecol 13:1883–1897. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2004.02212.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goudet J, Raymond M, Demeeus T, Rousset F (1996) Testing differentiation in diploid populations. Genetics 144:1933–1940PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Hubbard AL, McOrist S, Jones TW, Boids R, Scott R, Easterbee N (1992) Is the survival of European wildcats Felis silvestris in Britain threatened by interbreeding with domestic cats? Biol Conserv 61:203–208. doi: 10.1016/0006-3207(92)91117-B CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. IUCN (2008) 2008 IUCN red list of threatened species. Downloaded on 20 Jan 2009
  17. Jombart T (2008) Adegenet: a R package for the multivariate analysis of genetic markers. Bioinformatics 24:1403–1405. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btn129 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kitchener AC, Yamaguchi N, Ward JM, Macdonald DW (2005) A diagnosis for the Scottish wildcat (Felis silvestris): a tool for conservation action for a critically-endangered felid. Anim Conserv 8:223–237. doi: 10.1017/S1367943005002301 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Klar N, Fernández N, Kramer-Schadt S, Herrmann M, Trinzen M, Büttner I, Niemitz C (2008) Habitat selection models for European wildcat conservation. Biol Conserv 141:308–319. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2007.10.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lecis R, Pierpaoli M, Birò ZS, Szemethy L, Ragni B, Vercillo F, Randi E (2006) Bayesian analyses of admixture in wild and domestic cats (Felis silvestris) using linked microsatellite loci. Mol Ecol 15:119–131. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2005.02812.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Léger F, Stahl P, Ruette S, Wilhem JL (2008) La répartition du chat forestier en France: évolutions récentes. Faune Sauvage 280:24–39Google Scholar
  22. McOrist S, Kitchener AC (1994) Current threats to the European Wildcat, Felis silvestris, in Scotland. Ambio 23:243–245Google Scholar
  23. Menotti-Raymond M, David VA, Lyons LA, Schäffer AA, Tomlin JF, Hutton MK, O’Brien SJ (1999) A genetic linkage map of microsatellites in the domestic cat (Felis catus). Genomics 57:9–23. doi: 10.1006/geno.1999.5743 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nowell K (2008) Felis silvestris. In: IUCN 2008. 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Downloaded on 20 Jan 2009
  25. Oliveira R, Godhino R, Pierpaoli M, Randi E, Ferrand N, Alves PC (2008) Molecular analysis of hybridisation between wild and domestic cat (Felis silvestris) in Portugal: implication for conservation. Conserv Genet 9:1–11. doi: 10.1007/s10592-007-9297-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pierpaoli M, Birò ZS, Hermann M, Hupe K, Fernandes M, Ragni B, Szemethy L, Randi E (2003) Genetic distinction of wildcat (Felis silvestris) populations in Europe and hybridization with domestic cats in Hungary. Mol Ecol 12:2585–2598. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-294X.2003.01939.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P (2000) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155:945–959PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Randi E (2008) Detecting hybridization between wild species and their domesticated relatives. Mol Ecol 17:285–293. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2007.03417.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Randi E, Pierpaoli M, Beaumont M, Ragni B, Sforzi A (2001) Genetic identification of wild and domestic cat populations (Felis silvestris) and their hybrids using Bayesian clustering methods. Mol Biol Evol 18:1679–1693PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Rosenberg NA (2004) DISTRUCT: a program for the graphical display of population structure. Mol Ecol Notes 4:137–138. doi: 10.1046/j.1471-8286.2003.00566.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ryder OA (1986) Species conservation and systematic: the dilemma of subspecies. Trends Ecol Evol 1:9–10. doi: 10.1016/0169-5347(86)90059-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Suminski P (1962) Les caractères de la forme pure du chat sauvage Felis silvestris Schreber. Archeol Sci 15:277–296Google Scholar
  33. R Development Core Team (2008) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL
  34. UNEP-WCMC (2006) Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. Appendix II. Accessed 21 March 2006
  35. Vähä J-C, Primmer CR (2006) Efficiency of model-based Bayesian methods for detecting hybrid individuals under different hybridization scenarios and with different numbers of loci. Mol Ecol 15:63–72. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2005.02773.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Vigne JD, Guilaine J, Debue K, Haye L, Gérard P (2004) Early taming of the cat in cyprus. Science 304:259. doi: 10.1126/science.1095335 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wahlund S (1928) The combination of populations and the appearance of correlation examined from the standpoint of the study of heredity. Hereditas 11:65–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yamaguchi N, Driscoll CA, Kitchener AC, Ward JM, Macdonald DW (2004) Craniological differentiation between European wildcats (Felis silvestris silvestris), African wildcats (F. s. lybica) and Asian wildcats (F. s. ornata): implications for their evolution and conservation. Biol J Linn Soc Lond 83:47–63. doi: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.2004.00372.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • John O’Brien
    • 1
  • Sébastien Devillard
    • 1
  • Ludovic Say
    • 1
  • Hadrien Vanthomme
    • 1
  • Francois Léger
    • 2
  • Sandrine Ruette
    • 2
  • Dominique Pontier
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Université de LyonUniversité Lyon 1, CNRS, UMR 5558, Laboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie EvolutiveVilleurbanneFrance
  2. 2.Office National de la Chasse et de la Faune Sauvage, MontfortBirieuxFrance

Personalised recommendations