Conservation Genetics

, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp 547–554 | Cite as

Genetic isolation and evolutionary history of oases populations of the Baja California killifish, Fundulus lima

  • Giacomo Bernardi
  • Gorgonio Ruiz-Campos
  • Faustino Camarena-Rosales
Original Paper


The Baja California killifish, Fundulus lima, is found in six desert oases of the southern Baja California Peninsula, Mexico. The recent introduction of exotic fishes, particularly redbelly tilapia, have impacted the ecology of Fundulus lima such that it is now endangered. Plans of relocating F. lima to bodies of freshwater that are free of exotics have been proposed, however little is know about the genetic identity of the current populations. In this study, we examined the mitochondrial control region of F. lima samples from 4 oases, and in addition, compared these samples to their sister species, the California killifish F.␣parvipinnis. Using a combination of phylogenetic and coalescent approaches, we were able to determine that the two subspecies of the California killifish, F. p.␣brevis, and F. p. parvipinnis, and F. lima form an unresolved trichotomy that diverged between 200,000 years and 400,000 years ago. The one F. lima individual that we were able to collect in the southernmost oasis grouped with the southern subspecies of the California killifish, F. parvipinnis brevis. In contrast, we found that the 3 northern oases grouped together in a “Fundulus lima” clade. Each oasis is genetically distinct, yet there is no evidence of a␣marked genetic bottleneck in any populations (Haplotype diversity between 0.5 and 0.8). Future relocation plans will therefore need to be done cautiously to preserve the genetic identity of the original populations.


Fundulus lima Fundulus parvipinnis Baja California Desert fishes Control region 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



We would like to thank A. Antuna and Q.␣Talamantes for their help in the fish sampling, Vera Domingues and Drew Talley for discussion This research was supported by UC MEXUS.


  1. Avise JC (1994) Molecular markers, natural history and evolution. Chapman and Hall, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Avise JC (2000) Phylogeography: the history and formation of species. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MassGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernardi G (1997) Molecular phylogeny of the Fundulidae (Teleostei, Cyprinodontiformes) based on the cytochrome b gene. In: Kocher T, Stepien C (eds) Molecular Systematics of Fishes. Academic Press, pp 185–194Google Scholar
  4. Bernardi G, Powers DA (1995) Phylogenetic relationships among nine species from the genus Fundulus (Cyprinodontiformes, Fundulidae) inferred from sequences of the cytochrome b gene. Copeia 1995:469–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bernardi G, Talley D (2000) Molecular evidence for reduced dispersal in the coastal California killifish, Fundulus parvipinnis. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 255:187–199PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bernardi G, Findley L, Rocha-Olivares A (2003) Vicariance and dispersal across Baja California in disjunct marine fish populations. Evolution 57:1599–1609PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Camarena-Rosales F, De La Rosa-Vélez J, Ruiz-Campos G, Correa-Sandoval F (2001) Biometric and allozimic characterization of three coastal and inland killifish populations (Pisces:Fundulidae) from the peninsula of Baja California, México. Internat Rev Hydrobiol 86:229–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Domingues V, Bucciarelli G, Almada VC, Bernardi G (2005) Historical colonization and demography of the Mediterranean damselfish, Chromis chromis. Mol Ecol 14:4051–4063PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dumke RH (1976) Geographic variation in the California killifish, Fundulus parvipinnis Girard (Family Cyprinodontidae). M.Sc. Thesis. CSU FullertonGoogle Scholar
  10. Duvernell DD, Turner BJ (1998) Evolutionary genetics of Death Valley pupfish populations: mitochondrial DNA sequence variation and population structure. Molec Ecol 7:279–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Edwards SV, Beerli P (2000) Perspective: gene divergence, population divergence, and the variance in coalescence time in phylogeographic studies. Evolution 54:1839–1854PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fagan WF, Aumann C, Kennedy CM, Unmack PJ (2005) Rarity, fragmentation, and the scale of dependence of extinction risk in desert fishes. Ecology 86:34–41Google Scholar
  13. Farris JS (1968) The evolutionary relationships between the species of killifish genera Fundulus and Profundulus (Teleostei: Cyprinodontidae). Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MIGoogle Scholar
  14. Felsenstein J (1985) Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39:783–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kuhner MK, Yamato J, Felsenstein J (1998) Maximum likelihood estimation of population growth rates based on the coalescent. Genetics 149:429–434PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Lee WJ, Conroy J, Howell WH, Kocher TD (1995) Structure and evolution of teleost mitochondrial control regions. J Mol Evol 41:54–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Martin AP, Wilcox JL (2004) Evolutionary history of Ash Meadows pupfish (genus Cyprinodon) populations inferred using microsatellite markers. Conservation Genetics 5:769–782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. McCune AR, Lovejoy NR (1998) The relative rate of sympatric and allopatric speciation in fishes: tests using DNA sequence divergences between sister species and among clades. In: Howard DJ, Berlocher SH (eds) Endless forms: species and speciation. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Miller RR, Hubbs CL (1954) An erroneous record of the California killifish, Fundulus parvipinnis from Cabo San Lucas, Baja California. Copeia 1954:234–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Miller DJ, Lea RN (1972) Guide to coastal marine fishes of California. Fish Bulletin #157. Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  21. Moritz C (1994) Defining “Evolutionary Significant Units” for conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 9:373–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rozas J, Sánchez-DelBarrio JC, Messeguer X, Rozas R (2003) DnaSP, DNA polymorphism analyses by the coalescent and other methods. Bioinformatics 19:2496–2497PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ruiz-Campos G (2000) Threatened fishes of the world: Fundulus lima Vaillant, 1894 (Fundulidae). Environ Bio Fish 59:20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ruiz-Campos G, Castro-Aguirre JL, Contreras-Balderas S, Lozano-Vilano M, Gonzalez-Acosta AF, Sanchez-Gonzales S (2002) An annotated distributional checklist of the freshwater fish from Baja California Sur, Mexico. Rev Fish Biol Fisheries 12:143–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sambrook J, Fritsch EF, Maniatis T (1989) Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual, 2nd ed. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, NYGoogle Scholar
  26. Shimodaira H, Hasegawa M (1999) Multiple comparisons of log-likelihoods with applications to phylogenetic inference. Mol Biol Evol 16:1114–1116Google Scholar
  27. Swofford DL (2003) PAUP*. Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (*and Other Methods). Version 4.0b10. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  28. Wares JP, Cunningham CW (2001) Phylogeography and historical ecology of the north Atlantic intertidal. Evolution 55:2455–2469PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wiley EO (1986) A study of evolutionary relationships of Fundulus topminnows (Teleostei: Fundulidae). Am Zool 26:121–130Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Giacomo Bernardi
    • 1
  • Gorgonio Ruiz-Campos
    • 2
  • Faustino Camarena-Rosales
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Ecology and Evolutionary BiologyUniversity of CaliforniaSanta CruzUSA
  2. 2.Facultad de CienciasUniversidad Autónoma de Baja CaliforniaEnsenadaMéxico

Personalised recommendations