Acta Theriologica

, Volume 57, Issue 4, pp 383–386 | Cite as

Gene introgression between Gazella subgutturosa and G. marica: limitations of maternal inheritance analysis for species identification with conservation purposes

  • Marine Murtskhvaladze
  • Zurab Gurielidze
  • Natia Kopaliani
  • David Tarkhnishvili
Short Communication


It has recently been suggested that goitered gazelles (Gazella subgutturosa and Gazella marica) have paraphyletic maternal origin, and that the mitochondrial cytochrome b gene fragment can be used for species identification prior to reintroduction of the gazelles. Although there is a large geographic area where the gazelles have intermediate morphology, previous researchers have not inferred any signs of mitochondrial haplotype introgression, and it is thought that the introgression, if it exists, is male-biased. We studied mitochondrial haplotypes of morphologically typical G. subgutturosa from two geographic locations. Goitered gazelles from eastern Turkey, morphologically identical to G. subgutturosa, had haplotypes identical to G. marica. This finding confirms ongoing maternal gene introgression from G. marica to G. subgutturosa. Our suggestion is that there is a natural gene flow between these two nominal species, and morphological characters together with recombinant genetic markers rather than mitochondrial DNA should be used to differentiate among individuals from areas close to the contact zone.


Gazella subgutturosa Gazella marica Hybridization Species identification Reintroduction Mitochondrial DNA 


  1. Abbo S, Lev-Yadun S, Gopher A (2010) Agricultural origins: centers and noncenters; a Near Eastern reappraisal. Crit Rev Plant Sci 29:317–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abbott I (2000) Improving the conservation of threatened and rare mammal species through translocation to islands: case study Western Australia. Biol Conserv 93:195–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beysard M, Perrin N, Jaarola M, Heckel G, Vogel P (2012) Asymmetric and differential gene introgression at a contact zone between two highly divergent lineages of field voles (Microtus agrestis). J Evol Biol 25:400–408PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Durmuş M (2010) Determination of home range size and habitat selection of gazelles (Gazella subgutturosa) by GPS Telemetry in Şanliurfa. A thesis submitted to the Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences of Middle East Technical University. Sanliurfa. Available from: Accessed 17 Apr 2012
  5. Frankham R, Ballou JD, Briscoe DA (2004) A primer of conservation genetics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Grey-Ross R, Downs CT, Kirkman K (2009) Is use of translocation for the conservation of subpopulations of oribi Ourebia ourebi (Zimmermann) effective? A case study. Afr J Ecol 47:409–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Groves CP (1997) Taxonomy of Arabian gazelles. In: Habibi K, AbuZinada A, Nader I (eds) The gazelles of Arabia. National Commission for Wildlife Conservation and Development, Riyadh, pp 24–51Google Scholar
  8. Groves CP, Harrison DL (1967) The taxonomy of the gazelles (genus Gazella) of Arabia. J Zool 152:381–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hagen J, Taylor EB (2001) Habitat partitioning as a factor limiting gene flow in hybridizing populations of Dolly Varden char (Salvelinus malma) and bull trout (S. confluentus). Can J Fish Aquat Sci 58:2037–2047CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hall TA (1999) BioEdit: a user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for Windows 95 ⁄ 98 ⁄ NT. Nucleic Acids Symp Ser 41:95–98Google Scholar
  11. Hammond RL, Macasero W, Flores B, Mohammed OB, Wacher T, Bruford MW (2001) Phylogenetic reanalysis of the Saudi gazelle and its implications for conservation. Conserv Biol 15:1123–1133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hayward M (2011) Using the IUCN Red List to determine effective conservation strategies. Biodivers Conserv 20:2563–2573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hutchings J, Pollard S, Festa-Bianchet M, Bentzen P (2008) COSEWIC guidelines on manipulated populations. COSEWIC, GatineauGoogle Scholar
  14. Kasparek M (1986) On the historical distribution and present situation of Gazelles, Gazella spp., in Turkey. Zool Middle East 1:11–15Google Scholar
  15. Kleiman DG (1989) Reintroduction of captive mammals for conservation. BioScience 39:152–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kocher TD, Thomas WK, Meyer A, Edwards SV, Paabo S, Villablanca FX, Wilson AC (1989) Dynamics of mitochondrial evolution in animals: amplification and sequencing with conserved primers. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 86:6196–6620PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mallet J (2005) Hybridization as an invasion of the genome. Trends Ecol Evol 20:229–237PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mallon DP (2008) Gazella subgutturosa. In: IUCN 2011. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011.2. <>. Downloaded on 14 Jan 2012
  19. Mallon DP, Kingswood SC (eds) (2001) Antelopes. Part 4: North Africa, the Middle East and Asia, global survey and regional action plans. IUCN/SSC Antelope Specialist Group, IUCN, Gland and CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  20. Murtskhvaladze M, Gavashelishvili A, Tarkhnishvili D (2010) Geographic and genetic boundaries of brown bear (Ursus arctos) population in the Caucasus. Mol Ecol 19:1829–1841PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Neaves LE, Zenger KR, Cooper DW, Eldridge MDB (2010) Molecular detection of hybridization between sympatric kangaroo species in south-eastern Australia. Heredity 104:502–512PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Prager EM, Sage RD, Gyllensten U, Thomas WK, Hübner R, Jones CS, Noble L, Searle JB, Wilson AC (1993) Mitochondrial DNA sequence diversity and the colonisation of Scandinavia by house mice from East Holstein. Biol J Linn Soc 50:85–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. QIAamp DNA (2007) Accessed 17 Apr 2012
  24. Rebholz W, Harley E (1999) Phylogenetic relationships in the bovid subfamily Antilopinae based on mitochondrial DNA sequences. Mol Phylogenet Evol 12:87–94PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Senn HV, Pemberton JM (2008) Variable extent of hybridization between invasive sika (Cervus nippon) and native red deer (C. elaphus) in a small geographical area. Mol Ecol 18:862–876CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Senn HV, Barton NH, Goodman SL, Swanson GM, Abernethy KA, Pemberton JM (2010) Investigating temporal changes in hybridization and introgression in a predominantly bimodal hybridizing population of invasive sika (Cervus nippon) and native red deer (C. elaphus) on the Kintyre Peninsula, Scotland. Mol Ecol 19:910–924PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tarkhnishvili D, Hille AA, Böhme W (2001) Humid forest refugia, speciation and secondary introgression between two evolutionary lineages, differentiation in a near eastern brown frog, Rana macrocnemis. Biol J Linn Soc 74:141–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Tarkhnishvili D, Gavashelishvili A, Mumladze L (2012) Palaeoclimatic models help to understand current distribution of Caucasian forest species. Biol J Linn Soc 105:231–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Trigo TC, Freitas RO, Kunzler G, Cardoso JC, Silva R, Jonson WE, O’Brien SJ, Bonatto SL, Eizirik E (2008) Inter-species hybridization among Neotropical cats of the genus Leopardus, and evidence for an introgressive hybrid zone between L. geoffroyi and L. tigrinus in southern Brazil. Mol Ecol 17:4317–4433PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wacher T, Wronski T, Hammond RL, Winney B, Blacket MJ, Hundertmark KJ, Mohammed OB, Omer SA, Macasero W, Lerp H, Plath M, Bleidor C (2011) Phylogenetic analysis of mitochondrial DNA sequences reveals polyphyly in the goitered gazelle (Gazella subgutturosa). Conserv Genet 12:827–831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wronski T, Alageel K, Plath M, Sandouk MA (2012) Twenty years of monitoring a re-introduced population of Mountain Gazelles, Gazella gazella (Pallas, 1776), in the Ibex Reserve, Saudi Arabia. Zool Middle East 55:3–18Google Scholar
  32. Zazanashvili N, Sanadiradze G, Bukhnikashvili A, Kandaurov A, Tarkhnishvili D (2004) Caucasus. In: Mittermaier RA, Gil PG, Hoffmann M, Pilgrim J, Brooks T, Mittermaier CG, Lamoreux J, da Fonseca GAB (eds) Hotspots revisited, Earth’s biologically richest and most endangered terrestrial ecoregions. CEMEX/Agrupacion Sierra Madre, Mexico, pp 148–153Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Mammal Research Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences, Białowieża, Poland 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marine Murtskhvaladze
    • 1
  • Zurab Gurielidze
    • 1
  • Natia Kopaliani
    • 1
  • David Tarkhnishvili
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of EcologyIlia State UniversityTbilisiGeorgia

Personalised recommendations