Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Genetic variation and population structure in desert bighorn sheep: implications for conservation

  • Published:
Conservation Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Bighorn sheep populations experienced a drastic reduction in both distribution and abundance until the advent of modern wildlife management, where improving viability of extant populations and translocating animals into historical habitat range have been the most important management policies. The fact that subspecies relationships among bighorn are ambiguous,together with the importance of selecting appropriate source stock and the expense of translocation projects, makes an understanding of subspecies relationships and genetic variation, within and between populations, important for the management and conservation of this species. In this study, genetic variation in 279 bighorn sheep from 13 study sites in Arizona, California, New Mexico and Alberta, Canada were examined by analyzing ten microsatellite loci to determine interpopulation differentiation and relationships between closely related taxa. All populations contained a substantial amount of genetic variation. Genetic differences between populations were large and roughly proportional to geographic distance. The significance of this to desert subspecies relationships and management is discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ashley MV, Dow BD (1994) The use of microsatellite analysis in population biology: background, methods, and potential applications. In: Molecular Ecology and Evolution: Approaches and Application (eds. Scherwater B, Strait B, Wagner GP, Desalle R), pp. 185–201. Birkhauser Verlag, Basel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger J (1990) Persistence of different sized populations: an empirical assessment of rapid extinctions in bighorn sheep. Cons. Biol., 4, 91–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bleich VC, Wehausen JD, Ramey RR, Rechel JL (1995) Metapopulation theory and mountain sheep: implications for conservation. In: Metapopulations and Wildlife Conservation Management (ed. McCullough D), pp. 353–373. Island Press, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyce WM, Hedrick PW, Muggli-Cockett NE, Kalinowski S, Penedo MCT, Ramey RR (1997) Genetic variation of major histocompatibility complex and microsatellite loci: a comparison in bighorn sheep. Genetics, 145, 421–433.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brown D (1993) Early history in the desert bighorn sheep in Arizona. In: Desert Bighorn Sheep (ed. Lee RM), pp. 1–9. Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, Arizona.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan FC, Littlejohn RP, Galloway SM, Crawford AM (1993) Microsatellite and associated repetitive elements in the sheep genome. Mammal. Genome, 4, 58–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buechner HK (1960) The bighorn sheep of the United States: its past, present and future. Wildlife Monogr., 4, 1–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowan IM (1940) The distribution and variation in the native sheep of North America. Amer. Midl. Natur., 24, 505–580.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford AM, Montgomery GW, Pierson CA, Brown T, Dodds KG, Sunden SLF, Henry HM, Ede AJ, Swarbrick PA, Berryman T, Penty JM, Hill DF (1994) Sheep linkage mapping: nineteen linkage groups derived from the analysis of paternal half-sib families. Genetics, 137, 573–579.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DeForge JR, Jenner CW, Plechner AP, Sudmeier GW (1979) Decline of bighorn sheep (Ovis Canadensis), the genetic implications. Desert Bighorn Coun. Trans., 23, 63–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Environmental System Research Institute (ESRI) (1998) ARCVIEW 3.0a. Redlands, CA.

  • Feldman MW, Bergman A, Pollock DD, Goldstein DB (1997) Microsatellite genetic distances with range constraints: analytic 15 description and problems of estimation. Genetics, 145, 207–216.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Felsenstein J (1993) PHYLIP- (phylogeny inference package), version 3.5c. University of Washington, Seattle.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forbes SH, Hogg JT, Buchanan FC, Crawford AM, Allendorf FW (1995) Microsatellite evolution in congeneric mammals: domestic and bighorn sheep. Molec. Biol. Evol., 12, 1106–1113.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Forbes SH, Hogg JT (1999) Assessing population structure at high levels of differentiation: microsatellite comparisons of bighorn sheep and large carnivores. Anim. Cons., 2, 223–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedrick PW, Miller PS (1992) Conservation genetics: techniques and fundamentals. Ecol. Applic., 2, 30–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedrick PW (1999) Perspective: highly variable loci and their interpretation in evolution and conservation. Evolution, 53, 313–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarne P, Lagoda PJL (1996) Microsatellites, from molecules to populations and back. Trends Ecol. Evol., 11, 424–429.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jesup DA, Ramey RR (1995) Genetic variation of bighorn sheep as measured by blood protein electrophoresis. Desert Bighorn Coun. Trans. 39, 17–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee RM (1998) The Desert Bighorn Sheep in The Wild Sheep Journal. Foundation for North American Wild Sheep. Cody, Wyoming, pp. 51–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mantel N (1967) The detection of disease clustering and a generalized regression approach. Cancer Res., 27, 209–220.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Monson G (1990) Distribution and abundance. In: The Desert Bighorn Sheep: Its Life History, Ecology and Management (eds. Monson G, Sumner L), pp. 40–51. Univ. Arizona Press, Tucson, Arizona.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nauta MJ, Weissing FJ (1996) Constraints on allele size at microsatellite loci: implications for genetic differentiation. Genetics, 143, 1021–1032.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nei M (1977) F-statistics and analysis of gene diversity in subdivided population. Annals Hum. Genet., 41, 225–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nei M (1987) Molecular Evolutionary Genetics. Columbia University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ota T (1993) DISPAN: Genetic Distance and Phylogenetic Analysis. Institute of molecular evolutionary genetics. Pennsylvania State University.

  • Ramey RR (1995) Mitochondrial DNA variation, population structure, and evolution of mountains sheep in the southwestern United States and Mexico. Mol. Ecol. 4, 429–439.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Raymond M, Rousset F (1995) GENEPOP 1.02: population genetics software for exact tests and ecumenicism. J. Hered., 86, 248–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice WR (1989) Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution, 43, 223–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin ES, Boyce WM, Jorgensen MC, Torres SG, Hayes CL, O'Brien CS, Jessup DA (1998) The distribution and abundance of bighorn sheep in the Peninsular Ranges, California. Wildlife Soc. Bull., 26, 539–551.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sambrook J, Fritsch FE, Maniatis T (1989) Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual. Cold Spring Harbor Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sausman KA (1984) Survival of captive-born Ovis Canadensis in North American zoos. Zoo Biol., 3, 111–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz OA, Bleich VC, Holl SA (1986) Genetics and the conservation of mountain sheep Ovis canadensis nelsoni. Biol. Cons., 37, 179–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slatkin M (1995) A measure of population subdivision based on microsatellite allele frequencies. Genetics, 139, 457–462.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith TB, Wayne RK (eds.) (1996) Molecular Genetic Approaches in Conservation. Oxford Univ. Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1995) Biometry, 3rd Ed., W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steffen P, Eggen A, Dietz AB, Womack JE, Stranzinger G, Fries R (1993) Isolation and mapping of polymorphic microsatellites in cattle. Anim. Genet., 24, 121–124.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wehausen JD, Ramey RR (1993) A morphometric reevaluation of the peninsular bighorn subspecies. Desert Bighorn Coun. Trans., 37, 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Gustavo A. Gutiérrez-Espeleta

    Present address: Escuela de Biología, Universidad de Costa Rica, San José, Costa Rica

  2. Steven T. Kalinowski

    Present address: Northwest Fisheries Science Center, Conservation Biology Division, National Marine Fisheries Service, 2725 Montlake Blvd. E., Seattle, WA, 98112, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, 85287-1501, USA;

    Gustavo A. Gutiérrez-Espeleta & Steven T. Kalinowski

  2. Department of Veterinary Pathology, Microbiology, and Immunology, University of California, Davis, CA, 95616, USA

    Walter M. Boyce

  3. Department of Biology, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, 85287-1501, USA

    Philip W. Hedrick

Authors
  1. Gustavo A. Gutiérrez-Espeleta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Steven T. Kalinowski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Walter M. Boyce
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Philip W. Hedrick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Philip W. Hedrick.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gutiérrez-Espeleta, G.A., Kalinowski, S.T., Boyce, W.M. et al. Genetic variation and population structure in desert bighorn sheep: implications for conservation. Conservation Genetics 1, 3–15 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010125519304

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010125519304

Search

Navigation