Genetic similarity between urban and adjacent rural white-tailed deer populations in Iowa

Whitney Briggs, Lynne Gardner and Julie Blanchong

Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, Iowa State University, Ames, IA

• Estimate the degree of genetic similarity between urban white-tailed deer and surrounding rural deer populations

• Characterize genetic diversity in urban deer populations and compare them to adjacent rural populations

• White-tailed deer living in urban environments have elevated survival rates and have adapted to smaller home ranges

• High urban population densities may increase the frequency of negative human and deer interactions

• High rates of movement between urban and surrounding rural environments may create challenges for managers in controlling urban deer population size

• Estimation of the genetic similarity between rural and urban deer populations can help managers understand the amount of exchange between urban and rural populations

• Received tissues from deer harvested in 2010-2013 • Samples were collected from urban and surrounding rural areas in

Cedar Rapids & Davenport, Iowa (Figure 1) • 37 urban & 41 rural (Davenport) • 45 urban & 26 rural (Cedar Rapids)

• Extracted DNA using Lysis Buffer Method1 • PCR Amplification (Figure 1)

• Used 8 (of eventual 10) dinucleotide microsatellite loci • BM 6438, BM41072, RT7, RT9, RT23, RT273, N4, &

Cervid5

• Genotyping at ISU DNA facility • Checked each microsatellite locus for presence of null alleles, allelic

dropout and scoring errors using with Micro-Checker6

• Genetic similarity measurements • F statistics (GenAIEx 6.57)

• Genetic diversity measurements • Observed (HO) and expected heterozygosity (HE)

• ARLEQUIN 3.58 • Mean Allelic Richness (F-stat 2.9.3.29)

This research is supported by an Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) grant CRD8366WSuchy120012. We thank the cities of Cedar Rapids, Davenport, and Ottumwa for collecting samples during urban hunts. Specifically, we would like to thank the Urban Deer Management Zone administrators Jason Andrews, Rick Jones, and Mike Reis for facilitating tissue collection. We thank the IDNR staff for collecting rural samples for the project, and specifically Tom Litchfield and Willie Suchy for their continued support of the project. We thank Dr. Phil Dixon of the ISU Statistics Department for his valuable assistance in establishing sampling protocols for the rural portion of the sample. We would also like to thank Melissa Moy for her laboratory assistance in establishing microsatellite primer reaction protocols.

1. Longmire, J. L. et al. 1997. Occasional Papers of the Museum of Texas Tech University 163:1-3

2. Talbot, J. et al. 1996. Animal Genetics 27:117-119

3. Wilson, G. A. et al. 1997. Molecular Ecology 6:697-699

4. Anderson, J. D. et al. 2002. Journal of Wildlife Management 66:67-74

5. DeWoody, J.A. et al. 1995. Journal of Heredity 86:317-319

6. Oosterhout, C. V. et al. 2004. Molecular Ecology Notes 4:535-538

7. Peakall, R. & Smouse P. E. 2006. Molecular Ecology Notes 6:288-295

8. Piry, S. et al. 2004. Journal of Hered 95:536-539

9. Excoffier, L. et al. 2010. Molecular Ecology Resources. 10: 564-567

• Understanding the degree of genetic similarity between urban and rural deer populations will aid managers in devising appropriate management strategies for urban deer

• High levels of genetic similarity indicate there is a high rate of movement between urban and rural populations

• Implication: managers may need to incorporate the adjacent rural deer when managing urban deer populations

• Genotype all Davenport & Cedar Rapids samples with additional loci • Use assignment tests to identify mixing between populations

Study Areas Objectives

Introduction

Methods

Future Direction

Implications

References

Acknowledgements

Preliminary Results

Mean Observed Heterozygosity (±SE)

Mean Expected Heterozygosity (±SE)

Urban Davenport 0.911 ± 0.02 0.877 ± 0.01 Rural Davenport 0.887 ± 0.03 0.881 ± 0.01

Urban Cedar Rapids 0.878 ± 0.02 0.882 ± 0.01 Rural Cedar Rapids 0.892 ± 0.03 0.887 ± 0.01

Mean Allelic Richness (±SE)

Urban Davenport 10.2 ± 0.50

Rural Davenport 10.3 ± 0.54

Urban Cedar Rapids 10.6 ± 0.67

Rural Cedar Rapids 11.0 ± 0.69

• Measures of genetic similarity indicate urban populations are similar to adjacent rural populations (Figure 3)

• All populations exhibited high levels of genetic diversity (Tables 1 & 2)

Table 1: Levels of heterozygosity for urban & rural areas in Davenport & Cedar Rapids.

Table 2: Mean number of alleles adjusted to population size for urban & rural populations in Davenport & Cedar Rapids.

Preliminary Discussion

Figure 2. Two cities in eastern Iowa where urban (green) and rural (concentric circles) deer tissues were collected. Ten rural deer were sampled and genotyped from within each concentric circle.

• Genetic similarity measurements • Low FST values between both urban & rural populations indicates

there is high level of genetic similarity between either population • Preliminary data suggest urban and rural deer have a high level of

genetic exchange • Genetic diversity measurements

• Observed levels of heterozygosity and allelic richness indicate both urban and rural populations have high levels of genetic diversity

Figure 3: Measures of the amount of genetic similarity between urban and rural populations. The fixation index (FST represented by the yellow) is used to determine the amount of genetic similarity between the urban and rural deer populations.

Preliminary Results Cont.

Figure 1: Agarose electrophoresis gels are used to determine if the PCR was successful in amplifying the DNA from tissue samples. Microsatellite loci are used to specify the regions where amplification occurs.