No abstract

The Finnish wolf population (Canis lupus) was sampled during three different periods (1996-1998, 1999-2001 and 2002-2004), and 118 individuals were genotyped with 10 microsatellite markers. Large genetic variation was found in the population despite a recent demographic bottleneck. No spatial population subdivision was found even though a significant negative relationship between genetic relatedness and geographic distance suggested isolation by distance. Very few individuals did not belong to the local wolf population as determined by assignment analyses, suggesting a low level of immigration in the population. We used the temporal approach and several statistical methods to estimate the variance effective size of the population. All methods gave similar estimates of effective population size, approximately 40 wolves. These estimates were slightly larger than the estimated census size of breeding individuals. A Bayesian model based on Markov chain Monte Carlo simulations indicated strong evidence for a long-term population decline. These results suggest that the contemporary wolf population size is roughly 8% of its historical size, and that the population decline dates back to late 19th century or early 20th century. Despite an increase of over 50% in the census size of the population during the whole study period, there was only weak evidence that the effective population size during the last period was higher than during the first. This may be caused by increased inbreeding, diminished dispersal within the population, and decreased immigration to the population during the last study period.

No abstract

We examined the genetic diversity and structure of wolf populations in northwestern Russia. Populations in Republic of Karelia and Arkhangelsk Oblast were sampled during 1995-2000, and 43 individuals were genotyped with 10 microsatellite markers. Moreover, 118 previously genotyped wolves from the neighbouring Finnish population were used as a reference population. A relatively large amount of genetic variation was found in the Russian populations, and the Karelian wolf population tended to be slightly more polymorphic than the Arkhangelsk population. We found significant inbreeding (F = 0.094) in the Karelian, but not in the Arkhangelsk population. The effective size estimates of the Karelian wolf population based on the approximate Bayesian computation and linkage disequilibrium methods were 39.9 and 46.7 individuals, respectively. AMOVA-analysis and exact test of population differentiation suggested clear differentiation between the Karelian, Arkhangelsk and Finnish wolf populations. Indirect estimates of gene flow based on the level of population differentiation (/ ST = 0.152) and frequency of private alleles (0.029) both suggested a low level of gene flow between the populations (Nm = 1.4 and Nm = 3.7, respectively). Assignment analysis of Karelian and Finnish populations suggested an even lower number of recent migrants (less than 0.03) between populations, with a larger amount of migration from Finland to Karelia than vice versa. Our findings emphasise the role of physical obstacles and territorial behaviour in creating barriers to gene flow between populations in relatively limited geographical areas, even in large-bodied mammalian species with long-distance dispersal capabilities and an apparently continuous population structure.

The grey wolves (Canis lupus) of Finland have had a varied history, with a period of rapid population expansion after the mid-1990s followed by a decline with a current census size of about 140 wolves. Here, we investigate the impact of unstable population size and connectivity on genetic diversity and structure in a long-term genetic study of 298 Finnish wolves born in 1995-2009 and genotyped for 17 microsatellite loci. During the initial recovery and prior to population expansion, genetic diversity was high (1995-1997: LD-N(e)  = 67.2; H(o)  = 0.749; H(e)  = 0.709) despite a small census size and low number of breeders (N(c) < 100; N(b) < 10) likely reflecting the status of the Russian source population. Surprisingly, observed heterozygosity decreased significantly during the study period (t = -2.643, P = 0.021) despite population expansion, likely a result of an increase in inbreeding (F(IS)  = 0.108 in 2007-2009) owing to a low degree of connectivity with adjacent Russian wolf population (m = 0.016-0.090; F(ST)  = 0.086, P < 0.001) and population crash after 2006. However, population growth had a temporary positive impact on N(e) and number of family lines. This study shows that even strong population growth alone might not be adequate to retain genetic diversity, especially when accompanied with low amount of subsequent gene flow and population decline.