Convergent geographic patterns between grizzly bear population genetic structure and Indigenous language groups in coastal British Columbia, Canada

Abstract

Landscape genetic analyses of wildlife populations can exclude variation in a broad suite of potential spatiotemporal correlates, including consideration of how such variation might have similarly influenced people over time. Grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) populations in what is now known as coastal British Columbia, Canada, provide an opportunity to examine the possible effects of a complex set of landscape and human influences on genetic structure. In this collaboration among the Nuxalk, Haíɫzaqv, Kitasoo/ Xai'xais, Gitga'at, and Wuikinuxv First Nations and conservation scientists, we characterized patterns of genetic differentiation in the grizzly bear, a species of high cultural value, by genotyping 22 microsatellite loci from noninvasively collected hair samples over a 23,500 km² area. We identified three well-differentiated groups. Resistance surfaces, which incorporated past and present human use, settlement, and landscape resistant features, could not explain this pattern of genetic variation. Notably, however, we detected spatial alignment between Indigenous language families and grizzly bear genetic groups. Grizzly bears sampled within an area represented by a given language family were significantly similar to those sampled within that language family (P = 0.001) and significantly divergent to those sampled outside the language family (P = 0.001). This spatial co-occurrence suggests that grizzly bear and human groups have been shaped by the landscape in similar ways, creating a convergence of grizzly bear genetic and human linguistic diversity. Additionally, grizzly bear management units designated by the provincial government currently divide an otherwise continuous group and exclude recently colonized island populations that are genetically continuous with adjacent mainland groups. This work provides not only insight into how ecological and geographic conditions can similarly shape the distribution of people and wildlife but also new genetic evidence to support renewed, locally led management of grizzly bears into the future.

Weaving place‐based knowledge for culturally significant species in the age of genomics: Looking to the past to navigate the future

“…Interdisciplinary genomic approaches (e.g., Aitken & Bemmels, 2016; Gougherty et al, 2021; MacLachlan et al, 2021) promise to help biodiversity thrive in the face of rapid change. However, without biocultural context, genomic data represent missed opportunities for IPLC and researchers to realize shared benefits, including the co‐creation of more nuanced and epistemically diverse knowledge (e.g., this study; Gros‐Balthazard et al, 2020; Henson et al, 2021; Polfus et al, 2016; Service et al, 2020). In particular, our experiences highlight the importance of partnership with multiple communities who use space in different ways.…”

“…These benefits may include but are not limited to: (1) Reciprocally enhanced understanding of complex biocultural histories through genomics and/or place-based knowledge, including the co-production of a priori hypotheses. For instance, a recent collaboration between Nuxalk, Haíɫzaqv, Kitasoo/ Xai'xais, Gitga'at, and Wuikinuxv First Nations and conservation scientists found convergence between grizzly bear Ursus arctos genetic and human linguistic diversity, suggesting that human groups and grizzly bears have been shaped by the landscape in similar ways (Henson et al, 2021). In another recent study, integrating ethnographic survey (i.e., interviews and observation of farming practices) and population genetic analysis promoted a richer understanding of date palm Phoenix dactylifera L. diversity in Siwa Oasis, Egypt (Gros-Balthazard et al, 2020).…”

Freshwater fisheries monitoring in northern ecosystems using Indigenous ecological knowledge, genomics, and life history: Insights for community decision-making

“…To our knowledge, no studies other than Polfus et al (2016) on caribou, Gros-Balthazard et al (2020 on date palm agrobiodiversity, Henson et al (2021) on gizzly bear language group concordance, and the earlier IEK:genetic studies on Mistassini lake fishes (Fraser et al 2006;Marin et al 2017;Bowles et al 2020) have combined IEK and population genetics. Moreover, few studies have investigated genomic population structure across multiple species within large lake systems, for comparison to our work (i.e., using thousands of SNPs).…”

Genetic evidence to inform management of rare genetic variants and gene flow: Balancing the conservation of the rare “Spirit bear” allele and population genetic diversity across a complex landscape

“…When less than 10 guard hairs were present in a sample, up to five underfur hairs per missing guard were used. Our microsatellite loci set consisted of eight microsatellite loci commonly used for black and grizzly bear genotyping (G1A, G1D, G10B, G10C, G10L, G10M, G10P, G10X- Paetkau et al, 1995;Paetkau et al, 1998) combined with 13 loci previously used to identify black and grizzly bear population structure (G10J, G10H, G10U, CXX110, CXX20, MU23, MU50, MU59, MU51, CPH9, 144A06, MSUT-2, 145P07- Bellemain & Taberlet, 2004;Fredholm & Winterø, 1995;Kamath et al, 2015;Kitahara et al, 2000;Paetkau et al, 1998;Proctor et al, 2012) (primers in Henson et al, 2021). We additionally used an amelogenin locus that differentiates between Y and X chromosomes to identify sex (Ennis & Gallagher, 1994).…”