RAPID, GEOGRAPHICALLY EXTENSIVE GENETIC INTROGRESSION AFTER SECONDARY CONTACT BETWEEN TWO PUPFISH SPECIES (
            <i>CYPRINODON,</i>
            CYPRINODONTIDAE)

Echelle, Anthony A.; Connor, Patrick

doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.1989.tb05171.x

Cited by 89 publications

(129 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

123

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are few other examples of such geographically extensive introgression following the purposeful introduction of one species into the range of another (see also Echelle and Connor 1989).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mitochondrial Analysis of Gene Flow between New Zealand Mallards (Anas platyrhynchos) and Grey Ducks (A. superciliosa)

Rhymer

Braun

1994

The Auk

138

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT.•One of the more well-known examples of hybridization in birds is the frequently documented occurrence between sexually dimorphic Mallards (Anas platyrhynchos) and several closely related nondimorphic species in the mallard complex. In New Zealand, the Grey Duck (Anas superciliosa superciliosa) is the indigenous, nondimorphic Mallardlike species, and extensive hybridization with introduced Mallards has been implicated in the population decline of Grey Ducks. Individuals from throughout the country were classified phenotypically as parentals or hybrids based on variation in plumage, bill color, and leg color. We confirmed species-specific mitochondrial DNA haplotypes by comparing restrictionenzyme fragment patterns in Grey Ducks and New Zealand Mallards to those of Pacific Black Ducks (A, superciliosa rogersi) from Australia and Mallards from North America, respectively. Our data indicate that hybridization has led not only to introgression of Grey Duck mtDNA into Mallard populations (the predicted direction of gene flow), but also to significant introgression of Mallard mtDNA into Grey Duck populations. Thus, the contention that hybridization between Mallards and nondimorphic species involves primarily Mallard males with females of the other species is not upheld for this example from New Zealand. The speciation process appears to be undergoing reversal.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mitochondrial Analysis of Gene Flow between New Zealand Mallards (Anas platyrhynchos) and Grey Ducks (A. superciliosa)

Rhymer

Braun

1994

The Auk

138

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Even apparently innocuous actions can have ecologically catastrophic impacts. The release of bait fishes by fishermen at the end of the day has already led to the extinction of species in the United States, including the Pecos pupfish (Cyprinodon pecosensis), through hybridization (Echelle and Connor 1989).…”

Section: Exclusion and Control: Socioeconomic Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biotic Invasions: Causes, Epidemiology, Global Consequences, and Control

Mack

Simberloff

Lonsdale

et al. 2000

Ecological Applications

2,881

3,750

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Biotic invaders are species that establish a new range in which they proliferate, spread, and persist to the detriment of the environment. They are the most important ecological outcomes from the unprecedented alterations in the distribution of the earth's biota brought about largely through human transport and commerce. In a world without borders, few if any areas remain sheltered from these immigrations.The fate of immigrants is decidedly mixed. Few survive the hazards of chronic and stochastic forces, and only a small fraction become naturalized. In turn, some naturalized species do become invasive. There are several potential reasons why some immigrant species prosper: some escape from the constraints of their native predators or parasites; others are aided by human-caused disturbance that disrupts native communities. Ironically, many biotic invasions are apparently facilitated by cultivation and husbandry, unintentional actions that foster immigrant populations until they are self-perpetuating and uncontrollable. Whatever the cause, biotic invaders can in many cases inflict enormous environmental damage: (1) Animal invaders can cause extinctions of vulnerable native species through predation, grazing, competition, and habitat alteration. (2) Plant invaders can completely alter the fire regime, nutrient cycling, hydrology, and energy budgets in a native ecosystem and can greatly diminish the abundance or survival of native species. (3) In agriculture, the principal pests of temperate crops are nonindigenous, and the combined expenses of pest control and crop losses constitute an onerous ''tax'' on food, fiber, and forage production. (4) The global cost of virulent plant and animal diseases caused by parasites transported to new ranges and presented with susceptible new hosts is currently incalculable.Identifying future invaders and taking effective steps to prevent their dispersal and establishment constitutes an enormous challenge to both conservation and international commerce. Detection and management when exclusion fails have proved daunting for varied reasons: (1) Efforts to identify general attributes of future invaders have often been inconclusive. (2) Predicting susceptible locales for future invasions seems even more problematic, given the enormous differences in the rates of arrival among potential invaders. (3) Eradication of an established invader is rare, and control efforts vary enormously in their efficacy. Successful control, however, depends more on commitment and continuing diligence than on the efficacy of specific tools themselves. (4) Control of biotic invasions is most effective when it employs a long-term, ecosystemwide strategy rather than a tactical approach focused on battling individual invaders. (5) Prevention of invasions is much less costly than post-entry control. Revamping national and international quarantine laws by adopting a ''guilty until proven innocent'' approach would be a productive first step.Failure to address the issue of biotic invasions could effectivel...

show abstract

“…The original introduction appears to have been a baitfish release in Red Bluff Reservoir (Childs et al 1996). As a result, Pecos pupfish was eliminated from the lower Pecos River upstream to Loving, New Mexico, and replaced with a hybrid swarm (Echelle and Conner 1989;Wilde and Echelle 1992;Echelle et al 1997). Pecos pupfish is listed as "threatened" by Texas and New Mexico and is considered a "species of concern" by the American Fisheries Society (Williams et al 1989).…”

Section: Pecos Pupfish Conservation Agreementmentioning

confidence: 99%