Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 29

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 78 of the 78 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Beyond the snapshot: Landscape genetic analysis of time series data reveal responses of American black bears to landscape change

Draheim, Hope M., Moore, Jennifer A., Fortin, Marie‐Josée, Scribner, Kim T.·2018·Evolutionary Applications
DOI 10.1111/eva.12617PMC PMC6100183
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Landscape genetic studies typically focus on the evolutionary processes that give rise to spatial patterns that are quantified at a single point in time. Although landscape change is widely recognized as a strong driver of microevolutionary processes, few landscape genetic studies have directly evaluated the change in spatial genetic structure (SGS) over time with concurrent changes in landscape pattern. We introduce a novel approach to analyze landscape genetic data through time. We demonstrate this approach using genotyped samples (n = 569) from a large black bear (Ursus americanus) population in Michigan (USA) that were harvested during 3 years (2002, 2006, and 2010). We identified areas that were consistently occupied over this 9‐year period and quantified temporal variation in SGS. Then, we evaluated alternative hypotheses about effects of changes in landscape features (e.g., deforestation or crop conversion) on fine‐scale SGS among years using spatial autoregressive modeling and model selection. Relative measures of landscape change such as magnitude of landscape change (i.e., number of patches changing from suitable to unsuitable states or vice versa), and during later periods, measures of fragmentation (i.e., patch aggregation and cohesion) were associated with change in SGS. Our results stress the importance of conducting time series studies for the conservation and management of wildlife inhabiting rapidly changing landscapes.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/eva.12617

Cites

78 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Study area in the Northern Lower Peninsula of Michigan (NLP) showing areas (n = 141) of consistent sampling for black bear harvested during 2002, 2006, and 2010 (n = 569), interstate‐75 (I‐75) and major rivers
Figure 1 Study area in the Northern Lower Peninsula of Michigan (NLP) showing areas (n = 141) of consistent sampling for black bear harvested during 2002, 2006, and 2010 (n = 569), interstate‐75 (I‐75) and major riversCC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Extent and configuration of forested land lost (gray) over the sampling period from (a) 2001–2006, (b) 2006–2010, and (c) 2002–2010
Figure 2 Extent and configuration of forested land lost (gray) over the sampling period from (a) 2001–2006, (b) 2006–2010, and (c) 2002–2010CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 Delaunay triangulation network between individual locations for (a) 2002, (b) 2006, and (c) 2010 used to create genetic surfaces. Red triangles represent sample locations. Blue circles represent midpoints between sampling locations in which genetic differentiation was interpolated
Figure 3 Delaunay triangulation network between individual locations for (a) 2002, (b) 2006, and (c) 2010 used to create genetic surfaces. Red triangles represent sample locations. Blue circles represent midpoints between sampling locations in which genetic differentiation was interpolatedCC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 Distribution of (a) the cumulative difference in genetic differentiation (from spatial interpolated genetic surfaces) within a grid cell for all temporal comparisons (2002–2006, 2006–2010, 2002–2010) and (b) number of landscape change patches within a grid cell (2.6 km2). For landscape change maps, red indicates a large number of patches of change and blue indicates a low number of patches of change. For genetic change maps, red indicates an increase in genetic differentiation (GD) from time one (T1) to time two (T2) and blue indicates a decrease in genetic differentiation from T1 to T2
Figure 4 Distribution of (a) the cumulative difference in genetic differentiation (from spatial interpolated genetic surfaces) within a grid cell for all temporal comparisons (2002–2006, 2006–2010, 2002–2010) and (b) number of landscape change patches within a grid cell (2.6 km2). For landscape change maps, red indicates a large number of patches of change and blue indicates a low number of patches of change. For genetic change maps, red indicates an increase in genetic differentiation (GD) from time one (T1) to time two (T2) and blue indicates a decrease in genetic differentiation from T1 to T2CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Draheim H. M.(2015).Landscape genetics of black bears (Ursus americanus) in the Northern Lower Peninsula (NLP) of Michigan USA. Dissertation Department of Zoology Michigan State University East Lansing MI.
  2. Mantel N., 1967, Detection of disease clustering and a generalized regression approach, Cancer Research, 27, 209

Cited by

See all 29

Metadata

Authors
Draheim, H. M., Moore, J. A., Fortin, M., & Scribner, K. T.
Affiliations
  • Department of Zoology Michigan State University East Lansing MI USA
  • Biology Department Grand Valley State University Allendale MI USA
  • Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology University of Toronto Toronto ON Canada
  • Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Michigan State University East Lansing MI USA
ORCID
Draheim, Hope M.
Venue
Evolutionary Applications
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-03-25
Volume
11
Issue
8
Pages
1219-1230
ISSN
1752-4571
DOI
10.1111/eva.12617
PMC
PMC6100183
Cited by
29
References
78
Language
en
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (vor)
Funders
  • Michigan Department of Natural Resources (F11AF00640)
  • Michigan State University

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.