Cited by 66Genetic diversity and population structureForensic and Genetic ResearchPleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology

Late Quaternary loss of genetic diversity in muskox (Ovibos)

Open access
MacPhee, Ross DE, Tikhonov, Alexei N, Mol, Dick, Greenwood, Alex D·2005·BMC Evolutionary Biology

Abstract

Background: The modern wildherd of the tundra muskox (Ovibos moschatus) is native only to the New World (northern North America and Greenland), and its genetic diversity is notably low. However, like several other megafaunal mammals, muskoxen enjoyed a holarctic distribution during the late Pleistocene. To investigate whether collapse in range and loss of diversity might be correlated, we collected mitochondrial sequence data (hypervariable region and cytochrome b) from muskox fossil material recovered from localities in northeastern Asia and the Arctic Archipelago of northern North America, dating from late Pleistocene to late Holocene, and compared our results to existing databases for modern muskoxen. Results: Two classes of haplotypes were detected in the fossil material. "Surviving haplotypes" (SHs), closely similar or identical to haplotypes found in modern muskoxen and ranging in age from ~22,000 to ~160 yrbp, were found in all New World samples as well as some samples from northeastern Asia. "Extinct haplotypes" (EHs), dating between ~44,000 and ~18,000 yrbp, were found only in material from the Taimyr Peninsula and New Siberian Islands in northeastern Asia. EHs were not found in the Holocene muskoxen specimens available for this study, nor have they been found in other studies of extant muskox populations. Conclusion: We provisionally interpret this evidence as showing that genetic variability was reduced in muskoxen after the Last Glacial Maximum but before the mid-Holocene, or roughly within the interval 18,000-4,000 yrbp. Narrowing this gap further will require the recovery of more fossils and additional genetic information from this interval.

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 · 10.1186/1471-2148-5-49

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • The archeological record, supported by genetic data, provides evidence that muskoxen have been through several population bottlenecks and extirpation events best explained by non-anthropogenic causes, e.g., environmental change.

    “The archeological record, supported by genetic data (MacPhee et al. 2005), provides evidence that muskoxen have been through several population bottlenecks and extirpation events that are best explained by non-anthropogenic causes, e.g., environmental change (Campos et al. 2010).”

    From Muskox status, recent variation, and uncertain future (2020) · cites this paper as MacPhee et al. 2005

    The Background (page not specified) links modern muskoxen’s low genetic diversity to a long period of small effective population size or one or more bottlenecks, and describes a history of extirpation and replacement. The Conclusion (page not specified) confirms a loss of genetic diversity but says its timing and conditions cannot be well constrained. MacPhee et al. therefore support the genetic evidence for decline, not a definite history of several bottlenecks and extirpation events. The separate explanation involving non-anthropogenic causes is cited to Campos et al., not MacPhee et al. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The muskox underwent multiple population bottlenecks, which have resulted in contemporary populations having very low genetic diversity.

    “the muskox underwent multiple population bottlenecks, which have resulted in contemporary populations having very low genetic diversity9,28–30”

    From Chromosomal-level reference genome assembly of muskox (Ovibos moschatus) from Banks Island in the Canadian Arctic, a resource for conservation genomics (2024) · cites this paper as [29]

    The Background reports extremely low genetic diversity in living muskoxen, and the Conclusion states that they were more genetically diverse in the late Pleistocene. But the Background offers a prolonged period of small effective population size or one or more recent bottlenecks as alternatives; it does not establish multiple bottlenecks as the cause. Page numbers are not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 49 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Lent PC Muskoxen and their Hunters 1999 Norman, University of Oklahoma Press
  2. Matheus P Kunz M Guthrie RD Using frequency distributions of radiocarbon dates to detect relative changes in Pleistocene mammal populations – a test case from northern Alaska Proceedings of the 3rd International Mammoth Conference, May 24–29, 2003, Dawson City, Yukon, Abstracts and Program

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
MacPhee, R. D., Tikhonov, A. N., Mol, D., & Greenwood, A. D.
Affiliations
  • American Museum of Natural History (US)
  • Russian Academy of Sciences (RU)
Corresponding author
MacPhee, Ross DE
Venue
BMC Evolutionary Biology
Published
2005-10-06
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
49-49
ISSN
1471-2148 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1574062644
Cited by
65
References
49
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 5
FWCI
3.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • BMC Evolutionary Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Site cant be reached (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation (0117400)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic diversity and population structure
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Forensic and Genetic Research
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
Keywords
Ovibos moschatus, genetic diversity, Late Quaternary, mitochondrial haplotypes, Last Glacial Maximum, range collapse, megafauna, Northeast Asia, Arctic Archipelago, Taimyr Peninsula, New Siberian Islands, cytochrome b, hypervariable region
MeSH terms
Animals, DNA, Mitochondrial, Biological Evolution, Gene Frequency, Genetics, Population, Geography, Haplotypes, Models, Theoretical, Molecular Sequence Data, Phylogeny, Ruminants, Time Factors, Genetic Variation, Sequence Analysis, DNA, DNA Primers, Evolution, Molecular, Cytochromes b

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