Female philopatry and male dispersal in a cryptic, bush-dwelling antelope: A combined molecular and behavioural approach

Journal of Zoology

Volumn 280, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 213-220

  Apio, A ^a,b   Kabasa, J D ^b   Ketmaier, V ^a   Schroder C ^a   Plath, M ^a,c   Tiedemann, R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF POTSDAM   (Germany)

^b MAKERERE UNIVERSITY   (Uganda)

^c GOETHE UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Inbreeding avoidance; Kin selection; Matrilinearity; Natal dispersal; Spiral horned antelopes

Indexed keywords

GENETIC MARKER; GENETIC VARIATION; HOME RANGE; INBREEDING AVOIDANCE; KIN SELECTION; MITOCHONDRIAL DNA; NATAL DISPERSAL; PHILOPATRY; RELATEDNESS; SEX-RELATED DIFFERENCE; UNGULATE;

QUEEN ELIZABETH NATIONAL PARK; UGANDA;

MAMMALIA; TRAGELAPHUS; TRAGELAPHUS SCRIPTUS; UNGULATA;

EID: 78650843910     PISSN: 09528369     EISSN: 14697998     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-7998.2009.00654.x     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Apio, A., Plath, M., Tiedemann, R. & Wronski, T. (2007). Age-dependent mating tactics in male bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus). Behaviour 144, 585-610.
2. Bayes, M.K., Smith, K.L., Alberts, S.C., Altmann, J. & Bruford, M.W. (2000). Testing the reliability of microsatellite typing from faecal DNA in the savannah baboon. Conserv. Genet. 1, 173-176.
3. Beja-Pereira, A., Zeyl, E., Ouragh, L., Nagash, H., Ferrand, N., Taberlet, P. & Luikart, G. (2004). Twenty polymorphic microsatellites in two of North America's most threatened ungulates: Gazella dorcus and Ammotragus lervia (Bovidae; Artiodactyla). Mol. Ecol. Notes 4, 452-455.
4. Cegelski, C.C., Waits, L.P., Anderson, N.J., Flagstad, O., Strobeck, C. & Kyle, C.J. (2006). Genetic diversity and population structure of wolverine (Gulo gulo) populations at the southern edge of their current distribution in North America with implications for genetic viability. Conserv. Genet. 7, 197-211.
5. Clutton-Brock, T.H., Guinness, F.E. & Albon, S.D. (1982). Red deer: behaviour and ecology of two sexes. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
6. Cole, L.C. (1949). The measurement of interspecific association. Ecology 30, 411-424.
7. Excoffier, L., Laval, G. & Schneider, S. (2005). Arlequin ver 3.0: an integrated software package for population genetics data analysis. Evol. Bioinformatics Online 1, 47-50.
8. Festa-Bianchet, M. (1991). The social system of bighorn sheep: grouping patterns, kinship and female dominance rank. Anim. Behav. 42, 71-82.
9. Goudet, J. (2002). FSTAT, Version 2.9.3.2. Lausanne: Institute for Ecology, University of Lausanne.
10. Greenwood, P.J. (1980). Mating systems, philopatry and dispersal in birds and mammals. Anim. Behav. 28, 1140-1162.
11. Griffin, A.S. & West, S.A. (2003). Kin discrimination and the benefit of helping in cooperatively breeding vertebrates. Science 302, 634-636.
12. Gross, M.R. & Sargent, R.C. (1985). The evolution of male and female parental care in fishes. Am. Zool. 25, 807-822.
13. Hamilton, W.D. (1964). The genetical evolution of social behaviour I, II. J. Theor. Biol. 7, 1-52.
14. Hemelrijk, C.K. (1990). A matrix partial correlation test used in investigations of reciprocity and other social interaction patterns at group level. J. Theor. Biol. 143, 405-420.
15. Hooge, P.N. (1998). Animal movement analysis ArcView extensions. Glacier Bay Field Station: USGS-BRD, Alaska Biological Science Center.
16. Kappeler, P.M., Wimmer, B., Zinner, D. & Tautz, D. (2002). The hidden matrilineal structure of a solitary lemur: implications for primate social evolution. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. Ser. B 296, 1755-1763.
17. Krause, J. & Ruxton, G.D. (2002). Living in groups. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
18. Lehmann, L. & Perrin, N. (2003). Inbreeding avoidance through kin selection: choosy females boost male dispersal. Am. Nat. 162, 638-652.
19. Lidicker, W.Z. (1975). The role of dispersal in the demography of small mammals. In Small mammals: productivity and dynamics of populations: 103-128. Petrusewicz, K., Golley, E.B. & Ryszkowski, L. (Eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20. Lincoln, F.C. (1934). The operation of homing instinct. Bird-Banding 5, 149-155.
21. Lock, J.M. (1977). The vegetation of the Rwenzori National Park, Uganda. Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 98, 372-148.
22. Michener, G.R. (1983). Kin identification, matriarchies, and the evolution of sociality in ground dwelling sciurids. In Advances in the study of mammalian behavior: 528-572. Eisenberg, J.F. & Kleiman, D.G. (Eds). Shippenberg: American Society of Mammalogists.
23. Moodley, Y. & Bruford, M.W. (2007). Molecular biogeography: towards an integrated framework for conserving panafrican biodiversity. PLoS One 5, 1-9.
24. Moodley, Y., Bruford, M.W., Bleidorn, C., Wronski, T., Apio, A. & Plath, M. (2009). Analysis of mitochondrial DNA data reveals non-monophyly in the bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus) complex. Mamm. Biol. 74, 418-422.
25. Murray, M.G. (1982). Home range, dispersal and the clan system of impala. Afr. J. Ecol. 20, 253-269.
26. Nelson, M.E. & Mech, L.D. (1987). Demes within a north eastern Minnesota deer population. In Mammalian dispersal patterns: 3-24. Chepko-Sade, B.D. & Halpin, Z.T. (Eds). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
27. Nyakaana, S. & Arctander, P. (1999). Population genetic structure of the African elephant in Uganda based on variation at mitochondrial and nuclear loci: evidence for male-biased gene flow. Mol. Ecol. 8, 1105-1115.
28. Owen-Smith, R.N. (1976). The problem of territoriality, with reference to the tragelaphine antelopes. Publ. Univ. Pretoria 97, 80-83.
29. Packer, C. (1986). The ecology of sociality in felids. In Ecological aspects of social evolution: 429-451. Rubenstein, D.I. & Wrangham, R.W. (Eds). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
30. Peakall, R. & Smouse, P.E. (2006). GENALEX 6: genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research. Mol. Ecol. Notes 6, 288-295.
31. Pritchard, J.K., Stephens, M. & Donnelly, P. (2000). Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155, 945-959.
32. Shields, W.M. (1987). Dispersal and mating systems: investigating their causal connections. In Mammalian dispersal patterns: 3-24. Chepko-Sade, B.D. & Halpin, Z.T. (Eds). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
33. Taylor, L.R. & Taylor, R.A.J. (1977). Aggregation, migration and population mechanics. Nature 265, 415-421.
34. Tiedemann, R., Harder, J., Gmeiner, C. & Haase, E. (1996). Mitochondrial DNA sequence patterns of Harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) from the North and the Baltic Sea. Z. Säugetierk. 61, 104-111.
35. Tiedemann, R., Hardy, O., Vekemans, X. & Milinkovitch, M.C. (2000). Higher impact of female than male migration on population structure in large mammals. Mol. Ecol. 9, 1159-1163.
36. Tiedemann, R. & Milinkovitch, M.C. (1999). Culture and genetic evolution in whales. Science 284, 2055a.
37. Toldo, S.S., Fries, R., Steffen, P., Neibergs, H.L., Barendse, W., Womack, J.E., Hetzel, D.J.S. & Stranzinger, G. (1993). Physically mapped, cosmid-derived microsatellite markers as anchor loci on bovine chromosomes. Mamm. Genome 4, 720-727.
38. de Vries, H. (1993). The rowwise correlation between two proximity matrices and the partial rowwise correlation. Psychometrika 58, 53-69.
39. Waser, P. & Jones, W.T. (1983). Natal philopatry among solitary mammals. Q. Rev. Biol. 58, 355-390.
40. Waser, P.M. (1975). Spatial association and social interactions in a " solitary ungulate" : the bushbuck Tragelaphus scriptus (Pallas). Z. Tierpsychol. 37, 24-36.
41. Whitehead, H. (1998). Cultural selection and genetic diversity in matrilineal whales. Science 282, 1708-1711.
42. Wrangham, R.W. (1980). An ecological model of femalebonded primate groups. Behaviour 75, 262-300.
43. Wronski, T. (2005). Home range overlap and spatial organisation as indicators for territoriality among male bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus). J. Zool. (Lond.) 266, 227-235.
44. Wronski, T. & Apio, A. (2006). Home range overlap, social vicinity and agonistic interactions denoting matrilineal organisation in bushbuck, Tragelaphus scriptus. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 59, 819-828.
45. Wronski, T., Apio, A. & Plath, M. (2006). The communicatory significance of localised defecation sites in bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 60, 368-378.
46. Wronski, T., Apio, A., Plath, M. & Averbeck, C. (2009). Do ecotypes of bushbuck differ in grouping patterns?. Acta Ethol. 12, 71-78.