Upland Habitat Quality and Historic Landscape Composition Influence Genetic Variation of a Pond-Breeding Salamander

Diversity

Volumn 5, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 724-733

  Richter, Stephen C ^a   Price, Steven J ^b   Kross, Chelsea S ^a   Alexander, Jeremiah R ^a   Dorcas, Michael E ^c  

^a EASTERN KENTUCKY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

^c DAVIDSON COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Ambystoma maculatum; Historic landscapes; Microsatellite DNA; Population genetics; Upland core habitat

Indexed keywords

AMPHIBIAN; BIOINDICATOR; BREEDING POPULATION; CONSERVATION STATUS; DNA; GENETIC VARIATION; HABITAT QUALITY; LANDSCAPE STRUCTURE; POPULATION GENETICS; SPATIAL VARIATION; SPECIES CONSERVATION; TEMPORAL VARIATION; WILD POPULATION;

CHARLOTTE; NORTH CAROLINA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84890959883     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14242818     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/d5040724     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Lomolino, M.V.; Riddle, B.R.; Whittaker, R.J.; Brown, J.H. Biogeography, 4th ed.; Sinauer Associates, Inc.: Sunderland, MA, USA, 2010.
2. Moilanen, A.; Franco, A.M.A.; Early, R.I.; Fox, R.; Wintle, B.; Thomas, C.D. Prioritizing multiple-use landscapes for conservation: Methods for large multi-species planning problems. Proc. Biol. Sci. 2005, 272, 1885-1891.
3. McKinney, M.L. Urbanization, biodiversity, and conservation. BioScience 2002, 52, 883-890.
4. Jetz, W.; Wilcove, D.S.; Dobson, A.P. Projected impacts of climate and landscape change on the global diversity of birds. PLoS One 2007, 5, 1211-1219.
5. Syphard, A.D.; Clarke, K.C.; Franklin, J.; Regan, H.M.; McGinnis, M. Forecasts of habitat loss and fragmentation due to urban growth are sensitive to source input. J. Environ. Manag. 2011, 92, 1882-1898.
6. Richardson, J.L. Divergent landscape effects on population connectivity in two co-occurring amphibian species. Mol. Ecol. 2012, 21, 4437-4451.
7. Hamer, A.J.; McDonnell, M.J. Amphibian ecology and conservation in the urbanizing world: A review. Biol. Conserv. 2008, 141, 2432-2449.
8. Stuart, S.N.; Chanson, J.S.; Cox, N.A.; Young, B.E.; Rodrigues, A.S.L.; Fischman, D.L.; Waller, R.W. Status and trends of amphibian declines and extinctions worldwide. Science 2004, 306, 1783-1786.
9. Harper, E.B.; Rittenhouse, T.A.G.; Semlitsch, R.D. Demographic consequences of terrestrial habitat loss for pool-breeding amphibians: Predicting extinction risks associated with inadequate size of buffer zones. Conserv. Biol. 2008, 22, 1205-1215.
10. Rothermel, B.B. Migratory success of juveniles: A potential constraint on connectivity for pond-breeding amphibians. Ecol. Appl. 2004, 14, 1535-1546.
11. Cushman, S.A. Effects of habitat loss and fragmentation on amphibians: A review and prospectus. Biol. Conserv. 2006, 128, 231-240.
12. Price, S.J.; Dorcas, M.E.; Gallant, A.L.; Klaver, R.W.; Willson, J.D. Three decades of urbanization: Estimating the impact of land-cover change on stream salamander populations. Biol. Conserv. 2006, 133, 436-441.
13. Holzhauer, S.I.J.; Ekschmitt, K.; Sander, A.-C.; Dauber, J.; Wolters, V. Effect of historic landscape change on the genetic structure of the bush-cricket Metrioptera roeseli. Landscape Ecol. 2006, 21, 891-899.
14. Orsini, L.; Corander, J.; Alasentie, A.; Hanski, I. Genetic spatial structure in a butterfly metapopulation correlates better with past than present demographic structure. Mol. Ecol. 2008, 17, 2629-2642.
15. Porej, D.; Micacchion, M.; Hetherington, T.E. Core terrestrial habitat for conservation of local populations of salamanders and wood frogs in agricultural landscapes. Biol. Conserv. 2004, 120, 399-409.
16. Semlitsch, R.D.; Bodie, J.R. Biological criteria for buffer zones around wetlands and riparian habitats for amphibians and reptiles. Conserv. Biol. 2003, 17, 1219-1228.
17. Gamble, L.R.; McGarigal, K.; Jenkins, C.L.; Timm, B.C. Limitations of regulated "buffer zones" for the conservation of marbled salamanders. Wetlands 2006, 26, 298-306.
18. Semlitsch, R.D. Biological delineation of terrestrial buffer zones for pond-breeding salamanders. Conserv. Biol. 1998, 12, 1113-1119.
19. Van Buskirk, J. Local and landscape influence on amphibian occurrence and abundance. Ecology 2005, 86, 1936-1947.
20. Zamudio, K.R.; Wieczorek, A.M. Fine-Scale spatial genetic structure and dispersal among spotted salamander (Ambystoma maculatum) breeding populations. Mol. Ecol. 2007, 16, 257-274.
21. Greenwald, K.R.; Gibbs, H.L.; Waite, T.A. Efficacy of land-cover models in predicting isolation of marbled salamander populations in a fragmented landscape. Conserv. Biol. 2009, 23, 1232-1241.
22. Purrenhage, J.L.; Niewiarowski, S.P.H.; Moore, F.B.G. Population structure of spotted salamanders (Ambystoma maculatum) in a fragmented landscape. Mol. Ecol. 2009, 18, 235-247.
23. Richter, S.C.; Crother, B.I.; Broughton, R.E. Genetic consequences of population reduction and geographic isolation in the critically endangered frog. Copeia. 2009, 4, 799-806.
24. Spear, S.F.; Storfer, A. Landscape genetic structure of coastal tailed frogs (Ascaphus truei) in protected vs. managed forests. Mol. Ecol. 2008, 17, 4642-4656.
25. Savage, W.K.; Zamudio, K.R. Spotted Salamanders, Ambystoma maculatum. In Amphibian Declines: The Conservation Status of United States Species; Lannoo, M.J., Ed.; University of California Press: Berkeley, CA, USA, 2005; pp. 621-627.
26. Julian, S.E.; Kings, T.L.; Savage, W.K. Isolation and characterization of novel tetra-nucleotide microsatellite DNA markers for the spotted salamander, Ambystoma maculatum. Mol. Ecol. Notes 2003, 3, 7-9.
27. Goudet, J. FSTAT (Version 1.2): A computer program to calculate F-statistics. J. Hered. 1995, 86, 485-486.
28. Rothermel, B.B.; Semlitsch, R.D. An experimental investigation of landscape resistance of forest versus old-field habitats of emigrating juvenile amphibians. Conserv. Biol. 2002, 16, 1324-1332.
29. Rothermel, B.B.; Semlitsch, R.D. Consequences of forest fragmentation for juvenile survival in spotted (Ambystoma maculatum) and marbled (Ambystoma opacum) salamanders. Can. J. Zool. 2006, 84, 797-807.
30. Burnham, K.P.; Anderson, D.R. Model Selection and Multi-Model Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach, 2nd ed.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2002.
31. Hart, J.F. Cropland concentrations in the south. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 1978, 68, 505-517.
32. Hart, J.F. Land use change in a piedmont county. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 1980, 70, 492-527.
33. Griffith, J.A.; Stehman, S.V.; Loveland, T.R. Landscape trends in Mid-Atlantic and Southeastern United States ecoregions. Environ. Manag. 2003, 32, 572-588.
34. Napton, D.E.; Auch, R.F.; Headley, R.; Taylor, J.L. Land changes and their driving forces in the Southeastern United States. Reg. Environ. Change 2010, 10, 37-53.
35. Richter, S.C.; Jackson, J.A.; Hinderliter, M.; Epperson, D.; Theodorakis, C.W.; Adams, S.M. Conservation genetics of the largest cluster of federally threatened gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) colonies with implications for species management. Herpetologica 2011, 67, 406-419.
36. Armstrong, D.P. Integrating the metapopulation and habitat paradigms for understanding broad-scale declines of species. Conserv. Biol. 2005, 19, 1402-1410.
37. Brehm, K. The Acceptance of 0.2-metre Tunnels by Amphibians during Their Migration to the Breeding Site. In Amphibians and Roads; Langton, T.E.S., Ed.; ACO Polymer Products Ltd: Bedfordshire, UK, 1989; pp. 29-42.
38. Mazerolle, M.J. Drainage ditches facilitate frog movements in a hostile landscape. Landsc. Ecol. 2004, 20, 579-590.
39. White, D.; Minotti, P.G.; Barczak, M.J.; Sifneos, J.C.; Freemark, K.E.; Santelmann, M.V.; Preston, E.M. Assessing risks to biodiversity from future landscape change. Conserv. Biol. 1997, 11, 349-360.