DOCSLIB.ORG

Climate Change and the Conservation of Marmots

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Climate Change and the Conservation of Marmots Vol.5, No.5A, 36-43 (2013) Natural Science http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ns.2013.55A005 Climate change and the conservation of marmots Kenneth B. Armitage Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, USA; [email protected] Received 8 March 2013; revised 10 April 2013; accepted 24 April 2013 Copyright © 2013 Kenneth B. Armitage. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. ABSTRACT for any significant evolutionary response to dry- ness. The species that live in high, alpine mea- Conservation of marmots, large ground-dwelling dows where tree and shrub invasions occur are squirrels restricted to the northern hemisphere, most threatened with extinction. Captive breed- was impacted by direct human activity through ing can preserve marmot species in the short- hunting or modifying ecosystem dynamics. Re- run, but is impractical over the long-term. Wide- gulating human activities reduced the threat of spread species are unlikely to be endangered in extinction. Climate change, an indirect human the foreseeable future, but local, low elevation impact, threatens marmot survival through glo- populations will be lost. bal warming and extreme weather events. Most marmot species occupy a harsh environment Keywords: Climate Change; Global Warming; characterized by a short growing season and a Marmot; Snowmelt; Hibernation; Temperature long, cold season without food. Marmots cope with seasonality by hibernating. Their large size increases the efficiency of fat accumulation and 1. INTRODUCTION its use as the sole energy source during hiber- The currently recognized 15 species of marmots (Ta- nation. Marmot physiology is highly adapted to ble 1) are restricted to the northern hemisphere [1]. The coping with low environmental temperatures; habitats occupied by marmots range from small, widely they are stressed by high heat loads. Global scattered alpine meadows to the wide-spread steppe en- warming since the last ice age reduced the geo- vironment. All species except M. bobak and M. monax graphic distribution of some of the 15 species of are mountain dwellers [2]. Although habitat characteris- marmots. Recent warming resulted in a move- tics vary, they share the following major attributes: 1) ment upslope of their lower elevation boundary. meadow or grassland for foraging; 2) eastern to southern This process likely will continue because warm- exposure where snow melts earlier than on northern or ing is associated with drier unpalatable vegeta- western exposures; 3) a moderate to steep slope that pro- tion. Drought reduces reproduction and increa- ses mortality; thus decreased summer rainfall in vides good drainage; 4) a solid structure that supports a the montane environments where marmots live burrowing habit and often associated with rocks or talus; may cause local extinction. Snow cover, a major and 5) typically at high elevations, above or near timber- environmental factor, is essential to insulate hi- lines or if lower, in forest openings that may be of an- bernation burrows from low, stressful tempera- thropogenic origin [2]. tures. However, prolonged vernal snow cover re- This review will be in four parts. First, I will describe duces reproduction and increases mortality. Mon- the history and current situation of the species of mar- tane areas currently lacking marmot populations mots on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Sec- because vernal snow cover persists beyond the ond, the harsh environment in which marmots live and time that marmots must begin foraging may be- the importance of snow cover will be discussed to estab- come colonized if warming causes earlier snow lish the foundation for evaluating the potential effects of melt. This benefit will be short-lived because climate change on marmot biology. Third, known responses decreased precipitation likely will result in un- to global warming, including those following the last palatable vegetation. Although some marmot po- glacial maximum, will be described. Fourth, future pos- pulations are physiologically adapted to a warmer sible responses to global warming will be described and climate, global warming will increase too rapidly will include both potential beneficial and harmful effects. Copyright © 2013 SciRes. OPEN ACCESS K. B. Armitage / Natural Science 5 (2013) 36-43 37 2. CURRENT CONSERVATION populations apparently increased because deer (Odocoi- RESPONSES OF THREATENED leus hemionus) abundance increased when additional SPECIES food became available in the clear-cuts. Deer numbers subsequently declined and it is likely that wolves and Three species currently are considered under threat of cougars directed more efforts toward marmots [7]. A ri- extinction (Table 1). The reasons for the listing differ for gorous captive breeding and reintroduction program was each species; human impacts are critical for all three. established in 2003; marmot numbers increased to 300 - The Vancouver Island marmot story illustrates how 400 by 2011 [6]. human activity at one ecosystem level can have uninten- Local human populations have long utilized the en- ded consequences on the ecosystem processes and drive dangered M. sibirica for food. However, early in the 20th a highly endangered species nearly to extinction. This century a market for skins developed in Europe and an species occupies sub-alpine forb-grass meadows on steep estimated 115 million skins were prepared between 1906 slopes where snow cover and avalanches inhibit tree and 1994 [8]. Skin production underwent a slow decline growth [3]. Estimates of population numbers indicate until new markets developed, particularly in China. The that only 50 to 100 individuals existed in the late 1970’s high price of a pelt (as much as $7.64) increased the [3]. Beginning in 1981, the marmots colonized new habi- number of hunters and hunting pressure [9]. Hunting tats produced by clear-cut logging [4]. The population occurred during the reproductive season, which reduced increased to more than 200 individuals, then declined to recruitment. In 2005, hunting was banned throughout the about 100 individuals by 1995 [5]. The clear-cuts regen- erated; marmots went extinct in those habitats and con- country. The ban is ignored in some areas, but the popu- tinued to decline in the natural habitats to about 30 indi- lation appears to have stabilized in other areas. The sur- viduals in 2003 [6]. vival of the species seems assured because it thrives in The decline apparently was driven by wolf (Canis lu- areas where hunting is banned or does not occur for reli- pus) and cougar (Puma concolor) predation [7]. Predator gious reason [9]. Over the long term, regulation of hunt- ing must consider the use of marmots by local popula- Table 1. The currently recognized 15 species of marmots (Mar- tions for food, fur, and medicinal products. Recent stud- mota). The status of those species under threat of extinction as ies of the effect on extinction probabilities for the alpine listed in the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, version 3.1, marmot for three harvesting systems (constant-effort, is indicated except for those species of least concern. Species constant-yield, and threshold) indicated that threshold that typically skip one or more years between successive re- harvesting in which exploitation occurs only in those productions are marked with an asterisk*. years in which a population exceeds a given threshold Scientific name Common name IUCN listing and individuals are removed until the population reaches its threshold provided the highest mean yields in relation Eurasia to extinction risk [10]. Thus, if the social and population M. marmota* Alpine biology of a species are used as the basis for regulating * exploitation, sustained yields and a sustained population M. caudata Red or long-tailed * are possible. M. menzbieri Menzbier’s Vulnerable Numbers of the vulnerable Menzbier’s marmot have M. camtschatica* Black-capped decreased because of past hunting, poisoning campaigns M. himalayana Himalayan for pest surveys, overgrazing, and habitat destruction. Hence the populations have become more fragmented * M. sibirica Siberian or tarbagan Endangered and breeding has decreased [11]. Restriction of hunting is M. bobak* Steppe necessary to reduce the extinction probability of this M. baibacina* Gray species. These three species came under the threat of extinction M. kastschenkoi Forest-steppe by direct impacts on marmots or their environments by North America human activities. These and other species in local popu- M. broweri Arctic or Alaskan lations of some wide-ranging species are threatened indi- rectly by anthropogenic climate change. Climate change M. monax Woodchuck is predicted to affect marmots by increasing the tem- M. flaviventris Yellow-bellied perature of their environments and by producing more M. caligata* Hoary extreme weather events [12]. The likely significance of M. olympus* Olympic warming and extreme weather events can be understood by examining the nature of the harsh environment where M. vancouverensis* Vancouver Island Critically endangered marmots live. Copyright © 2013 SciRes. OPEN ACCESS 38 K. B. Armitage / Natural Science 5 (2013) 36-43 3. THE HARSH ENVIRONMENT greatest [19-21]. The physiological response to heat stress may vary with the environmental conditions en- The ground-dwelling squirrels (spermophiles, prairie countered by local populations.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mammal Species Native to the USA and Canada for Which the MIL Has an Image (296) 31 July 2021
    Mammal species native to the USA and Canada for which the MIL has an image (296) 31 July 2021 ARTIODACTYLA (includes CETACEA) (38) ANTILOCAPRIDAE - pronghorns Antilocapra americana - Pronghorn BALAENIDAE - bowheads and right whales 1. Balaena mysticetus – Bowhead Whale BALAENOPTERIDAE -rorqual whales 1. Balaenoptera acutorostrata – Common Minke Whale 2. Balaenoptera borealis - Sei Whale 3. Balaenoptera brydei - Bryde’s Whale 4. Balaenoptera musculus - Blue Whale 5. Balaenoptera physalus - Fin Whale 6. Eschrichtius robustus - Gray Whale 7. Megaptera novaeangliae - Humpback Whale BOVIDAE - cattle, sheep, goats, and antelopes 1. Bos bison - American Bison 2. Oreamnos americanus - Mountain Goat 3. Ovibos moschatus - Muskox 4. Ovis canadensis - Bighorn Sheep 5. Ovis dalli - Thinhorn Sheep CERVIDAE - deer 1. Alces alces - Moose 2. Cervus canadensis - Wapiti (Elk) 3. Odocoileus hemionus - Mule Deer 4. Odocoileus virginianus - White-tailed Deer 5. Rangifer tarandus -Caribou DELPHINIDAE - ocean dolphins 1. Delphinus delphis - Common Dolphin 2. Globicephala macrorhynchus - Short-finned Pilot Whale 3. Grampus griseus - Risso's Dolphin 4. Lagenorhynchus albirostris - White-beaked Dolphin 5. Lissodelphis borealis - Northern Right-whale Dolphin 6. Orcinus orca - Killer Whale 7. Peponocephala electra - Melon-headed Whale 8. Pseudorca crassidens - False Killer Whale 9. Sagmatias obliquidens - Pacific White-sided Dolphin 10. Stenella coeruleoalba - Striped Dolphin 11. Stenella frontalis – Atlantic Spotted Dolphin 12. Steno bredanensis - Rough-toothed Dolphin 13. Tursiops truncatus - Common Bottlenose Dolphin MONODONTIDAE - narwhals, belugas 1. Delphinapterus leucas - Beluga 2. Monodon monoceros - Narwhal PHOCOENIDAE - porpoises 1. Phocoena phocoena - Harbor Porpoise 2. Phocoenoides dalli - Dall’s Porpoise PHYSETERIDAE - sperm whales Physeter macrocephalus – Sperm Whale TAYASSUIDAE - peccaries Dicotyles tajacu - Collared Peccary CARNIVORA (48) CANIDAE - dogs 1. Canis latrans - Coyote 2.
    [Show full text]
  • North American Game Birds Or Animals
    North American Game Birds & Game Animals LARGE GAME Bear: Black Bear, Brown Bear, Grizzly Bear, Polar Bear Goat: bezoar goat, ibex, mountain goat, Rocky Mountain goat Bison, Wood Bison Moose, including Shiras Moose Caribou: Barren Ground Caribou, Dolphin Caribou, Union Caribou, Muskox Woodland Caribou Pronghorn Mountain Lion Sheep: Barbary Sheep, Bighorn Deer: Axis Deer, Black-tailed Deer, Sheep, California Bighorn Sheep, Chital, Columbian Black-tailed Deer, Dall’s Sheep, Desert Bighorn Mule Deer, White-tailed Deer Sheep, Lanai Mouflon Sheep, Nelson Bighorn Sheep, Rocky Elk: Rocky Mountain Elk, Tule Elk Mountain Bighorn Sheep, Stone Sheep, Thinhorn Mountain Sheep Gemsbok SMALL GAME Armadillo Marmot, including Alaska marmot, groundhog, hoary marmot, Badger woodchuck Beaver Marten, including American marten and pine marten Bobcat Mink North American Civet Cat/Ring- tailed Cat, Spotted Skunk Mole Coyote Mouse Ferret, feral ferret Muskrat Fisher Nutria Fox: arctic fox, gray fox, red fox, swift Opossum fox Pig: feral swine, javelina, wild boar, Lynx wild hogs, wild pigs Pika Skunk, including Striped Skunk Porcupine and Spotted Skunk Prairie Dog: Black-tailed Prairie Squirrel: Abert’s Squirrel, Black Dogs, Gunnison’s Prairie Dogs, Squirrel, Columbian Ground White-tailed Prairie Dogs Squirrel, Gray Squirrel, Flying Squirrel, Fox Squirrel, Ground Rabbit & Hare: Arctic Hare, Black- Squirrel, Pine Squirrel, Red Squirrel, tailed Jackrabbit, Cottontail Rabbit, Richardson’s Ground Squirrel, Tree Belgian Hare, European
    [Show full text]
  • Database Support for the Alaska Comprehensive Conservation Strategy Planning Effort
    DATABASE SUPPORT FOR THE ALASKA COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION STRATEGY PLANNING EFFORT By Tracey Gotthardt, Tamara Fields, Kelly Walton, Keith Boggs and Santosh KC Alaska Natural Heritage Program College of Arts and Sciences University of Alaska Anchorage 707 A Street Anchorage, AK 99501 June 2010 Partnership in Nongame Wildlife Research - AKNHP ii Partnership in Nongame Wildlife Research - AKNHP iii Partnership in Nongame Wildlife Research - AKNHP ABSTRACT The Alaska Natural Heritage Program (AKNHP) entered into a partnership with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game’s (ADF&G) Wildlife Diversity Program to summarize biological, ecological, and distribution information on a number of species featured in their Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy (CWCS) to aid with informed decision-making regarding the conservation status of these animals. The products resulting from this partnership, which occurred between 2004 and 2007, included summarizing ecological and biological data for 92 “featured species” to assess their conservation status rank. Additionally, range and element occurrence distribution maps were created for a subset of these species (56 of the 92), and the associated spatial information was entered into AKNHP’s Biotics database. The purpose of this project was to provide ongoing database support for the CWCS featured species dataset and to enhance its utility through the creation of integrated output products to ADF&G and its partner agencies via a web-based interface. During the course of this project AKNHP staff quality
    [Show full text]
  • Hoary Marmot
    Alaska Species Ranking System - Hoary marmot Hoary marmot Class: Mammalia Order: Rodentia Marmota caligata Review Status: Peer-reviewed Version Date: 17 December 2018 Conservation Status NatureServe: Agency: G Rank:G5 ADF&G: IUCN:Least Concern Audubon AK: S Rank: S4 USFWS: BLM: Final Rank Conservation category: V. Orange unknown status and either high biological vulnerability or high action need Category Range Score Status -20 to 20 0 Biological -50 to 50 -32 Action -40 to 40 4 Higher numerical scores denote greater concern Status - variables measure the trend in a taxon’s population status or distribution. Higher status scores denote taxa with known declining trends. Status scores range from -20 (increasing) to 20 (decreasing). Score Population Trend in Alaska (-10 to 10) 0 Unknown. Distribution Trend in Alaska (-10 to 10) 0 Unknown. Status Total: 0 Biological - variables measure aspects of a taxon’s distribution, abundance and life history. Higher biological scores suggest greater vulnerability to extirpation. Biological scores range from -50 (least vulnerable) to 50 (most vulnerable). Score Population Size in Alaska (-10 to 10) -6 Unknown, but suspected large. This species is common in suitable habitat (MacDonald and Cook 2009) and has a relatively large range in Alaska. Range Size in Alaska (-10 to 10) -10 Occurs from southeast Alaska north to the Yukon River and from Canada west to Bethel and the eastern Alaska Peninsula (Gunderson et al. 2009; MacDonald and Cook 2009). Absent from nearly all islands in southeast Alaska (MacDonald and Cook 2009), but distribution on islands in southcentral Alaska is unclear (Lance 2002b; L.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020-2022 Federal Wildlife Subsistence Regulations
    Federal Subsistence Management Regulations for the HARVESTHARVEST ofof WILDLIFEWILDLIFE on Federal Public Lands in Alaska Genevieve Muldoon, 10, Eagle, 2020-21 Student Art Contest Winner Ilene Fernandez, 9, Sitka 2014 Student Art Contest Winner Effective 1 July 2020 - 30 June 2022 Subsistence management regulations are available online at www.doi.gov/subsistence/wildlife Reporting Violations To report violations of the regulations in this book or other regulations on Federal public lands and waters in Alaska, please contact: National Parks and Preserves National Park Service ............................. (907) 644-3880 or (800) 478-2724 National Wildlife Refuges U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service .............. (907) 786-3311 or (800) 858-7621 National Forests U.S. Forest Service ............................... (907) 586-8820 Bureau of Land Management areas Bureau of Land Management ................ (907) 271-6623 For Federal permit information, refer to the Directory of Federal Land Management Offices at the back of this book. About this book This book is published by the Federal Subsistence Management Program as an informative summary and guide to annual Federal subsistence hunting regulations contained in the Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR Part 242 and 50 CFR Part 100) and the Federal Register. There may be errors or omissions not identified at press time, or changes made to the regulations after the book is printed. To be certain of current regulations, refer to the official Code of Federal Regulations and the Federal Register publications or contact the Office of Subsistence Management. The regulations may change at any time by special actions of the Federal Subsistence Board. Changes are published in the Federal Register and Board actions or major corrections to this book are posted on the Office of Subsistence Management website, www.doi.gov/subsistence.
    [Show full text]
  • A Global-Scale Evaluation of Mammalian Exposure and Vulnerability to Anthropogenic Climate Change
    A Global-Scale Evaluation of Mammalian Exposure and Vulnerability to Anthropogenic Climate Change Tanya L. Graham A Thesis in The Department of Geography, Planning and Environment Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science (Geography, Urban and Environmental Studies) at Concordia University Montreal, Quebec, Canada March 2018 © Tanya L. Graham, 2018 Abstract A Global-Scale Evaluation of Mammalian Exposure and Vulnerability to Anthropogenic Climate Change Tanya L. Graham There is considerable evidence demonstrating that anthropogenic climate change is impacting species living in the wild. The vulnerability of a given species to such change may be understood as a combination of the magnitude of climate change to which the species is exposed, the sensitivity of the species to changes in climate, and the capacity of the species to adapt to climatic change. I used species distributions and estimates of expected changes in local temperatures per teratonne of carbon emissions to assess the exposure of terrestrial mammal species to human-induced climate change. I evaluated species vulnerability to climate change by combining expected local temperature changes with species conservation status, using the latter as a proxy for species sensitivity and adaptive capacity to climate change. I also performed a global-scale analysis to identify hotspots of mammalian vulnerability to climate change using expected temperature changes, species richness and average species threat level for each km2 across the globe. The average expected change in local annual average temperature for terrestrial mammal species is 1.85 oC/TtC. Highest temperature changes are expected for species living in high northern latitudes, while smaller changes are expected for species living in tropical locations.
    [Show full text]
  • Mammal Inventory of Alaska's National Parks and Preserves
    Mammal Inventory of Alaska’s National Parks and Preserves SOUTHWEST ALASKA NETWORK: Kenai Fjords National Park, Lake Clark National Park and Preserve, and Katmai National Park and Preserve Final Report William Leacock Joseph A. Cook Stephen O. MacDonald Museum of Southwestern Biology MSCO3 2020 University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131 505-277-1358 15 December 2005 National Park Service Alaska Region Inventory and Monitoring Program Report Number: NPS/AKRSWAN/NRTR-2005/05 Cooperative Agreement H8R07010001 Task Agreement J8R07030002 Funding Source: National Park Service, Southwest Alaska Network File Names CookJA_2005_SWAN_MammalsInvFinalRprt_609488a.doc CookJA_2005_SWAN_MammalsInvFinalRprtAppendices_609488b.doc CookJA_2005_SWAN_MammalsInvFinalRprt_609488a.pdf CookJA_2005_SWAN_MammalsInvFinalRprtAppendices_609488b.pdf Recommended Citation Cook, J. A., and S. O. MacDonald. 2005. Mammal inventory of Alaska’s National Parks and Preserves: Southwest Alaska Network: Kenai Fjords National Park, Lake Clark National Park and Preserve, and Katmai National Park and Preserve. National Park Service Alaska Region, Inventory and Monitoring Program Final Report. 57 pages + appendices. Keywords Mammals, small mammals, inventory, NPS Southwest Alaska Network, Kenai Fjords National Park, Lake Clark National Park and Preserve, Katmai National Park and Preserve, Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve Abbreviations ADFG—Alaska Department of Fish and Game ALAG—Alagnak Wild River ANIA—Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve BCP—Beringian Coevolution
    [Show full text]
  • List of Taxa for Which MIL Has Images
    LIST OF 27 ORDERS, 163 FAMILIES, 887 GENERA, AND 2064 SPECIES IN MAMMAL IMAGES LIBRARY 31 JULY 2021 AFROSORICIDA (9 genera, 12 species) CHRYSOCHLORIDAE - golden moles 1. Amblysomus hottentotus - Hottentot Golden Mole 2. Chrysospalax villosus - Rough-haired Golden Mole 3. Eremitalpa granti - Grant’s Golden Mole TENRECIDAE - tenrecs 1. Echinops telfairi - Lesser Hedgehog Tenrec 2. Hemicentetes semispinosus - Lowland Streaked Tenrec 3. Microgale cf. longicaudata - Lesser Long-tailed Shrew Tenrec 4. Microgale cowani - Cowan’s Shrew Tenrec 5. Microgale mergulus - Web-footed Tenrec 6. Nesogale cf. talazaci - Talazac’s Shrew Tenrec 7. Nesogale dobsoni - Dobson’s Shrew Tenrec 8. Setifer setosus - Greater Hedgehog Tenrec 9. Tenrec ecaudatus - Tailless Tenrec ARTIODACTYLA (127 genera, 308 species) ANTILOCAPRIDAE - pronghorns Antilocapra americana - Pronghorn BALAENIDAE - bowheads and right whales 1. Balaena mysticetus – Bowhead Whale 2. Eubalaena australis - Southern Right Whale 3. Eubalaena glacialis – North Atlantic Right Whale 4. Eubalaena japonica - North Pacific Right Whale BALAENOPTERIDAE -rorqual whales 1. Balaenoptera acutorostrata – Common Minke Whale 2. Balaenoptera borealis - Sei Whale 3. Balaenoptera brydei – Bryde’s Whale 4. Balaenoptera musculus - Blue Whale 5. Balaenoptera physalus - Fin Whale 6. Balaenoptera ricei - Rice’s Whale 7. Eschrichtius robustus - Gray Whale 8. Megaptera novaeangliae - Humpback Whale BOVIDAE (54 genera) - cattle, sheep, goats, and antelopes 1. Addax nasomaculatus - Addax 2. Aepyceros melampus - Common Impala 3. Aepyceros petersi - Black-faced Impala 4. Alcelaphus caama - Red Hartebeest 5. Alcelaphus cokii - Kongoni (Coke’s Hartebeest) 6. Alcelaphus lelwel - Lelwel Hartebeest 7. Alcelaphus swaynei - Swayne’s Hartebeest 8. Ammelaphus australis - Southern Lesser Kudu 9. Ammelaphus imberbis - Northern Lesser Kudu 10. Ammodorcas clarkei - Dibatag 11. Ammotragus lervia - Aoudad (Barbary Sheep) 12.
    [Show full text]
  • Limited Phylogeographic Structure and Genetic Variation in Alaska's Arctic
    Journal of Mammalogy, 93(1):66–75, 2012 Limited phylogeographic structure and genetic variation in Alaska’s arctic and alpine endemic, the Alaska marmot AREN M. GUNDERSON*, HAYLEY C. LANIER, AND LINK E. OLSON University of Alaska Museum, University of Alaska Fairbanks, 907 Yukon Drive, Fairbanks, AK 99775, USA (AMG, LEO) Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan, 1109 Geddes Ave., Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA (HCL) * Correspondent: [email protected] Alpine and arctic environments are thought to be more vulnerable to climate change than other lower-elevation and lower-latitude regions. Being both arctic and alpine distributed, the Alaska marmot (Marmota broweri)is uniquely suited to serve as a harbinger of the effects of climate change, yet it is the least-studied marmot species in North America. We investigated the phylogeography and genetic diversity of M. broweri throughout its known distribution in northern Alaska using the mitochondrial cytochrome b gene to better understand how post-Pleistocene changes and population fragmentation have structured genetic diversity. Our results show significant, although shallow, geographic structure among Alaska marmot populations. The diversity within and among populations is consistent with 2 phylogeographic hypotheses: Alaska marmots persisted in the eastern Brooks Range, Ray Mountains, and Kokrines Hills during the Pleistocene and have only recently expanded into the western Brooks Range; and the western Brooks Range served as a refugium as well and those populations have undergone a bottleneck resulting in reduced genetic variation in extant populations. Levels of mitochondrial deoxyribonucleic acid diversity are lower in M. broweri than in any other codistributed small mammal species and alpine mammal species with comparable data available.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecography ECOG-04347 Speed, J
    Ecography ECOG-04347 Speed, J. D. M., Skjelbred, I. Å., Barrio, I. C., Martin, M. D., Berteaux, D., Bueno, C. G., Christie, K. S., Forbes, B. C., Forbey, J., Fortin, D., Grytnes, J.-A., Hoset, K. S., Lecomte, N., Marteinsdóttir, B., Mosbacher, J. B., Pedersen, Å. Ø., Ravolainen, V., Rees, E. C., Skarin, A., Sokolova, N., Thornhill, A. H., Tombre, I. and Soininen, E. M. 2019. Trophic interactions and abiotic factors drive functional and phylogenetic structure of vertebrate herbivore communities across the Arctic tundra biome. – Ecography doi: 10.1111/ecog.04347 Supplementary material Appendix 1 Supplementary methods and results. Table A1. Full list of 76 Arctic vertebrate herbivore species indicating those used in this study and those used by Barrio et al. (2016). GenBank accession numbers are shown for the four genetic markers for all included species. Species names according to IUCN and Birdlife International. Species Used by Genetic Used in Notes cytB COI 12S ND4 Barrio et data current al. 2016 available study Dicrostonyx groenlandicus 1 1 1 KJ556713.1 JF456464.1 AF128937.1 Dicrostonyx hudsonius 1 1 1 AJ238436.1 JF456491.1 Dicrostonyx nelsoni 1 0 0 Dicrostonyx nunatakensis 0 0 0 Dicrostonyx richardsoni 1 1 1 AJ238435.1 JF443818.1 Dicrostonyx torquatus 1 1 1 KT867537.1 Dicrostonyx unalascensis 1 0 0 Dicrostonyx vinogradovi 1 0 0 Lemmus amurensis 0 1 1 FJ025979.1 Lemmus lemmus 1 1 1 JX483908.1 Lemmus portenkoi 1 0 0 Lemmus sibiricus 1 1 1 AY219144.1 Lemmus trimucronatus 1 1 1 AF119276.1 JF456714.1 AF128943.1 Synaptomys borealis 1 1 1 AF119259.1 JF457125.1 AF128932.1 Arvicola amphibius 1 1 1 KM005047.1 AY332681.1 AF128938.1 Alticola lemminus 1 1 1 KJ556633.1 Microtus miurus 1 1 1 EF608581.1 Microtus abbreviatus 1 1 1 AF163890.1 1 Species Used by Genetic Used in Notes cytB COI 12S ND4 Barrio et data current al.
    [Show full text]
  • FEIS Citation Retrieval System Keywords
    FEIS Citation Retrieval System Keywords 29,958 entries as KEYWORD (PARENT) Descriptive phrase AB (CANADA) Alberta ABEESC (PLANTS) Abelmoschus esculentus, okra ABEGRA (PLANTS) Abelia × grandiflora [chinensis × uniflora], glossy abelia ABERT'S SQUIRREL (MAMMALS) Sciurus alberti ABERT'S TOWHEE (BIRDS) Pipilo aberti ABIABI (BRYOPHYTES) Abietinella abietina, abietinella moss ABIALB (PLANTS) Abies alba, European silver fir ABIAMA (PLANTS) Abies amabilis, Pacific silver fir ABIBAL (PLANTS) Abies balsamea, balsam fir ABIBIF (PLANTS) Abies bifolia, subalpine fir ABIBRA (PLANTS) Abies bracteata, bristlecone fir ABICON (PLANTS) Abies concolor, white fir ABICONC (ABICON) Abies concolor var. concolor, white fir ABICONL (ABICON) Abies concolor var. lowiana, Rocky Mountain white fir ABIDUR (PLANTS) Abies durangensis, Coahuila fir ABIES SPP. (PLANTS) firs ABIETINELLA SPP. (BRYOPHYTES) Abietinella spp., mosses ABIFIR (PLANTS) Abies firma, Japanese fir ABIFRA (PLANTS) Abies fraseri, Fraser fir ABIGRA (PLANTS) Abies grandis, grand fir ABIHOL (PLANTS) Abies holophylla, Manchurian fir ABIHOM (PLANTS) Abies homolepis, Nikko fir ABILAS (PLANTS) Abies lasiocarpa, subalpine fir ABILASA (ABILAS) Abies lasiocarpa var. arizonica, corkbark fir ABILASB (ABILAS) Abies lasiocarpa var. bifolia, subalpine fir ABILASL (ABILAS) Abies lasiocarpa var. lasiocarpa, subalpine fir ABILOW (PLANTS) Abies lowiana, Rocky Mountain white fir ABIMAG (PLANTS) Abies magnifica, California red fir ABIMAGM (ABIMAG) Abies magnifica var. magnifica, California red fir ABIMAGS (ABIMAG) Abies
    [Show full text]
  • Dental Pathology of the Hoary Marmot (Marmota Caligata), Groundhog (Marmota Monax) and Alaska Marmot (Marmota Broweri)
    UC Davis UC Davis Previously Published Works Title Dental Pathology of the Hoary Marmot (Marmota caligata), Groundhog (Marmota monax) and Alaska Marmot (Marmota broweri). Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8j69r801 Journal Journal of comparative pathology, 156(1) ISSN 0021-9975 Authors Winer, JN Arzi, B Leale, DM et al. Publication Date 2017 DOI 10.1016/j.jcpa.2016.10.005 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California J. Comp. Path. 2016, Vol. -,1e11 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect www.elsevier.com/locate/jcpa DISEASE IN WILDLIFE OR EXOTIC SPECIES Dental Pathology of the Hoary Marmot (Marmota caligata), Groundhog (Marmota monax) and Alaska Marmot (Marmota broweri) J. N. Winer*, B. Arzi†, D. M. Leale†,P.H.Kass‡ and F. J. M. Verstraete† *William R. Pritchard Veterinary Medical Teaching Hospital, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, CA, † Department of Surgical and Radiological Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, CA and ‡ Department of Population Health and Reproduction, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, CA, USA Summary Museum specimens (maxillae and mandibles) of the three marmot species occurring in Alaska (Marmota caligata [n ¼ 108 specimens], Marmota monax [n ¼ 30] and Marmota broweri [n ¼ 24]) were examined macroscopically according to predefined criteria. There were 71 specimens (43.8%) from female animals, 69 (42.6%) from male animals and 22 (13.6%) from animals of unknown sex. The ages of animals ranged from neonatal to adult, with 121 young adults (74.4%) and 41 adults (25.3%) included, and 168 excluded from study due to neonatal/ju- venile age or incompleteness of specimens (missing part of the dentition).
    [Show full text]