4.7 Article

Comparative genetic analyses of historical and contemporary collections highlight contrasting demographic histories for the bumble bees Bombus pensylvanicus and B. impatiens in Illinois

Journal

MOLECULAR ECOLOGY
Volume 18, Issue 9, Pages 1875-1886

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2009.04160.x

Keywords

Apidae; ancient DNA; conservation; Hymenoptera; natural history collections; pollinator decline

Funding

  1. US Department of Agriculture [2007-02274]
  2. Phillip W. Smith Memorial Fund

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Direct comparison of genetic patterns between museum specimens and contemporary collections can be a powerful approach for detecting recent demographic changes. Using microsatellite markers, we examined historical and contemporary genetic variation from an apparently declining bumble bee species, Bombus pensylvanicus, and from a stable species, Bombus impatiens, in central Illinois. For each species, we genotyped specimens from the Illinois Natural History Survey collected from three populations between 1969-1972 and from a resurvey of the same areas conducted in 2008. Population structure in B. pensylvanicus increased markedly over the last four decades (from theta(ST) = 0.001 to 0.027) while no structure was detected in B. impatiens for either time period (theta(ST) = -0.006 to -0.003). Changes in genetic diversity were not significant for either species, although small reductions were observed for B. pensylvanicus in all three populations. Coalescent simulations incorporating both contemporary and historical samples suggest that this small change is not surprising for recent population declines, as large reductions in genetic diversity were only apparent under the most severe bottleneck scenarios. These results demonstrate how comparisons of genetic patterns between temporal periods and species can help elucidate potential threats to population health and suggest several strategies that might be useful in the conservation of B. pensylvanicus in the Midwestern USA.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available