4.7 Article

Implications for management and conservation of the population genetic structure of the wedge clam Donax trunculus across two biogeographic boundaries

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 6, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/srep39152

关键词

-

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry of Education [PR2010-0601]
  2. Spanish Scientific Research Council
  3. Organismo Autonomo de Parques Nacionales Grant [OAPN122_2010]
  4. Coordination Office of Donana National Park
  5. Consejeria de Agricultura, Pesca y Desarrollo Rural of the Andalusian Government

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In a resource management perspective, the understanding of the relative influence of the physical factors on species connectivity remains a major challenge and is also of great ecological and conservation biology interest. Despite the overfishing threat on the wedge clam Donax trunculus in Europe, relatively little information is known about its population genetic structure and connectivity and their consequences on conservation policies. We employed 16 microsatellite loci to characterise the genetic diversity and population structure of D. trunculus. A total of 514 samples from seven different localities along the Atlantic-Mediterranean transition, from the Atlantic (Gulf of Cadiz) to the north-western Mediterranean were genotyped. The analysis of the population genetic structure displayed a clear distinction along the Atlantic-Mediterranean transition with different clusters in the Atlantic Ocean, the Alboran Sea and the northwestern Mediterranean. Consequently, we recommend that these three areas should be considered as different management units. We showed that all populations seem to be at high long-term risk of extinction with the exception of the protected Donana National Park population which still seems to have evolutionary potential. Therefore, our results emphasized the necessity of protection of this economic resource and the validity of molecular tools to evaluate the population dynamics.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据