4.7 Article

Genomic evidence for the Old divergence of Southern European wolf populations

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2020.1206

关键词

wolf; Canis lupus; whole genome; demographic history; Iberian wolf; Italian wolf

资金

  1. Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) [SFRH/BD/60549/2009, PTDC/BIA-EVL/31902/2017]
  2. 2019 UC MEXUS-CONACYT collaborative grant
  3. DGAPA-PAPIIT grant [PAPIIT-IA200620]
  4. FCT [DL57/2016, PTDC/BIA-EVF/2460/2014]
  5. Norte Portugal Regional Operational Program (NORTE2020), under the PORTUGAL 2020 Partnership Agreement, through the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) [NORTE-01-0145-FEDER-000007]
  6. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [SFRH/BD/60549/2009, PTDC/BIA-EVL/31902/2017, PTDC/BIA-EVF/2460/2014] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The grey wolf (Canis lupus) is one of the most widely distributed mammals in which a variety of distinct populations have been described. However, given their currently fragmented distribution and recent history of human-induced population decline, little is known about the events that led to their differentiation. Based on the analysis of whole canid genomes, we examined the divergence times between Southern European wolf populations and their ancient demographic history. We found that all present-day Eurasian wolves share a common ancestorca36 000 years ago, supporting the hypothesis that all extant wolves derive from a single population that subsequently expanded after the Last Glacial Maximum. We also estimated that the currently isolated European populations of the Iberian Peninsula, Italy and the Dinarics-Balkans diverged very closely in time,ca10 500 years ago, and maintained negligible gene flow ever since. This indicates that the current genetic and morphological distinctiveness of Iberian and Italian wolves can be attributed to their isolation dating back to the end of the Pleistocene, predating the recent human-induced extinction of wolves in Central Europe by several millennia.

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