Skip to main content
Ecology and Evolution logoLink to Ecology and Evolution
. 2020 Jun 2;10(14):7157–7172. doi: 10.1002/ece3.6416

Genotyping‐in‐Thousands by sequencing reveals marked population structure in Western Rattlesnakes to inform conservation status

Danielle A Schmidt 1, Purnima Govindarajulu 2, Karl W Larsen 3, Michael A Russello 1,
PMCID: PMC7391313  PMID: 32760519

Abstract

Delineation of units below the species level is critical for prioritizing conservation actions for species at‐risk. Genetic studies play an important role in characterizing patterns of population connectivity and diversity to inform the designation of conservation units, especially for populations that are geographically isolated. The northernmost range margin of Western Rattlesnakes (Crotalus oreganus) occurs in British Columbia, Canada, where it is federally classified as threatened and restricted to five geographic regions. In these areas, Western Rattlesnakes hibernate (den) communally, raising questions about connectivity within and between den complexes. At present, Western Rattlesnake conservation efforts are hindered by a complete lack of information on genetic structure and degree of isolation at multiple scales, from the den to the regional level. To fill this knowledge gap, we used Genotyping‐in‐Thousands by sequencing (GT‐seq) to genotype an optimized panel of 362 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) from individual samples (n = 461) collected across the snake's distribution in western Canada and neighboring Washington (USA). Hierarchical STRUCTURE analyses found evidence for population structure within and among the five geographic regions in BC, as well as in Washington. Within these regions, 11 genetically distinct complexes of dens were identified, with some regions having multiple complexes. No significant pattern of isolation‐by‐distance and generally low levels of migration were detected among den complexes across regions. Additionally, snakes within dens generally were more related than those among den complexes within a region, indicating limited movement. Overall, our results suggest that the single, recognized designatable unit for Western Rattlesnakes in Canada should be re‐assessed to proactively focus conservation efforts on preserving total genetic variation detected range‐wide. More broadly, our study demonstrates a novel application of GT‐seq for investigating patterns of diversity in wild populations at multiple scales to better inform conservation management.

Keywords: designatable units, genotyping‐by‐sequencing, GT‐seq, hibernacula, reptile, snake


Genetic studies provide key information for the delineation of conservation units below the species level to help prioritize management efforts. Here, we used Genotyping‐in‐Thousands by sequencing (GT‐seq) to reveal significant population structure and limited connectivity among populations of the at‐risk Western Rattlesnake at their northern range periphery in Canada. Our results demonstrate a novel application of GT‐seq and suggest that the current conservation unit status for this species in Canada warrants re‐examination to better inform proactive management.

graphic file with name ECE3-10-7157-g006.jpg

1. INTRODUCTION

Habitat loss and degradation are two of the main threats affecting the persistence of global biodiversity (Magin, Johnson, Groombridge, Jenkins, & Smith, 1994; Purvis, Gittleman, Cowlishaw, & Mace, 2000). Anthropogenic disturbances such as residential and commercial development, roads, agriculture, and forestry can lead to the isolation of large areas of formerly intact habitat that becomes disconnected over time. As a result, populations often are reduced in size and exhibit low connectivity and restricted gene flow (Pease, Lande, & Bull, 1989). Without sufficient genetic variation, populations of a species may be limited in their ability to adapt in the face of stochasticity, making them more vulnerable to extinction (Frankham, 2003). Over time, the extirpation of multiple isolated subpopulations can contribute to overall species decline in population size and erosion of genetic diversity. As a result, species existing in isolated populations often are of elevated conservation concern (Ehrlich, 1988).

Population genetic studies play an important role in understanding connectivity among geographically isolated populations, especially for rare or at‐risk species. In particular, genetic assessments can help delineate conservation units, which are fundamental for enforcing legislation and prioritizing conservation resources (Funk, Mckay, Hohenlohe, & Allendorf, 2012; Green, 2005). Multiple concepts for designating conservation units have been proposed within various contexts, including evolutionarily significant units (ESUs) based upon historical patterns of genetic divergence between populations (Crandall, Bininda‐Emonds, Mace, & Wayne, 2000; Ryder, 1986; Waples, 1991) and management units (MUs) that consider contemporary patterns of genetic differentiation among populations (Moritz, 1994). In Canada, designatable units (DUs) have been adopted by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) to define biologically relevant units for conservation below the species level (Green, 2005). DUs are determined based upon population discreteness and evolutionary significance, two criteria that can be examined using genetic data. According to COSEWIC, population(s) may be considered discrete if there is evidence for genetic distinctiveness, natural geographic disjunction, or occurrence in geographically varied ecological zones. Once populations are deemed discrete, they can then be evaluated for significance to determine whether they are integral to the evolutionary trajectory of the species, where unique genetic diversity would not be naturally restored if lost (Environment & Climate Change Canada, 2017). Measures of neutral genetic variation and gene flow among populations can provide evidence for discreteness, while the evolutionary significance of populations can be informed by estimating patterns of adaptive divergence (Allendorf, Hohenlohe, & Luikart, 2010; Funk et al., 2012).

One species of concern in Canada that requires an explicit evaluation of designatable unit status is the Western Rattlesnake (Crotalus oreganus). Although broadly distributed throughout the western half of the United States, this snake is classified as “threatened” by the Canadian Species At Risk Act and protected under the British Columbia (BC) Wildlife Act (COSEWIC, 2015). The area of occupancy of this species in Canada is restricted to BC and estimated at <1,500 km2 (COSEWIC, 2015; Figure 1), representing one of the northernmost extensions for any viper in North America (Family Viperidae). At these northern latitudes, Western Rattlesnakes use traditional denning sites that enable overwinter survival (Charland, Nelson, & Gregory, 1993). The numbers of animals using these dens range from single digits to several hundred individuals, including adults and juveniles of both sexes (Winton, Taylor, Bishop, & Larsen, 2018). Following emergence from the dens in the spring, adult snakes migrate various distances to forage and mate before returning to the same dens in the fall (Gomez, Larsen, & Gregory, 2015; Harvey & Larsen, in press). Gravid females do not travel as far, remaining closer or even at den sites to give birth to their litters in late summer (Eye and Larsen unpubl.). Presently, the entire distribution of the Western Rattlesnake in Canada is managed as a single DU (COSEWIC, 2015), although five putative geographic regions have been identified (Figure 1). These regions are reasonably distinct, given that suitable habitat at this latitude is relatively scarce and naturally interrupted by geographic barriers. Moreover, anthropogenic modifications to the landscape, such as habitat loss and fragmentation by roads, likely constitute additional barriers to gene flow in this species (Maida et al., 2018; Winton et al., 2018).

FIGURE 1.

FIGURE 1

The distribution of den complex locations of Western Rattlesnakes across five main geographic regions in Canada, including Thompson‐Nicola (TNI), Vernon (VER), Okanagan‐Similkameen (OKS), Midway (MW), Grand Forks (GF), as well as Washington (WA), USA. Gray shading represents the current known distribution in Canada and Washington. Black‐dotted circles encompass geographic regions defined by COSEWIC (2015); WA was also considered a separate geographic region. Colored pie charts indicate results of the hierarchical Bayesian clustering analyses for individuals within the 11 den complexes across the six geographic regions: TNI‐W (n = 57), TNI‐C (n = 35), TNI‐E (n = 17), VER‐CB (n = 30), VER‐KL (n = 57), WL (n = 99), OS (n = 55), MW (n = 23), GF (n = 31), WA‐N (n = 39), WA‐S (n = 18). Each color within a pie chart represents the proportion of identity to each unique genetic cluster. The black arrow is pointing to the City of Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada (gray star). Gray shading in the figure inset displays the entire distribution of Western Rattlesnakes in North America with the approximate distribution in this study outlined in dark gray [spatial data from NatureServe and the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), 2007]

In addition to the influence of natural and anthropogenic barriers to gene flow, range position can impact the extent and distribution of population genetic variation in broadly distributed species. The central–marginal hypothesis (Eckert, Samis, & Lougheed, 2008) predicts that peripheral populations, particularly those in discontinuous patches, are expected to have lower genetic diversity within and greater differentiation among populations than those found toward the core of a species range. Despite smaller population sizes and an increased risk of extirpation, these peripheral populations may also have high evolutionary potential given they are likely subject to more heterogeneous environments than found in the range core (Cassel‐Lundhagen et al., 2009; Lesica & Allendorf, 1995). Such conditions may lead to the development of unique traits and divergent genetic variation within peripheral populations that permit adaptation to environmental change (Lesica & Allendorf, 1995). For Western Rattlesnakes, a fuller understanding of the distribution of genetic variation within and among populations at the northernmost extent of their species range is warranted for evaluating discreteness, inferring significance, and refining conservation strategies.

In the current study, we used genotyping‐by‐sequencing (GBS) to characterize the distribution of genetic variation within and among Western Rattlesnake populations in Canada and neighboring Washington (USA). Given the protected status and venomous nature of the animal, we largely employed minimally invasive sampling (MIS) using cloacal swabs, as it reduced handling time and limited disturbance to individual snakes. Although MIS is often suboptimal for use with many GBS approaches (e.g., RADseq; Andrews, Barba, Russello, & Waits, 2018; Russello, Waterhouse, Etter, & Johnson, 2015), we recently demonstrated the utility of a multiplex amplicon sequencing approach, Genotyping‐in‐Thousands by sequencing (GT‐seq; Campbell, Harmon, & Narum, 2015), for cloacal swab samples and other MIS sources (e.g., skin sheds) for the Western Rattlesnake (Schmidt, Campbell, Govindarajulu, Larsen, & Russello, 2020). Here, we used genotypic data collected from 591 individuals to infer patterns of hierarchical genetic structure within and among the five presumed geographic regions of Western Rattlesnakes in British Columbia (Canada) as well as in Washington (USA). We also examined fine‐scale patterns of genetic diversity and connectivity among complexes of dens within regions. Lastly, we used the evidence collected to explicitly address DUs for Western Rattlesnakes in Canada and discuss the implications of these results for informing prioritization and management strategies.

2. METHODS

2.1. Study area and sample collection

Between 2015 and 2017, a total of 591 individuals were sampled, including from blood (n = 30), cloacal swabs (n = 552), buccal swabs (n = 5), and skin sheds (n = 4), from 36 dens across all five of the informally recognized regions of the Western Rattlesnake range in Canada, namely the Thompson‐Nicola (TNI), Vernon (VER), Okanagan‐Similkameen (OKS), Midway (MW), and Grand Forks (GF), as well as from neighboring Washington (WA), USA (Figure 1).

All DNA samples obtained from live snakes were taken with the anterior portion of the animals restrained in a plexiglass handling tube (Murphy, 1971). Blood samples were collected by inserting a sterile syringe into the caudal vein of a snake, drawing 0.1 ml of blood, and then directly transferring the sample to 1 ml of Longmire lysis buffer (Longmire, Maltbie, & Baker, 1997) for preservation at 4°C. Cloacal samples were collected by gently inserting a sterile cotton‐tipped swab into the cloacal vent, located on the ventral side of the snake near the tail, and then slowly rotating it 5–10 times. For juvenile and neonate snakes that were too small for cloacal sampling, we employed buccal swabs. To collect buccal cells, a cotton swab was gently inserted into the mouth of a snake and slowly rotated for 5–10 s, with care taken to avoid getting the swab stuck on the fangs. As with blood samples, buccal and cloacal swabs were then preserved in 1 ml of Longmire lysis buffer (Longmire et al., 1997) at 4°C. Shed skins were stored at −80°C as recommended by Burbrink and Castoe (2009).

In addition to collecting DNA samples, we also recorded the snout‐to‐vent length (SVL), sex, weight (g), and age class for individual snakes when possible. For the present study, we defined adults as those snakes with a SVL measurement of >540 mm either at the time of sampling or postsampling, based upon recent estimates for sexually mature Western Rattlesnakes (Maida et al., 2018). All snakes were marked with a unique colored marking at the base of the rattle to identify recaptured individuals both within and among sampling years. Sample collection took place under Thompson Rivers University Animal Ethics File No. 101547, BC Ministry of Environment Park Use Permit No. 108794, and British Columbia Wildlife Act PE15‐171661.

2.2. DNA extraction

We extracted whole genomic DNA from the blood samples using a DNeasy Blood and Tissue Kit (Qiagen) following the manufacturer's protocols (including RNAse A treatment). Only slight variations were applied for the shed, buccal, and cloacal swab samples. For the shed skins, ~160–180 mg of each shed underwent a surface clean with a 3% bleach solution. After bleach treatment, we then washed the sheds with ethanol and left them to air‐dry completely. Once dry, we manually pulverized each sample and placed them into separate 2‐ml tubes. Proteinase K and lysis buffer were added to each tube, and samples were incubated for 48 hr at 56°C. The rest of the extraction procedure followed the manufacturer's protocol (including RNAse A treatment).

For the cloacal and buccal swab samples, we extracted DNA from the lysis buffer in which the swabs were stored. 180 μl of buffer from each sample was incubated with 20 μl of Proteinase K for 1 hr at 56°C. The rest of the extractions then followed the manufacturer's protocol (including RNAse A treatment). Once eluted, we quantified all DNA extracts using a Qubit™ 3.0 Fluorometer and Qubit™ dsDNA High Sensitivity Assay kit (Invitrogen).

2.3. GT‐Seq library preparation and genotyping

We prepared a GT‐seq library to simultaneously genotype all 591 samples at a targeted panel of 362 single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers previously developed and optimized in Schmidt et al. (2020). A total of 17 samples were repeated to calculate within library genotyping error. Library preparation generally followed the protocol of Campbell et al. (2015) as modified in Schmidt et al. (2020). For PCR1, we ran one plate per primer pool to amplify the specific regions of DNA containing SNPs of interest within each individual. Next, 3 μl of each resulting PCR product was pooled together and diluted 1:10 (a total dilution of 1:20) for use in PCR2 to add identifying barcodes for each individual sample and the corresponding sample location in each PCR plate. After each plate of 96 PCR2 products was normalized using a SequelPrep Normalization kit (Thermo Fisher), we pooled 10 μL of sample from each individual into a plate library. Plate libraries were then quantified, and an equimolar amount of each was combined in a single tube. We purified this library using a MinElute PCR Purification Kit (Qiagen) eluted in a final volume of 22 μl. Library sequencing was completed on a single lane of Illumina HiSeq 4000 paired‐end 100 sequencing at McGill University and Génome Québec Innovation Centre. Raw sequencing data were genotyped using the GT‐seq pipeline available on GitHub (https://github.com/GTseq/GTseq‐Pipeline). The GTseq_Genotyper_v3.pl script was used to call genotypes for each individual sample, and then, GTseq_GenoCompile_v3.pl was used to compile all the individual genotypes. This resulting output file was then converted into a PED file format (Purcell et al., 2007) for downstream genetic analysis.

Prior to analysis, we quality‐filtered the entire dataset of 608 samples (591 individuals + 17 repeats). Those individuals and SNP loci with >30% missing data were removed from the dataset. Loci with a minor allele frequency <0.05 and those that deviated from Hardy–Weinberg Equilibrium (HWE) in >60% of sampling units were also removed. We calculated genotyping error for repeated samples that passed data quality filters (n = 17) as the proportion of discordant genotypes across all loci successfully genotyped for both replicates. To reduce bias due to sampling potentially highly related individuals at dens, we used ML‐RELATE (Kalinowski, Wagner, & Taper, 2006) to infer relationships between all individuals using default parameters. After cross‐referencing with the age class data, those individuals with an inferred parent as a result of this analysis were subsequently removed from the dataset for all population genetic analyses, except those assessing patterns of relatedness.

2.4. Population structure and migration

To infer broad‐scale patterns of population structure across the northern range of the Western Rattlesnake, we conducted Bayesian clustering analyses with STRUCTURE v 2.3.4 (Pritchard, Stephens, & Donnelly, 2000). Ten iterations were run for K = 1–8 (the number of a priori geographic regions + 2), each with a burn‐in of 500,000 and a run length of 1,000,000 MCMC steps. The resulting output was then summarized using STRUCTURE HARVESTER (Earl & vonHoldt, 2012). To infer the optimal K value, we employed a combination of the ΔK method (Evanno, Regnaut, & Goudet, 2005) and the plotting of the log probability of the data (Pritchard et al., 2000) to assess where ln Pr(X|K) plateaued (see STRUCTURE manual). Additional iterations of STRUCTURE were also conducted for each independent cluster to test for fine‐scale genetic substructure. For the optimal values of K, results were summarized with CLUMPP (Jakobsson & Rosenberg, 2007) and then plotted with DISTRUCT v.1.1 (Rosenberg, 2004). Based on these analyses, we defined those groups of dens that either formed distinct genetic clusters or were geographically isolated as “den complexes” (Figure 1). Using this information, we calculated Weir and Cockerham's (1984) unbiased estimates of pairwise genetic differentiation (θ) among sampling regions and den complexes as implemented in GENETIX 4.05 (Belkhir, Borsa, Chikhi, Raufaste, & Bonhomme, 2004).

To further examine connectivity across the range, we tested for patterns of isolation‐by‐distance (Wright, 1943) among all den complexes using a Mantel test (Mantel, 1967) as implemented in the R package ade4 (Dray & Dufour, 2007) using 10,000 replicates to test for significance. To conduct this test, the centroid location of each den complex was determined using the rgeos (Bivand & Rundel, 2014) package in R (R Core Team, 2019). The straight‐line geographic distance between centroids was then calculated in kilometers with GeographicDistanceMatrixGenerator_v1.2.3 (http://biodiversityinformatics.amnh.org/open_source/gdmg/download.php) and correlated with estimates of pairwise θ. We then repeated this test using den‐level pairwise geographic and genetic distances within each geographic region containing >2 dens to evaluate more fine‐scale patterns of connectivity.

We also assessed the amount and direction of contemporary migration among den complexes with BAYESASS 3.04 (Wilson & Rannala, 2003). This Bayesian approach uses multilocus genotypes to estimate movement among populations over the past three generations. We estimated levels of migration using 10,000,000 iterations after a burn‐in of 1,000,000 MCMC steps, sampling after every 100 steps. Five runs were conducted, each starting with a different random seed, and convergence was analyzed by comparing mean posterior estimates of migration. To determine whether migration between den complexes was significant, we calculated 95% credible sets by calculating the mean migration rate ±1.96x the standard deviation, as suggested in the user manual. Those migration estimates with credible sets that did not include zero were deemed significant.

2.5. Genetic diversity and relatedness within and among den complexes

We evaluated genetic diversity within each den complex and within each den by calculating estimates of observed heterozygosity (H o), expected heterozygosity (H E), nucleotide diversity (π), and the proportion of variable sites (P) as implemented in ARLEQUIN (Excoffier & Lischer, 2010). Global tests for heterozygote deficit or excess were run using Fisher's exact tests in GENEPOP 4.5 (Rousset, 2008), with 10,000 dememorization steps, 100 batches, and 10,000 iterations. Those groups with a p‐value <.05 were considered to significantly deviate from the level of heterozygosity expected if they were in Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium. We also calculated inbreeding coefficients (F IS) for each den complex with GENETIX (Belkhir et al., 2004), using 1,000 permutations to test for significance. To determine whether measures of genetic diversity were correlated with latitude, linear regressions with nucleotide diversity and the proportion of polymorphic SNP loci (P) in a den complex were conducted in R (R Core Team, 2019) for all 11 den complexes.

Additionally, pairwise estimates of Queller and Goodnight's unbiased relatedness coefficient were calculated for individuals across each geographic region as well as within and among den complexes and dens using SPAGeDI 1.5 (Hardy & Vekemans, 2002). Reference allele frequencies were determined by pooling all individuals in a given geographic sampling region. For this analysis, we added the individuals with presumed parents back into the dataset.

3. RESULTS

3.1. GT‐seq genotyping

A total of 608 samples (591 individuals + 17 repeats) were genotyped, with an average of 341,838 raw sequencing reads per sample. After quality filtering for 30% missing data, minor allele frequency > 0.05, and HWE, 505 samples and 308 loci remained in our dataset. Mean genotyping error across all repeated samples (n = 17) was 0.36%. After repeated samples and those individuals with an inferred parent in the dataset (n = 27) were removed, a total of 461 individuals were used for subsequent population genetic analysis with an average depth of 332x (range: 23x‐1113x) and 3.82% missing data (range: 0.00%–29.87%).

3.2. Population structure and connectivity

STRUCTURE analyses inferred an initial optimal value of K = 3 for all samples range‐wide (Figure 2), including clusters representing TNI, VER, and the rest of the geographic regions across the range, respectively (acronyms as defined in Figure 1). Within the three genetically distinct clusters inferred range‐wide, hierarchical STRUCTURE analyses identified genetic substructure within the TNI, VER, OKS, and WA regions, a unique cluster in MW, and a geographically isolated cluster in GF that shared ancestry with both OKS and MW (Figures 1 and 2, Figure A1). Three distinct den complexes (K = 3) were detected in the TNI region (TNI‐W, TNI‐C, and TNI‐E) (Figure 2), while two discrete den complexes (K = 2) were found within each of the VER (VER‐KL, VER‐CB), OKS (WL, OS), and WA (WA‐N, WA‐S) regions, respectively, for a total of 11 genetically unique or geographically isolated den complexes. Among sampling regions, all values of pairwise genetic differentiation (θ) were significant (p < .001) and ranged from 0.059 to 0.321 (Table 1). Across the identified den complexes, estimates of θ ranged from 0.0459 to 0.526 (p < .001) (Table 2).

FIGURE 2.

FIGURE 2

STRUCTURE bar plots displaying inferred clustering and ancestry estimation for all individuals (n = 461), showing K = 3 for iteration 1 and K = 3 for iteration 2 for analyses run among geographic regions. Iteration 3 investigated evidence for further substructure within regions, revealing K = 3, K = 2, K = 2, and K = 2, respectively (population acronyms below plots as defined in Figure 1). Each color represents a unique genetic cluster, and each vertical bar represents the proportion of ancestry to each cluster for each individual. For iteration 3, each letter (a, b, c, d) corresponds to a different STRUCTURE analysis. See Appendix (Figure A1) for the data used to determine optimal K values

TABLE 1.

Estimates of pairwise genetic distance (θ) between all five geographic regions in Canada, including Thompson‐Nicola (TNI), Vernon (VER), Okanagan‐Similkameen (OKS), Midway (MW), Grand Forks (GF), as well as Washington (WA), USA. All comparisons were significant (p < .001) with 1,000 replicates

OKS WA TNI VER GF MW
OKS 0.059 0.091 0.148 0.082 0.183
WA 0.114 0.172 0.105 0.202
TNI 0.213 0.163 0.261
VER 0.210 0.321
GF 0.199
MW

TABLE 2.

Estimates of pairwise θ and straight‐line distance (km) between the 11 defined den complexes in this study (abbreviations as in Figure 1)

OS WA‐N WA‐S WL TNI‐C TNI‐W TNI‐E VER‐KL VER‐CB GF MW
OS 0.088 0.063 0.046 0.168 0.117 0.307 0.159 0.186 0.094 0.216
WA‐N 80.1 0.069 0.092 0.219 0.143 0.342 0.210 0.230 0.127 0.232
WA‐S 238.3 174.5 0.068 0.180 0.115 0.367 0.174 0.196 0.115 0.213
WL 37.8 95.4 265.5 0.160 0.111 0.296 0.175 0.197 0.096 0.191
TNI‐C 200.3 238.9 412.4 162.9 0.124 0.405 0.287 0.308 0.242 0.352
TNI‐W 213.9 231.3 397.7 176.7 62.3 0.346 0.249 0.263 0.178 0.276
TNI‐E 186.7 232.1 406.4 150.1 23.5 82.9 0.424 0.474 0.387 0.526
VER‐KL 129.6 196.8 366.4 101.7 107.9 155.4 85.5 0.116 0.219 0.336
VER‐CB 122.0 185.6 356.9 91.4 100.4 143.8 79.3 15.4 0.252 0.372
GF 73.7 145.0 272.6 96.9 235.8 264.7 216.9 138.2 138.9 0.199
MW 37.8 112.0 253.8 64.5 216.2 238.5 199.5 129.0 125.7 35.9

Values above the diagonal represent θ and those below are straight‐line distances. All pairwise comparisons of θ were significant p < .001 with 1,000 replicates

Range‐wide, there was no detected pattern of isolation‐by‐distance among den complexes (r = −.038, p = .50) (Figure 3). Within sampling regions, there was no significant pattern of isolation‐by‐distance detected among dens within the TNI (r = .221, p = .298) or GF (r = .911, p = .167) regions; however, a significant pattern of isolation‐by‐distance was detected among dens in VER (r = .873, p = .03), OKS (r = .811, p < .001), and WA (r = .57, p < .001). Estimates of recent migration found significant gene flow from the OS den complex to WA‐S and from OS to WL. All other estimates of gene flow were low (m < 0.1) and not significant (Table 3).

FIGURE 3.

FIGURE 3

Mantel's correlation between pairwise straight‐line distance (km) and genetic distance (θ) for all 11 den complexes (r = −.03812, p = .4989)

TABLE 3.

Estimates of contemporary migration among den complexes as calculated in BAYESASS. Numbers represent the mean proportion of migrants moving from one group to another per generation averaged across five iterations

From
OS WA‐N WA‐S WL TNI‐C TNI‐W TNI‐E VER‐KL VER‐CB GF MW
To OS 0.949 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005
WA‐N 0.042 0.888 0.013 0.010 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007
WA‐S 0.216 0.012 0.678 0.014 0.012 0.012 0.011 0.011 0.012 0.011 0.012
WL 0.065 0.006 0.003 0.904 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003
TNI‐C 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.917 0.011 0.007 0.007 0.015 0.007 0.007
TNI‐W 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.951 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005
TNI‐E 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.881 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012
VER‐KL 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.951 0.005 0.005 0.005
VER‐CB 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.009 0.918 0.008 0.008
GF 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.921 0.008
MW 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.902

Italicized values along the diagonal indicate the mean proportion of nonmigrants within a den complex. Bolded values indicate significant estimates of migration where calculated 95% credible sets did not include zero.

3.3. Genetic diversity and relatedness

Observed values of heterozygosity varied slightly across the range, with the highest value in the VER‐CB den complex (H o = 0.379) and the lowest in the TNI‐C den complex (H o = 0.290) (Table 4). A significant heterozygote deficit was found in the WA‐N, WA‐S, WL, TNI‐C, and TNI‐W den complexes, all accompanied by inbreeding coefficients significantly above zero (range: 0.0219–0.102). The VER‐KL den complex also exhibited a significant level of inbreeding (F IS = 0.017) (Table 4), while a significant heterozygote excess was found in the VER‐CB group. Across den complexes, the proportion of polymorphic sites within each group varied widely. The largest proportion of polymorphism was found in the WL den complex (p = .994), while the least polymorphism was found in the TNI‐E den complex (p = .302) (Table 4). There was no significant correlation detected between latitude and proportion of polymorphism (r 2 = .196, p = .10); however, nucleotide diversity was significantly and negatively correlated with latitude (r 2 = .365, p = .03) (Figure 4).

TABLE 4.

Estimates of mean observed and expected heterozygosity, proportion of polymorphism (P ), nucleotide diversity (π ), and inbreeding coefficients (F IS) for each den complex and dens within each den complex. * indicates p < .05, ** indicates p < .001

Den complex Den n P Mean H o Mean H E F IS π
OS 55 0.981 0.362 0.360 −0.005 0.346
OS‐01 28 0.974 0.365 0.360 −0.014 0.344
OS‐02 8 0.909 0.378 0.382 0.011 0.344
OS‐03 19 0.961 0.376 0.371 −0.012 0.341
WA‐N 39 0.987 0.312* 0.346 0.102** 0.312
WA‐N01 3 0.682 0.452 0.468 0.054 0.337
WA‐N02 1 0.312 1.000 1.000 0.000 0.314
WA‐N03 9 0.724 0.352* 0.375 0.084* 0.264
WA‐N04 9 0.802 0.353** 0.368 0.043* 0.281
WA‐N05 3 0.494 0.454 0.454 −0.025 0.319
WA‐N06 5 0.779 0.442* 0.418 −0.071 0.293
WA‐N07 9 0.782 0.369 0.380 0.027 0.285
WA‐S 18 0.961 0.363* 0.375 0.031* 0.356
WA‐S01 2 0.630 0.603* 0.564 −0.109 0.357
WA‐S02 11 0.919 0.392 0.390 −0.005 0.355
WA‐S03 4 0.701 0.456 0.441 −0.028 0.307
WA‐S04 1 0.276 1.000 1.000 0.000 0.278
WL 99 0.994 0.349* 0.357 0.022** 0.329
WL‐01 28 0.971 0.357 0.362 0.012 0.334
WL‐02 26 0.961 0.360 0.357 −0.007 0.325
WL‐03 21 0.932 0.364 0.361 −0.002 0.308
WL‐04 2 0.646 0.550 0.555 0.013 0.370
WL‐05 20 0.948 0.354** 0.370 0.046* 0.337
WL‐06 2 0.604 0.554 0.552 −0.005 0.343
TNI‐W 57 0.886 0.331* 0.341 0.026** 0.287
TNI‐W01 36 0.844 0.340 0.337 −0.010 0.278
TNI‐W02 21 0.802 0.367 0.361 −0.014 0.282
TNI‐C 35 0.821 0.290** 0.307 0.062** 0.237
TNI‐C01 9 0.545 0.365 0.359 0.004 0.209
TNI‐C02 9 0.779 0.305** 0.340 0.111* 0.260
TNI‐C03 17 0.744 0.344 0.344 0.003 0.232
TNI‐E TNI‐E01 17 0.302 0.363 0.353 −0.033 0.100
VER‐KL 57 0.766 0.338 0.343 0.017* 0.260
VER‐KL01 17 0.724 0.349 0.351 0.003 0.251
VER‐KL02 23 0.750 0.348 0.343 −0.013 0.259
VER‐KL03 3 0.536 0.499* 0.465 −0.078 0.252
VER‐KL04 14 0.747 0.360 0.367 0.018 0.256
VER‐CB 30 0.724 0.379* 0.353 −0.070 0.237
VER‐CB01 17 0.685 0.401** 0.376 −0.063 0.222
VER‐CB02 13 0.682 0.390** 0.351 −0.109 0.244
GF 31 0.873 0.335* 0.341 0.021 0.281
GF‐01 12 0.776 0.361 0.356 −0.020 0.257
GF‐02 18 0.857 0.346 0.355 0.024 0.296
GF‐03 1 0.263 1.000 1.000 0.000 0.281
MW MW‐01 23 0.675 0.349 0.350 0.002 0.225

n refers to the number of individuals within a specified den complex or den site.

FIGURE 4.

FIGURE 4

Correlation between latitude and nucleotide diversity (π) (r 2 = .365, p = .03), and latitude and proportion of polymorphism (P) (r 2 = .196, p = .1) across all 11 den complexes

At the individual den level, estimates of heterozygosity tended to be higher than those calculated at the den complex level (Table 4). Values of observed heterozygosity ranged from 0.305 (TNI‐C02) to 0.603 (WA‐S01). Evidence for a significant heterozygote deficit was found in the WA‐N03, WA‐N04, WL‐05, and TNI‐C02 dens, all of which also exhibited significant levels of inbreeding (Table 4). In contrast, the WA‐N06, WA‐S01, VER‐KL03, VER‐CB01, and VER‐CB02 dens all displayed an excess of heterozygotes, which was not observed in their associated den complexes overall (WA‐N, WA‐S, VER‐KL, or VER‐CB). Estimates of nucleotide diversity and the proportion of polymorphism among individual dens were similar to those determined at the den complex level (Table 4).

Additionally, average pairwise relatedness generally was higher between snakes within a den than either among dens in a den complex or among all snakes within a geographic region, though this varied across the distribution. Across regions, mean pairwise relatedness ranged from −0.05 in MW to −0.005 in OKS (Table 5). TNI‐E was the most related of all 11 den complexes (r QG = .781), while MW was the least related (r QG = −.047) (Table 5). Within dens, mean pairwise relatedness varied from −0.077 (WL‐04) to 0.781 (TNI‐E01) (Table 5).

TABLE 5.

Estimates of Queller and Goodnight's (1989) pairwise relatedness (r QG) between pairs of individuals within each region, den complex, and each den

Region Den complex Den n r QG
TNI 112 −0.010
TNI‐W 59 0.143
TNI‐W01 36 0.147
TNI‐W02 23 0.133
TNI‐C 36 0.268
TNI‐C01 9 0.409
TNI‐C02 18 0.247
TNI‐C03 9 0.219
TNI‐E TNI‐E01 17 0.781
VER 101 −0.010
VER‐CB 38 0.184
VER‐CB01 13 0.236
VER‐CB02 25 0.191
VER‐KL 63 0.067
VER‐KL01 21 0.121
VER‐KL02 24 0.087
VER‐KL03 3 0.250
VER‐KL04 15 0.076
OKS 162 −0.006
OS 57 0.054
OS‐01 30 0.068
OS‐02 8 0.069
OS‐03 19 0.056
WL 105 0.028
WL‐01 28 0.023
WL‐02 26 0.065
WL‐03 22 0.089
WL‐04 2 −0.077
WL‐05 25 0.037
WL‐06 2 0.078
WA 58 −0.017
WA‐N 40 0.050
WA‐N01 3 0.077
WA‐N02 1 ‐‐‐‐
WA‐N03 10 0.235
WA‐N04 9 0.202
WA‐N05 3 0.119
WA‐N06 5 0.135
WA‐N07 9 0.228
WA‐S 18 0.030
WA‐S01 2 0.142
WA‐S02 11 0.055
WA‐S03 4 0.253
WA‐S04 1 ‐‐‐‐
GF GF 32 −0.033
GF‐01 12 0.044
GF‐02 19 −0.047
GF‐03 1 ‐‐‐‐
MW MW MW‐01 23 −0.047

n refers to the number of individuals within a specified region, den complex, or den site.

4. DISCUSSION

4.1. Population structure and connectivity

We found evidence for significant hierarchical genetic structure and low connectivity among Western Rattlesnakes at the northern extent of their range in Canada and Washington (USA). At the broad scale, the five main geographic regions (TNI, VER, OKS, MW, and GF) in Canada represented three unique genetic clusters (Figure 2). In particular, TNI and VER each represented a unique genetic cluster and exhibited a high degree of genetic differentiation from all other sampled regions (Figure 2, Table 1). The other geographic regions (OKS, MW, and GF) together represented a third unique genetic cluster, with evidence for underlying substructure where OKS and MW were found to be genetically distinct (Figure 2, Table 1). In the case of GF, shared ancestry was detected with both OKS and MW, yet this region was still significantly differentiated from both based on pairwise θ (Table 1). Overall, the broad‐scale patterns of genetic distinctiveness identified across the distribution generally align with identified geographic disjunction between regions due to the presence of unsuitable habitat (COSEWIC, 2015). This is especially apparent between the TNI and VER regions, where there is a high and significant level of genetic differentiation (Table 1) that corresponds to a large disconnect in the species range (Figure 1). This separation is believed to have existed since the Holocene Climate Optimum (Hobbs, 2013), after which temperatures began to cool roughly 6,000–5,000 years before present representing the start of a period known as the “Mesothermic Interval” in BC (Walker, 2004).

At a finer scale, we found evidence for low and generally nonsignificant estimates of genetic migration, with no significant pattern of isolation‐by‐distance among all 11 den complexes that we defined across the distribution (Table 3, Figure 3). While male Western Rattlesnakes will move considerable distances during seasonal migrations, constraints on migration behavior and den site fidelity may be limiting connectivity between complexes of dens across the landscape (Harvey, 2015). Adult males of this species in BC have been shown to travel a maximum of ~4 km from their den of origin prior to returning to hibernate, although migration behavior is not necessarily consistent among individual snakes or populations within the same geographical region (Harvey, 2015). Migration distances vary considerably between snakes that occupy different dens, even those neighboring one another (Gomez et al., 2015). Differences in migration patterns could potentially be a result of differences in prey availability, thermoregulatory opportunity, and habitat suitability, all of which are key factors for snake persistence (Lomas, Larsen, & Bishop, 2015). In the present study, straight‐line distances between den complexes defined across the landscape ranged from 15 km (within cluster) to 412 km (among cluster) (Table 2), distances well beyond that undertaken by an individual snake in a single season. Therefore, it could take several years for snakes to encounter those from other den complexes. Moreover, environmental variability among sampled regions across the range may also be decreasing the likelihood that individuals will disperse far enough to find mates from dens outside of a given den complex. Based upon migration estimates, this seems plausible; however, as we were unable to sample from all known dens across the distribution, our sampling at the targeted den complexes may have excluded potential intermediary populations that could provide connectivity.

Estimates of relatedness within and among den complexes also indicated that the behavior of these snakes may influence levels of migration and population connectivity. Snakes sampled within a given den complex were found to be more related than snakes among complexes within a geographic region. At a finer level, snakes sampled at the same den were found, in some instances, to be more related to one another than snakes across dens within a given den complex. This pattern of relatedness suggests that snakes are denning near related individuals and may be mating locally with snakes from nearby dens, while exhibiting some form of kin recognition to avoid inbreeding. Kin discrimination behavior has been previously demonstrated in captively raised Timber Rattlesnakes (Crotalus horridus; Clark, 2004; Clark, Brown, Stechert, & Zamudio, 2008), but is suspected to occur in most other pit viper species including the Cottonmouth (Hoss, Deutschman, Booth, & Clark, 2015).

In addition to behavioral constraints on snake movement, our results also provide varying evidence for barriers to gene flow among den complexes. There was support for barriers to gene flow among den complexes identified in the TNI region. High and significant values of pairwise differentiation among den complexes (Table 2), as well as no significant pattern of isolation‐by‐distance among dens within this region, are indicative of reduced population connectivity due to factors besides geographic distance. Previous studies of other snake species have found that roads not only alter snake movement and behavior (Andrews & Gibbons, 2005; Shepard, Kuhns, Dreslik, & Phillips, 2008), but also serve as barriers to gene flow. For example, roads with varying traffic volumes have been found to limit gene flow and connectivity among dens of Timber Rattlesnakes (Clark, Brown, Stechert, & Zamudio, 2010) as well as among subpopulations of Western Diamondback Rattlesnakes (Herrmann, Pozarowski, Ochoa, & Schuett, 2017). Roads have been further shown to impact connectivity within and among regional populations of Eastern Massasauga Rattlesnakes (Sistrurus catenatus) in Ontario, Canada (DiLeo, Rouse, Dávila, & Lougheed, 2013), where bodies of water were also found to affect patterns of population structure. Within the TNI region, the TNI‐W, TNI‐C, and TNI‐E den complexes are separated by major highways such as Highway 97, Highway 1, and Highway 5, as well as the Thompson River, Kamloops Lake, and extensive human development. Consequently, our findings of significant genetic structure and limited population connectivity in this region may be a result of the roads and bodies of water present among the den complexes that were sampled, in addition to the geographic distances between these groups. More spatially explicit analyses that examine patterns of isolation‐by‐resistance (McRae, 2006) could further parse the influence of roads, water bodies, and other landscape features on patterns of genetic differentiation and connectivity in this area.

In contrast to the TNI region, our data provided weak evidence for distinct geographical or anthropogenic barriers to gene flow within the VER, OKS, and WA regions. Despite significant θ estimates between den complexes within these regions (Table 2), all values were low and fall within the level of “inbreeding connectivity” (θ < 0.20) as defined by Lowe and Allendorf (2010). This distinction suggests that gene flow may be occurring between den complexes in each of these regions at a level that can counteract the negative effects of inbreeding (Lowe & Allendorf, 2010). Within OKS, significant migration was detected between the OS and WL den complexes, which is consistent with the low estimate of pairwise differentiation. Significant patterns of isolation‐by‐distance were also detected among dens in both OKS and WA, suggesting that geographic distance may be the main factor responsible for limiting population connectivity throughout these regions.

Consistent with previous predictions of connectivity between C. oreganus in Canada and populations further south in the United States (Stebbins, 2003), a significant level of gene flow was detected among the OKS and WA regions, specifically between the OS and WA‐S den complexes. Given that the OS den complex is closer in proximity to the WA‐N den complex, we expected to find that more migration would be occurring between these areas. While further investigation found a significant pattern of isolation‐by‐distance among dens across OS and WA‐N (r = .518, p = .002), other factors may be contributing to the genetic differentiation detected between these den complexes. In addition to geographic distance between these sites, there are several high‐elevation mountain peaks within the Pasayten Wilderness in Washington (USA) that are situated between OS and WA‐N, which may be inhibiting snake movement. In order for gene flow to occur between these groups, snakes would have to successfully traverse over these mountains at elevations >2,000 m, well above the elevation at which this species has been shown to occur in studies across its range in North America (Ashton, 2001; Gomez et al., 2015; Loughran, Beck, & Weaver, 2015; Macartney & Gregory, 1988; Maida et al., 2018; Winton et al., 2018). In contrast, elevation remains relatively low (< 834m) across the landscape from OS to WA‐S, potentially better facilitating connectivity between these two areas.

4.2. Genetic diversity and relatedness

Across both den complexes and individual dens, identified patterns of genetic variation aligned with the predictions of the central–marginal hypothesis for populations that exist at the periphery of a species distribution. Here, we saw reduced levels of genetic variation within the northernmost region of the Western Rattlesnake distribution, as evidenced by a significant negative relationship detected between latitude and within den complex estimates of nucleotide diversity (Figure 4). The proportion of polymorphism detected within den complexes also tended to be qualitatively lower at the northern extent of the species range in TNI and VER, and higher in the southern populations in OKS and WA (Table 5). Based upon inferred patterns of migration and genetic differentiation, it is likely that diversity measures are higher among den complexes within the OKS and WA regions due to inferred connectivity within and among these groups, which may extend further south into other populations of C. oreganus closer to the core of the range in North America. Future studies that include samples from rattlesnake populations at more southern latitudes would allow for more direct tests of the central–marginal hypothesis for this species to better understand how genetic diversity is distributed range‐wide.

Generally, observed levels of heterozygosity were either similar to or higher than those detected for populations of other vipers in North America using SNPs (Maigret, Cox, & Weisrock, 2020; Sovic, Fries, Martin, & Gibbs, 2019). Although not pervasive, almost all instances of significant heterozygote deficiency within Western Rattlesnake den complexes and individual dens were associated with significant levels of inbreeding (Table 4). The exceptions were the TNI‐W and WA‐S den complexes, where individual dens were not found to deviate from Hardy–Weinberg expectations or show evidence for significant levels of inbreeding. For the TNI‐W group, the reduced heterozygosity at the den complex level may be explained by the Wahlund effect (Wahlund, 1928), which results from the pooling of individuals from genetically structured groups, or in this case, dens. Further analysis of dens within this group revealed low, but significant, pairwise differentiation (θ = 0.0763; p < .001) between the TNI‐W01 and TNI‐W02 dens, suggesting that underlying substructure may be responsible for the reduced heterozygosity of the den complex as a whole. As for the WA‐S den complex, the only significant (p < .05) pairwise differentiation detected was between the WA‐S02 and WA‐S03 dens (θ = 0.0813). Rather than genetic substructure influencing heterozygosity at the den complex level in WA‐S, relatedness among sampled individuals may be leading to a “Family Wahlund Effect” (Castric, Bernatchez, Belkhir, & Bonhomme, 2002). In this den complex, mean pairwise relatedness was higher within den than among dens, suggesting that individual dens may be comprised of separate family groups. In fact, den WA‐03 contained three pairs of individuals with inferred relatedness at the level of half‐siblings (data not shown). As a result, the probability of having sampled sets of closely related individuals across this entire den complex is higher than expected if individuals were randomly mating across dens, thereby decreasing the overall observed levels of heterozygosity for the complex. A similar pattern has been found in other vertebrate systems (Castric et al., 2002; Jensen, Tapia, Caccone, & Russello, 2015).

4.3. Implications for conservation

Taken together, our results provide valuable information for conservation and management of Western Rattlesnakes at their northern range limits, and for communal denning vipers elsewhere. Evidence of significant population differentiation and limited connectivity within and among the main geographic regions of Western Rattlesnake occurrence in Canada suggest that management of this species as a single conservation unit may not be adequate for maintaining genetic diversity and population connectivity range‐wide. In particular, the magnitude of genetic differentiation between TNI, VER, and other sampled populations across the range may warrant reconsideration of the current designation of a single DU for C. oreganus in Canada, although our results only provide evidence for population discreteness. Further evaluation of the evolutionary significance of populations of this species is necessary prior to a formal recommendation to change DU status. Future studies using larger scale, genome‐wide data would allow for the detection of candidate or “outlier” loci under selection; if detected and validated, these loci can be used to quantify adaptive genetic variation and better address the evolutionary significance criterion (Funk et al., 2012).

In addition to informing conservation unit designation, the results of this study can help guide management strategies for this and other species with similar life‐history traits. For snake populations that occur in fragmented habitat, re‐establishing connectivity may be challenging. Based upon the inferred patterns of hierarchical population structure and migration, the rehabilitation of fragmented landscapes at key locations may be the most effective approach to restoring population connectivity at local (i.e., the den complex level) and regional scales. The identification and subsequent preservation/restoration of key movement corridors and critical habitats can help to encourage connectivity, whether it facilitates individual movements or the gradual expansion of existing populations. However, this approach would be challenging in landscapes where land ownership is primarily private and where strong legislation does not regulate land use to favor species at risk conservation and recovery. Furthermore, increased public outreach and education will be necessary to minimize human–snake conflicts if these animals are to re‐establish in areas from which they have been extirpated due to development.

An alternative approach for managing populations separated by unsuitable habitat or more distinct barriers could be to artificially increase gene flow through translocation. For example, in the north and central OKS region near the City of Kelowna (Figure 1), we were unable to sample snakes because population densities were too low or absent at potential denning sites. This is likely due to the intensity of human activities and development that is preventing gene flow among snakes in this area. In such cases where barriers to natural movement will be exceedingly difficult to remove, translocation could help introduce novel genetic variation across these populations and provide greater resilience to stochasticity and ongoing anthropogenic development. Translocations have been shown to be successful for both Antiguan Racers (Alsophis antiguae; Daltry et al., 2017) and Adders (Vipera berus; Madsen, Ujvari, & Olsson, 2004), resulting in bolstered population sizes and increased genetic variation (Madsen et al., 2004). However, it is important to note that in most instances, translocations are ineffective, especially for snakes and other reptiles (Brown, Bishop, & Brooks, 2009; Germano & Bishop, 2009; Nowak, Hare, & McNally, 2002; Reinert & Rupert, 1999). Many studies have found translocation to alter snake behavior and movement patterns, while also increasing population mortality (Reinert, 1991; Sullivan, Nowak, & Kwiatkowski, 2015). Additionally, the movement of individuals may also result in reduced genetic diversity for both newly established and source populations (Furlan et al., 2020), as well as outbreeding depression (Weeks et al., 2011). Due to the risks associated with translocations, it is imperative that they are biologically informed to maximize potential success. Several studies discuss the impacts of translocation on both population genetics and demography, and outline guidelines relevant to their use as a conservation tool (Furlan et al., 2020; Weeks et al., 2011). Notably, translocation efforts must account for species evolutionary trajectory as well as life‐history characteristics in order to help meet conservation goals.

Overall, the continued genetic monitoring of Western Rattlesnakes in this system can allow conservation managers to track changes in genetic diversity and population connectivity over time, as well as evaluate the outcomes of management efforts. The genotyping method employed in this study (GT‐seq, Campbell et al., 2015) is a reliable, quick, and relatively inexpensive approach for simultaneously genotyping hundreds to thousands of individuals at hundreds of SNPs, and can be successfully applied to minimally invasive DNA samples (Schmidt et al., 2020). As the environment is continually modified due to anthropogenic development and changing climates, leading‐edge genomic tools can allow wildlife and conservation managers to more effectively survey natural populations and adapt conservation strategies as necessary to encourage the persistence of species amidst their current decline.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

None declared.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Danielle A. Schmidt: Conceptualization (supporting); Data curation (lead); Formal analysis (lead); Investigation (lead); Methodology (equal); Writing‐original draft (lead); Writing‐review & editing (equal). Purnima Govindarajulu: Conceptualization (supporting); Funding acquisition (equal); Resources (supporting); Writing‐review & editing (supporting). Karl W. Larsen: Conceptualization (supporting); Data curation (supporting); Funding acquisition (equal); Resources (supporting); Supervision (supporting); Writing‐review & editing (supporting). Michael A. Russello: Conceptualization (lead); Formal analysis (supporting); Funding acquisition (equal); Investigation (supporting); Methodology (supporting); Project administration (lead); Resources (equal); Supervision (lead); Writing‐original draft (supporting); Writing‐review & editing (equal).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Jeff Brown, Kyle Horner, Owain M. McKibbin, and Christine Bishop (Environment and Climate Change Canada), Orville Dyer (BC Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy), Jared Hobbs (Hemmera), Lindsay Anderson, Robyn Reudink (BC Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations & Rural Development), John Rohrer (US Forest Service), Mike Dunn (Okanagan Nation Alliance), Stephanie Winton, Jared Maida, Jenny Petersen, Alycia Aird (Thompson Rivers University), JoAnne Hales (Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc), and Brodie Rundel (BC Parks) collected DNA samples that made this study possible. Bryson Sjodin, Luke Elliott, Brett Ford, and Kristine Teichman (UBC), and Shawn Klassen (BC Parks) provided valuable assistance in the field. Funding for this work was provided by the Habitat Conservation Trust Foundation (KL, MR, PG), the Interdepartmental Recovery Fund (KL), and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) Discovery grant # 341711 (MR).

APPENDIX 1.

FIGURE A1.

FIGURE A1

Line graphs depicting results of all iterations of STRUCTURE. Plot numbers correspond to the labels defined for each iteration of STRUCTURE in Figure 2. Dark gray lines represent the mean log probability for each K value (Mean lnP(K)) with vertical bars to show standard deviation. Light gray lines represent the value of ΔK across K values. Graphs with a blue background were determined to have an optimal K value of 3, while those with no colored background were determined to have an optimal K value of 2

Schmidt DA, Govindarajulu P, Larsen KW, Russello MA. Genotyping‐in‐Thousands by sequencing reveals marked population structure in Western Rattlesnakes to inform conservation status. Ecol Evol. 2020;10:7157–7172. 10.1002/ece3.6416

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Individual metadata and SNP genotypic data collected via GT‐seq are deposited in DRYAD (https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.fbg79cns4). All Illumina raw reads are available from the NCBI sequence read archive (BioProject ID: PRJNA631230).

REFERENCES

  1. Allendorf, F. W. , Hohenlohe, P. A. , & Luikart, G. (2010). Genomics and the future of conservation genetics. Nature Reviews Genetics, 11, 697–709. 10.1038/nrg2844 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Andrews, K. R. , Barba, M. D. , Russello, M. A. , & Waits, L. P. (2018). Advances in using non‐invasive, archival, and environmental samples for population genomic studies In Rajora O. P. (Ed.), Population Genomics (pp. 1–37). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. [Google Scholar]
  3. Andrews, K. M. , & Gibbons, J. W. (2005). How do highways influence snake movement? Behavioral responses to roads and vehicles. Copeia, 2005, 772–782. [Google Scholar]
  4. Ashton, K. G. (2001). Body size variation among mainland populations of the western rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis). Evolution, 55, 2523–2533. 10.1111/j.0014-3820.2001.tb00766.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Belkhir, K. , Borsa, P. , Chikhi, L. , Raufaste, N. , & Bonhomme, F. (2004). GENETIX 4.05, Windows TM software for population genetics, Montpellier, France: Laboratoire Génome, Populations, Interactions, CNRS. [Google Scholar]
  6. Bivand, R. , & Rundel, C. (2014). Rgeos: Interface to Geometry Engine‐Open Source (GEOS). R Package Version 0.3–6. Vienna, Austria: Comprehensive R Archive Network. Software. [Google Scholar]
  7. Brown, J. R. , Bishop, C. A. , & Brooks, R. J. (2009). Effectiveness of short‐distance translocation and its effects on western rattlesnakes. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 73, 419–425. 10.2193/2007-558 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  8. Burbrink, F. T. , & Castoe, T. A. (2009). 2. Molecular phylogeography of snakes In Mullin S. J., & Seigel R. A. (Eds.), Snakes (pp. 38–77). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. [Google Scholar]
  9. Campbell, N. R. , Harmon, S. A. , & Narum, S. R. (2015). Genotyping‐in‐Thousands by sequencing (GT‐seq): A cost effective SNP genotyping method based on custom amplicon sequencing. Molecular Ecology Resources, 15, 855–867. 10.1111/1755-0998.12357 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Cassel‐Lundhagen, A. , Tammaru, T. , Windig, J. J. , Ryrholm, N. , & Nylin, S. (2009). Are peripheral populations special? Congruent patterns in two butterfly species. Ecography, 32, 591–600. 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2008.05685.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  11. Castric, V. , Bernatchez, L. , Belkhir, K. , & Bonhomme, F. (2002). Heterozygote deficiencies in small lacustrine populations of Brook Charr Salvelinus fontinalis Mitchill (Pisces, Salmonidae): A test of alternative hypotheses. Heredity, 89, 27–35. 10.1038/sj.hdy.6800089 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Charland, M. B. , Nelson, K. J. , & Gregory, P. T. (1993). Status of the Northern Pacific Rattlesnake in British Columbia. Citeseer. [Google Scholar]
  13. Clark, R. W. (2004). Kin recognition in rattlesnakes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 271, S243–S245. 10.1098/rsbl.2004.0162 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Clark, R. W. , Brown, W. S. , Stechert, R. , & Zamudio, K. R. (2008). Integrating individual behaviour and landscape genetics: The population structure of Timber Rattlesnake hibernacula. Molecular Ecology, 17, 719–730. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Clark, R. W. , Brown, W. S. , Stechert, R. , & Zamudio, K. R. (2010). Roads, interrupted dispersal, and genetic diversity in timber rattlesnakes: Roads and population genetics. Conservation Biology, 24, 1059–1069. 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01439.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. R Core Team . (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; Retrieved from http://www.R‐project.org/ [Google Scholar]
  17. COSEWIC (2015). Western rattlesnake (Crotalus oreganus). Ottawa, ON, Canada: Environment Canada. [Google Scholar]
  18. Crandall, K. A. , Bininda‐Emonds, O. R. P. , Mace, G. M. , & Wayne, R. K. (2000). Considering evolutionary processes in conservation biology. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 15, 290–295. 10.1016/S0169-5347(00)01876-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Daltry, J. C. , Lindsay, K. , Lawrence, S. N. , Morton, M. N. , Otto, A. , & Thibou, A. (2017). Successful reintroduction of the Critically Endangered Antiguan racer Alsophis antiguae to offshore islands in Antigua, West Indies. International Zoo Yearbook, 51, 97–106. [Google Scholar]
  20. DiLeo, M. F. , Rouse, J. D. , Dávila, J. A. , & Lougheed, S. C. (2013). The influence of landscape on gene flow in the Eastern Massasauga rattlesnake (Sistrurus c. Catenatus): Insight from computer simulations. Molecular Ecology, 22, 4483–4498. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Dray, S. , & Dufour, A.‐B. (2007). The ade4 package: Implementing the duality diagram for ecologists. Journal of Statistical Software, 22(4), 1–20. [Google Scholar]
  22. Earl, D. A. , & vonHoldt, B. M. (2012). STRUCTURE HARVESTER: A website and program for visualizing STRUCTURE output and implementing the Evanno method. Conservation Genetics Resources, 4, 359–361. 10.1007/s12686-011-9548-7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  23. Eckert, C. G. , Samis, K. E. , & Lougheed, S. C. (2008). Genetic variation across species’ geographical ranges: The central–marginal hypothesis and beyond. Molecular Ecology, 17, 1170–1188. 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2007.03659.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Ehrlich, P. R. (1988). The loss of diversity In Wilson E.O. (Ed.), Biodiversity. National Academy of Sciences (pp. 21–22). Washington, DC: National Academies Press. [Google Scholar]
  25. Environment and Climate Change Canada . (2017, June 7). COSEWIC guidelines for recognizing designatable units. [guidance]. [Google Scholar]
  26. Evanno, G. , Regnaut, S. , & Goudet, J. (2005). Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software structure: A simulation study. Molecular Ecology, 14, 2611–2620. 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2005.02553.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Excoffier, L. , & Lischer, H. E. L. (2010). Arlequin suite ver 3.5: A new series of programs to perform population genetics analyses under Linux and Windows. Molecular Ecology Resources, 10, 564–567. 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2010.02847.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Frankham, R. (2003). Genetics and conservation biology. Comptes Rendus Biologies, 326, 22–29. 10.1016/S1631-0691(03)00023-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Funk, W. C. , Mckay, J. K. , Hohenlohe, P. A. , & Allendorf, F. W. (2012). Harnessing genomics for delineating conservation units. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 27, 489–496. 10.1016/j.tree.2012.05.012 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Furlan, E. M. , Gruber, B. , Attard, C. R. M. , Wager, R. N. E. , Kerezsy, A. , Faulks, L. K. , … Unmack, P. J. (2020). Assessing the benefits and risks of translocations in depauperate species: A theoretical framework with an empirical validation. Journal of Applied Ecology, 57(4), 831–841. 10.1111/1365-2664.13581 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  31. Germano, J. M. , & Bishop, P. J. (2009). Suitability of amphibians and reptiles for translocation. Conservation Biology, 23, 7–15. 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.01123.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Gomez, L. , Larsen, K. , & Gregory, P. (2015). Contrasting patterns of migration and habitat use in neighboring rattlesnake populations. Journal of Herpetology, 49, 371–376. 10.1670/13-138 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  33. Green, D. M. (2005). Designatable units for status assessment of endangered species. Conservation Biology, 19, 1813–1820. 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00284.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  34. Hardy, O. J. , & Vekemans, X. (2002). SPAGeDI: A versatile computer program to analyse spatial genetic structure at the individual or population levels. Molecular Ecology Notes, 2, 618–620. 10.1046/j.1471-8286.2002.00305.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  35. Harvey, J. A. (2015). Thermal influences on summer habitat use by western rattlesnakes (Crotalus oreganus) in British Columbia. [Google Scholar]
  36. Harvey, J. A. , & Larsen, K. W. (in press). Rattlesnake migrations and the implications of thermal landscapes. Movement Ecology. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Herrmann, H.‐W. , Pozarowski, K. M. , Ochoa, A. , & Schuett, G. W. (2017). An interstate highway affects gene flow in a top reptilian predator (Crotalus atrox) of the Sonoran Desert. Conservation Genetics, 18, 911–924. 10.1007/s10592-017-0936-8 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  38. Hobbs, J. (2013). Den survey and population assessment of the Northern Pacific Rattlesnake in BC: Final report. Victoria, BC, Canada: BC Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations. [Google Scholar]
  39. Hoss, S. K. , Deutschman, D. H. , Booth, W. , & Clark, R. W. (2015). Post‐birth separation affects the affiliative behaviour of kin in a pitviper with maternal attendance. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 116, 637–648. [Google Scholar]
  40. Jakobsson, M. , & Rosenberg, N. A. (2007). CLUMPP : A cluster matching and permutation program for dealing with label switching and multimodality in analysis of population structure. Bioinformatics, 23, 1801–1806. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Jensen, E. L. , Tapia, W. , Caccone, A. , & Russello, M. A. (2015). Genetics of a head‐start program to guide conservation of an endangered Galápagos tortoise (Chelonoidis ephippium). Conservation Genetics, 16, 823–832. 10.1007/s10592-015-0703-7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  42. Kalinowski, S. T. , Wagner, A. P. , & Taper, M. L. (2006). ML‐RELATE: A computer program for maximum likelihood estimation of relatedness and relationship. Molecular Ecology Notes, 6, 576–579. 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2006.01256.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  43. Lesica, P. , & Allendorf, F. W. (1995). When are peripheral populations valuable for conservation? Conservation Biology, 9, 753–760. 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1995.09040753.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  44. Lomas, E. , Larsen, K. W. , & Bishop, C. A. (2015). Persistence of Northern Pacific Rattlesnakes masks the impact of human disturbance on weight and body condition: Effects of human disturbance on rattlesnakes. Animal Conservation, 18, 548–556. 10.1111/acv.12208 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  45. Longmire, J. L. , Maltbie, M. , & Baker, R. J. (1997). Use of “lysis buffer” in DNA isolation and its implication for museum collections. Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech University, 163, 1–3. [Google Scholar]
  46. Loughran, C. L. , Beck, D. D. , & Weaver, R. E. (2015). Use of communal shedding sites by the Northern Pacific rattlesnake (crotalus Oreganus Oreganus) in Central Washington State. Northwestern Naturalist, 96, 156–160. [Google Scholar]
  47. Lowe, W. H. , & Allendorf, F. W. (2010). What can genetics tell us about population connectivity? Molecular Ecology, 19, 3038–3051. 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2010.04688.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Macartney, J. M. , & Gregory, P. T. (1988). Reproductive biology of female rattlesnakes (Crotalus viridis) in British Columbia. Copeia, 1988, 47–57. 10.2307/1445921 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  49. Madsen, T. , Ujvari, B. , & Olsson, M. (2004). Novel genes continue to enhance population growth in adders (Vipera berus). Biological Conservation, 120, 145–147. 10.1016/j.biocon.2004.01.022 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  50. Magin, C. D. , Johnson, T. H. , Groombridge, B. , Jenkins, M. , & Smith, H. (1994). Species extinctions, endangerment and captive breeding In Olney P. J. S., Mace G. M., & Feistner A. T. C. (Eds.), Creative conservation: Interactive management of wild and captive animals (pp. 3–31). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer Netherlands. [Google Scholar]
  51. Maida, J. R. , Kirk, D. A. , McKibbin, O. , Row, J. R. , Larsen, K. W. , Stringam, C. , & Bishop, C. A. (2018). Population estimate, survivorship, and generation time of the northern Pacific rattlesnake (Crotalus o. Oreganus) at its northern‐most range limits. 12. [Google Scholar]
  52. Maigret, T. A. , Cox, J. J. , & Weisrock, D. W. (2020). A spatial genomic approach identifies time lags and historical barriers to gene flow in a rapidly fragmenting Appalachian landscape. Molecular Ecology, 29, 673–685. 10.1111/mec.15362 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Mantel, N. (1967). The detection of disease clustering and a generalized regression approach. Cancer Research, 27, 209–220. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. McRae, B. H. (2006). Isolation by resistance. Evolution, 60, 1551–1561. 10.1111/j.0014-3820.2006.tb00500.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Moritz, C. (1994). Defining “Evolutionarily Significant Units” for conservation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 9, 373–375. 10.1016/0169-5347(94)90057-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Murphy, J. B. (1971). A method for immobilising venomous snakes at Dallas Zoo. International Zoo Yearbook, 11, 233–233. 10.1111/j.1748-1090.1971.tb01915.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  57. NatureServe and IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) . (2007). Crotalus oreganus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2019–2. Retrieved from http://www.iucnredlist.org. Downloaded on 06 August 2019. [Google Scholar]
  58. Nowak, E. M. , Hare, T. , & McNally, J. (2002). Management of ‘“nuisance”’vipers: Effects of translocation on Western Diamond‐backed Rattlesnakes (Crotalus atrox). Biology of the Vipers, 2002, 533–560. [Google Scholar]
  59. Pease, C. M. , Lande, R. , & Bull, J. J. (1989). A model of population growth, dispersal and evolution in a changing environment. Ecology, 70, 1657–1664. 10.2307/1938100 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  60. Pritchard, J. K. , Stephens, M. , & Donnelly, P. (2000). Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics, 155, 945–959. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Purcell, S. , Neale, B. , Todd‐Brown, K. , Thomas, L. , Ferreira, M. A. R. , Bender, D. , … Sham, P. C. (2007). PLINK: A tool set for whole‐genome association and population‐based linkage analyses. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 81, 559–575. 10.1086/519795 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Purvis, A. , Gittleman, J. L. , Cowlishaw, G. , & Mace, G. M. (2000). Predicting extinction risk in declining species. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 267, 1947–1952. 10.1098/rspb.2000.1234 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Reinert, H. K. (1991). Translocation as a conservation strategy for amphibians and reptiles: Some comments, concerns, and observations. Herpetologica, 47, 357–363. [Google Scholar]
  64. Reinert, H. K. , & Rupert, R. R. (1999). Impacts of translocation on behavior and survival of timber rattlesnakes, Crotalus horridus . Journal of Herpetology, 33, 45–61. 10.2307/1565542 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  65. Rosenberg, N. A. (2004). distruct: A program for the graphical display of population structure. Molecular Ecology Notes, 4, 137–138. 10.1046/j.1471-8286.2003.00566.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  66. Rousset, F. (2008). GENEPOP’007: A complete re‐implementation of the GENEPOP software for Windows and Linux. Molecular Ecology Resources, 8, 103–106. 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.01931.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. Russello, M. A. , Waterhouse, M. D. , Etter, P. D. , & Johnson, E. A. (2015). From promise to practice: Pairing non‐invasive sampling with genomics in conservation. PeerJ, 3, e1106 10.7717/peerj.1106 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. Ryder, O. A. (1986). Species conservation and systematics: The dilemma of subspecies. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 1, 9–10. 10.1016/0169-5347(86)90059-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Schmidt, D. A. , Campbell, N. R. , Govindarajulu, P. , Larsen, K. W. , & Russello, M. A. (2020). Genotyping‐in‐Thousands by sequencing (GT‐seq) panel development and application to minimally invasive DNA samples to support studies in molecular ecology. Molecular Ecology Resources, 20(1), 114–124. 10.1111/1755-0998.13090 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Shepard, D. B. , Kuhns, A. R. , Dreslik, M. J. , & Phillips, C. A. (2008). Roads as barriers to animal movement in fragmented landscapes. Animal Conservation, 11, 288–296. 10.1111/j.1469-1795.2008.00183.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  71. Sovic, M. , Fries, A. , Martin, S. A. , & Gibbs, H. L. (2019). Genetic signatures of small effective population sizes and demographic declines in an endangered rattlesnake, Sistrurus catenatus . Evolutionary Applications, 12, 664–678. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. Stebbins, R. C. (2003). Western reptiles and amphibians. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company. [Google Scholar]
  73. Sullivan, B. K. , Nowak, E. M. , & Kwiatkowski, M. A. (2015). Problems with mitigation translocation of herpetofauna. Conservation Biology, 29, 12–18. 10.1111/cobi.12336 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  74. Wahlund, S. (1928). Zusammensetzung von populationen und korrelationserscheinungen vom standpunkt der vererbungslehre aus betrachtet. Hereditas, 11, 65–106. 10.1111/j.1601-5223.1928.tb02483.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  75. Walker, I. R. (2004). Climate change, the last fifteen thousand years in the Okanagan In Roed M. A., & Greenough J. D. (Eds.), Okanagan geology (pp. 55–62). Kelowna, BC, Canada: Kelowna Geology Commitee. [Google Scholar]
  76. Waples, R. S. (1991). Pacific salmon, Oncorhynchus spp., and the definition of “species” under the endangered species Act. Marine Fisheries Review, 53(3), 11–22. [Google Scholar]
  77. Weeks, A. R. , Sgro, C. M. , Young, A. G. , Frankham, R. , Mitchell, N. J. , Miller, K. A. , … Hoffmann, A. A. (2011). Assessing the benefits and risks of translocations in changing environments: A genetic perspective. Evolutionary Applications, 4, 709–725. 10.1111/j.1752-4571.2011.00192.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  78. Weir, B. S. , & Cockerham, C. C. (1984). Estimating F‐statistics for the analysis of population structure. Evolution, 38, 1358–1370. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  79. Wilson, G. A. , & Rannala, B. (2003). Bayesian inference of recent migration rates using multilocus genotypes. Genetics, 163, 1177–1191. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  80. Winton, S. A. , Taylor, R. , Bishop, C. A. , & Larsen, K. W. (2018). Estimating actual versus detected road mortality rates for a northern viper. Global Ecology and Conservation, 16, e00476 10.1016/j.gecco.2018.e00476 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  81. Wright, S. (1943). Isolation by distance. Genetics, 28, 114–138. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

Individual metadata and SNP genotypic data collected via GT‐seq are deposited in DRYAD (https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.fbg79cns4). All Illumina raw reads are available from the NCBI sequence read archive (BioProject ID: PRJNA631230).


Articles from Ecology and Evolution are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES