Abstract
There are increasing concerns regarding bat mortality at wind energy facilities, especially as installed capacity continues to grow. In North America, wind energy development has recently expanded into the Lower Rio Grande Valley in south Texas where bat species had not previously been exposed to wind turbines. Our study sought to characterize genetic diversity, population structure, and effective population size in Dasypterus ega and D. intermedius, two tree-roosting yellow bats native to this region and for which little is known about their population biology and seasonal movements. There was no evidence of population substructure in either species. Genetic diversity at mitochondrial and microsatellite loci was lower in these yellow bat taxa than in previously studied migratory tree bat species in North America, which may be due to the non-migratory nature of these species at our study site, the fact that our study site is located at a geographic range end for both taxa, and possibly weak ascertainment bias at microsatellite loci. Historical effective population size (NEF) was large for both species, while current estimates of Ne had upper 95% confidence limits that encompassed infinity. We found evidence of strong mitochondrial differentiation between the two putative subspecies of D. intermedius (D. i. floridanus and D. i. intermedius) which are sympatric in this region of Texas, yet little differentiation using microsatellite loci. We suggest this pattern is due to secondary contact and hybridization and possibly incomplete lineage sorting at microsatellite loci. We also found evidence of some hybridization between D. ega and D. intermedius in this region of Texas. We recommend that our data serve as a starting point for the long-term genetic monitoring of these species in order to better understand the impacts of wind-related mortality on these populations over time.
Keywords: Bats, Dasypterus ega, Dasypterus intermedius, Lasiurus, Microsatellites, Mitochondrial DNA, Population genetics, Tree bats, Wind energy development, Wind power
Introduction
Bats face significant threats from a variety of sources including habitat loss, diseases like white-nose syndrome, human disturbance and persecution, and climate change (Jones et al., 2009; O’Shea et al., 2016; Frick, Kingston & Flanders, 2019). The growth of wind energy development, which is critical for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and mitigating the effects of climate change, unfortunately also represents a potential threat to the persistence of bat populations as bats are killed at wind energy facilities worldwide (Arnett & Baerwald, 2013; Arnett et al., 2016; Zimmerling & Francis, 2016; Thaxter et al., 2017). In the United States and Canada, most of the research investigating bat mortality at wind energy facilities has focused on three bat species: Aeorestes [Lasiurus] cinereus, Lasiurus borealis, and Lasionycteris noctivigans, as they comprise the majority of fatalities reported annually (Arnett & Baerwald, 2013; Smallwood, 2013; Zimmerling & Francis, 2016). All three species are migratory, solitary, and tree-roosting; and as such, are dispersed across the landscape making it impossible to estimate census population sizes or monitor population trends using traditional mark-recapture methods (Schorr, Ellison & Lukacs, 2014). Given this challenge and the lack of empirical demographic data, studies of these three species have implemented population genetics methods to better understand genetic diversity and population connectivity (Luikart et al., 2010), which in turn likely affect species’ resiliency to sustained wind turbine mortality. From the studies published to date, these migratory tree bats all have high genetic diversity, large effective population sizes, and show no evidence of population sub-structure (Korstian, Hale & Williams, 2015; Vonhof & Russell, 2015; Pylant et al., 2016; Sovic, Carstens & Gibbs, 2016), most likely due to individuals mating during annual migration resulting in high gene flow among populations.
Given that population genetics methods can be implemented in repeated sampling efforts to detect evidence of population declines over time (Schwartz, Luikart & Waples, 2007; Antao, Pérez-Figueroa & Luikart, 2011), genetic data collected from bat species killed at wind turbines have the potential to reduce uncertainty regarding the impacts of wind energy on bat populations, and could be an important component of long-term monitoring efforts for conservation. Furthermore, the opportunity for expanding this approach beyond the three migratory tree bats mentioned above is high given the annual abundance of bat carcasses that could be available for DNA collection (Arnett & Baerwald, 2013; AWWI, 2018). The large quantity of bat carcasses salvaged from wind energy facilities at distinct geographic locations at known times of the year provides an opportunity to answer questions related to population status, cryptic species, geographic ranges, and seasonal movements—all aspects of bat biology that warrant additional investigation. With the population status of many bat species worldwide being unknown (Frick, Kingston & Flanders, 2019), fatalities at wind energy facilities in North America provide an opportunity to indirectly estimate the population-level effects of wind-related mortality if repeated genetic sampling efforts are carried out over time (Schwartz, Luikart & Waples, 2007).
Recent wind energy expansion into the Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas has led to two additional bat species, the northern yellow bat (Dasypterus intermedius) and the southern yellow bat (D. ega), being identified as collision fatalities at wind turbines (AWWI, 2018). Yellow bats are Lasiurine bats and are therefore closely related to hoary bats (Aeorestes) and red bats (Lasiurus; Baird et al., 2015; Baird et al., 2017). Thus, the potential for collision mortality from wind energy development is high for these species given their shared life histories and the level of mortality seen annually in A. cinereus and L. borealis. The purpose of our study was to use Dasypterus carcasses salvaged from two wind energy facilities located in far-south Texas to provide insights into aspects of yellow bat basic biology such as seasonal movements, population connectivity, and life-history characteristics. Specifically, we sought to provide contemporary estimates of genetic diversity, effective population size, and population structure which can be used as a baseline for the long-term genetic monitoring of these species, and provide recommendations for future research. And finally, due to the location of our study site, we assessed the status of D. intermedius subspecies designations (D. intermedius floridanus and D. i. intermedius; Webster, Jones & Baker, 1980) to determine whether the groups are genetically distinct and if both putative subspecies are sympatric in south Texas.
Materials & Methods
Focal species
Overall, the geographic range of D. ega is expansive, encompassing much of South America, Central America, and the southern region and gulf coast of Mexico (Barquez & Diaz, 2016). In contrast, the range of D. intermedius is more limited in scope and includes the southeastern U.S., continuing west along the Gulf of Mexico as far south as Nicaragua, and then extends northward along the Pacific coast of Mexico (Miller & Rodriguez, 2016). Within Texas, both D. ega and D. intermedius have a limited geographic range (Ammerman, Hice & Schmidly, 2012; see Fig. 2 in Decker et al., 2020). The northern limit to the range of D. ega was previously thought to include only the southernmost counties of Texas, although a recent study documents a northern expansion into south-central Texas (Decker et al., 2020). D. intermedius was known primarily from Texas counties along the Gulf of Mexico, but now appears to be expanding inland (Decker et al., 2020). Previous research separated D. intermedius into two subspecies based on body size and pelage color, and suggested that they differentiated during the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) in separate refugia (Hall & Jones Jr, 1961). Today D. i. intermedius is believed to occur from Central America into southern Texas, whereas D. i. floridanus occurs from Florida along the Gulf Coast and into southern Texas. Several recent studies have revealed that these two subspecies are clearly differentiated at mitochondrial loci and that they are sympatric in southern Texas (Chipps et al., 2020; Decker & Ammerman, 2020). Decker & Ammerman (2020) estimated that these subspecies differentiated long before the LGM (∼5.5 Ma) and found strong mito-nuclear discordance using a nuclear intron (chymase intron 1). Decker & Ammerman (2020) further suggest that secondary contact and interbreeding between these taxa is the primary cause of the discordance; a result that is also supported by evidence of intergradation in morphology across their range (Hall & Jones Jr, 1961).
Sample collection
We obtained wing tissue samples from D. ega and D. intermedius carcasses collected during post-construction fatality surveys at wind energy facilities in Starr and Hidalgo Counties (Texas) from March through November of 2017 and 2018 (n = 439 carcasses; Weaver, 2019; Weaver et al., 2020). Duke Energy and EDP Renewables provided access to their wind energy facilities (EDPR: contract number 0320007188). Bat carcasses were collected in accordance with the Texas State University Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC: permit number 20171185494) and Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD: permit number SPR-0213-023). Wing tissue samples were stored in vials containing 95% ethanol. We extracted DNA from the preserved tissue samples following the ammonium acetate/isopropanol precipitation method detailed in Korstian et al. (2013). We used DNA barcoding to confirm or correct species identification (Chipps et al., 2020).
Mitochondrial DNA sequencing
We sequenced DNA extracted from all wing tissue samples at a 550 bp section of the mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase I (COI) gene. To amplify the COI gene using a polymerase chain reaction (PCR), we used an M13-tailed primer cocktail (Ivanova et al., 2007); cocktail 2 in Clare et al., 2007). PCR reactions (10 µL) contained 10–50 ng DNA, 0.2 µM of the primer cocktail, 1X BSA, and 1X AccuStart™ II PCR SuperMix. PCR reactions were completed using an ABI 2720 thermal cycler with parameters: one cycle at 94 °C for 15 min, followed by 30 cycles of 30 s at 94 °C, 90 s at 57 °C, 90 s at 72 °C, and then a final extension of 5 min at 72 °C. Products were sequenced using ABI Big Dye Terminator Cycle Sequencing v3.1 Chemistry (Applied Biosystems, USA) with the PCR primers. DNA sequences were analyzed on an ABI 3130XL Genetic Analyzer (Applied Biosystems, USA); trimmed, edited and assembled into contigs using Sequencher v5.1 (Gene Codes, USA); and then aligned in MEGA v10 (Kumar et al., 2018). Aligned sequences were translated to verify the absence of stop codons, after which they were compared to GenBank voucher sequences to generate a species ID. Only sequences > 400 bp in length were used and our criterion to accept a molecular species identification required an identity value > 98% in BLAST. Unique sequence haplotypes were detected using GenAlEx v6.5 (Peakall & Smouse, 2006).
Nuclear microsatellite loci amplification
We amplified 118 D. ega and 262 D. intermedius samples at 13 microsatellite loci in three groups: multiplex A with primers: Coto_G12, LAS7468, LAS8830, LAS9555 and LAS9618; multiplex B with primers: Cora_F11, LAS2547, LAS8425, LAS9151 and LbT; and multiplex C with primers: LAS7831, LcM, LcU. Primers were previously developed for use in L. borealis, A. cinereus, and Corynorhinus spp. by Piaggio, Figueroa & Perkins (2009), Piaggio et al. (2009), Korstian, Hale & Williams (2014) and Keller et al. (2014). PCR reactions were performed using the same ratios of reagents as mitochondrial sequencing, but had cycling parameters of: one cycle at 94 °C for 15 min, followed by 30 cycles of 30 s at 94 °C, 90 s at 60 °C, 90 s at 72 °C, and then a final extension of 30 min at 60 °C. The PCR products were diluted with 200 µL dH20. For all samples, 0.5 µL of diluted product was loaded in 15 µL HIDI formamide with 0.1 µL LIZ-500 size standard (ThermoFisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) and electrophoresed using an ABI 3130XL Genetic Analyzer (ThermoFisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). We scored and binned genotypes using Genemapper v5.0 (ThermoFisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA).
Genetic diversity analyses
Microsatellite Loci
We used GenAlEx v6.5 to determine the number of alleles, observed heterozygosity (Ho), expected heterozygosity (HE), and FIS at each locus in each taxon separately (Peakall & Smouse, 2006; Peakall & Smouse, 2012). We also used GenAlEx v6.5 to calculate FST and unbiased Nei’s genetic distance between species and subspecies. Because the magnitude of FST is influenced by heterozygosity, we also present the standardized measure F′ST developed by Meirmans & Hedrick (2011). Microsatellite loci were tested for deviations from Hardy–Weinberg Equilibrium (HWE) with heterozygote excess, as well as genotypic linkage equilibrium using GENEPOP v4.7 (Rousset, 2008). We used a sequential Bonferroni correction to account for multiple comparisons in these tests. Null alleles were identified using MICROCHECKER v2.2.3 (Van Oosterhout et al., 2004), and then loci with null alleles and significant deviations from HWE were removed from further analyses. HP-RARE was used to calculate allelic richness (Ar) using rarefaction to consider the differences in sample sizes between taxa (Kalinowski, 2005). When amplifying microsatellite loci cross-species, it is possible to lose variability across loci which would lead to an underestimate of nuclear genetic diversity. One expectation of ascertainment bias at microsatellite loci is that the median allele size is expected to be smaller in the species for which the loci were not originally developed since shorter microsatellites are generally less variable (Crawford et al., 1998). We compared the median allele sizes for the loci used in yellow bat species to median allele sizes of the same loci in L. borealis and A. cinereus using Mann–Whitney U tests. For D. ega and D. intermedius there was no difference in median allele lengths with those of L. borealis and A. cinereus, suggesting ascertainment bias is not strong in these species (D. ega versus L. borealis/A. cinereus medians: 269 bp and 266 bp, W = 84.0, P = 0.93; D. intermedius versus L. borealis/A. cinereus medians: 274 bp and 267 bp, W = 40, P = 0.94).
Mitochondrial DNA
We calculated haplotype diversity (h) in GenAlEx v6.5 and nucleotide diversity of mitochondrial haplotypes (π) using DnaSP v6 (Rozas et al., 2017). Mitochondrial COI sequences from putative D. intermedius subspecies sampled in this study and downloaded from GenBank were used to create a Minimum Spanning Network in PopArt (Leigh & Bryant, 2015).
Population structure
We tested for evidence of population structure for each taxon individually, for D. i. floridanus and D. i. intermedius together, and for D. ega with D. intermedius combined using STRUCTURE v2.3.4, which clusters multilocus microsatellite genotypes based on the number of genetically distinct populations (Pritchard, Stephens & Donnelly, 2000). We assumed admixture, correlated allele frequencies, and omitted prior taxon designation. We used the Markov Chain Monte Carlo for 106 iterations after a burn-in period of 104 iterations for 10 replicates of K = 1–5 clusters. STRUCTURE can give misleading results for the number of populations and individual ancestry if there is uneven sampling across clusters, K (Puechmaille, 2016; Wang, 2017). To mitigate these potential biases, we used the recommendations of Wang (2017) and set the prior for admixture to allow α to vary between clusters and we decreased the initial α from 1.0 to 0.2. We estimated the most likely K using the method from Evanno, Regnaut & Goudet (2005) and by determining the highest LnP(D) before values plateaued (Pritchard, Stephens & Donnelly, 2000). We used CLUMPP v1.1.1 to average the most likely K across ten replicate runs (Jakobsson & Rosenberg, 2007). We considered individuals to be admixed between clusters when their ancestry (q) was ≥ 0.10 in each of two or more clusters, a value that has been used in a number of other studies (Vähä & Primmer, 2006; Barilani et al., 2007; Sanz et al., 2009; Bohling, Adams & Waits, 2013; Johnson et al., 2015).
Population expansion and effective population size
We tested for neutrality using DnaSP v6 in each taxon and used the COI sequences to calculate Fu’s F and Tajima’s D (Fu, 1997; Tajima, 1989). Values showing significant negative deviations from the null model of a stable population indicate historical population growth. Historic female effective population size (NEf) was estimated by first calculating Watterson’s estimator of COI sequence diversity (θ) in Arlequin v3.5, and then by using the equation: θ= 2Neu, where u is the mutation rate per sequence per generation (Excoffier & Lischer, 2010; Schenekar & Weiss, 2011). As the mutation rate of the COI gene is not known for either yellow bat species, we used mutation rates of the cytochrome b gene from other bat species of Vespertilionidae (Nabholz, Glémin & Galtier, 2008). The high and low mutation rates used were 9.115 × 10−5 and 6.751 × 10−6 per sequence per year, respectively. Contemporary effective population size (Ne) was estimated from the microsatellite genotypes using NeEstimator v2.1, and a minimum allele frequency of 0.05 was used to calculate upper and lower limits of Ne with the linkage disequilibrium model assuming random mating (Do et al., 2014).
Results
Dasypterus ega - microsatellite genetic diversity
After genotyping 119 D. ega individuals at 13 microsatellite loci, we removed 4 loci due to either null alleles or deviations from HWE. None of the remaining nine loci exhibited a heterozygote deficit or genotypic linkage disequilibrium. One sample was removed after failing to amplify at >50% of the loci. One hundred fifteen individuals amplified successfully at all 9 loci (Table 1). Observed heterozygosity (Ho) ranged from 0.513 to 0.974 across loci (mean 0.760 ± 0.050 SE), with the number of alleles ranging from 2 to 40. Allelic richness (Ar) ranged from 3.14 to 4.61 (3.548 ± 0.329).
Table 1. Characterization of microsatellite loci for each Dasypterus taxon examined.
Each locus has the number of individuals (n), allele size range in bp, number of alleles (Na), allelic richness (Ar), observed heterozygosity (HO), expected heterozygosity (HE), and the inbreeding coefficient FIS. Ar was only calculated using loci shared among all taxa.
Species | Locus | n | Size range (bp) | Na | Ar | HO | HE | FIS |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
D. ega | Coto_G12 | 118 | 211–231 | 10 | – | 0.839 | 0.808 | −0.038 |
LAS7468 | 115 | 311–419 | 40 | 4.61 | 0.974 | 0.954 | −0.021 | |
LAS8830 | 117 | 254–284 | 13 | 3.59 | 0.821 | 0.822 | 0.002 | |
LAS9555 | 116 | 441–489 | 16 | – | 0.793 | 0.836 | 0.051 | |
Cora_F11 | 117 | 146–155 | 2 | – | 0.513 | 0.498 | −0.029 | |
LAS9151 | 118 | 262–306 | 11 | 2.64 | 0.551 | 0.588 | 0.063 | |
LAS7831 | 116 | 401–423 | 11 | 3.76 | 0.871 | 0.849 | −0.026 | |
LcM | 116 | 195–241 | 20 | – | 0.690 | 0.712 | 0.031 | |
LcU | 116 | 220–253 | 7 | 3.14 | 0.793 | 0.750 | −0.057 | |
D. i. floridanus | Coto_G12 | 50 | 211–231 | 10 | – | 0.800 | 0.839 | 0.047 |
LAS7468 | 49 | 325–376 | 20 | 4.41 | 0.980 | 0.927 | −0.057 | |
LAS8830 | 50 | 262–276 | 8 | 3.19 | 0.760 | 0.751 | −0.012 | |
LAS8425 | 50 | 166–172 | 4 | – | 0.300 | 0.269 | −0.117 | |
LAS9151 | 50 | 272–290 | 4 | 2.00 | 0.520 | 0.491 | −0.059 | |
LAS7831 | 50 | 399–418 | 10 | 3.82 | 0.800 | 0.854 | 0.063 | |
LcM | 50 | 203–245 | 13 | – | 0.740 | 0.803 | 0.078 | |
LcU | 50 | 228–253 | 7 | 2.99 | 0.640 | 0.662 | 0.033 | |
D. i. intermedius | LAS7468 | 208 | 325–384 | 24 | 4.37 | 0.938 | 0.930 | 0.932 |
LAS8830 | 211 | 264–278 | 8 | 3.23 | 0.716 | 0.764 | −0.009 | |
LAS2547 | 184 | 428–461 | 15 | – | 0.842 | 0.827 | 0.063 | |
LAS8425 | 211 | 166–188 | 5 | – | 0.209 | 0.202 | −0.019 | |
LAS9151 | 211 | 264–293 | 9 | 2.10 | 0.507 | 0.519 | −0.032 | |
LAS7831 | 205 | 397–417 | 11 | 3.94 | 0.873 | 0.876 | 0.022 | |
LcU | 211 | 224–228 | 7 | 2.99 | 0.720 | 0.715 | 0.004 | |
D. intermedius | LAS7468 | 257 | 325–384 | 37 | 4.52 | 0.946 | 0.946 | 0.001 |
LAS8830 | 261 | 262–278 | 9 | 3.22 | 0.724 | 0.762 | 0.050 | |
LAS8425 | 261 | 166–188 | 5 | – | 0.226 | 0.215 | −0.051 | |
LAS9151 | 261 | 264–293 | 9 | 2.08 | 0.510 | 0.513 | 0.008 | |
LAS7831 | 255 | 397–418 | 12 | 3.93 | 0.859 | 0.876 | 0.019 | |
LcU | 261 | 224–253 | 9 | 2.96 | 0.705 | 0.708 | 0.004 |
Dasypterus intermedius - microsatellite genetic diversity
A total of 267 individuals identified by DNA barcoding as either of the two D. intermedius subspecies (50 D. i. floridanus and 217 D. i. intermedius) were genotyped at 13 microsatellite loci. For D. i. floridanus, we removed 5 loci due to null alleles or deviations from HWE. Forty-nine individuals amplified at all loci (Table 1). Observed heterozygosity (Ho) ranged from 0.300 to 0.980 across loci (0.692 ± 0.073), with the number of alleles ranging from 4 to 20. Allelic richness (Ar) ranged from 2 to 4.41 (3.282 ± 0.406). For D. i. intermedius, we removed 6 loci due to null alleles or deviations from HWE. One hundred eighty-four individuals amplified at all loci, and we removed 5 samples after failing to amplify at > 50% of loci (Table 1). Observed heterozygosity (Ho) ranged from 0.209 to 0.938 (0.686 ± 0.096), with the number of alleles ranging from 5 to 24. Allelic richness (Ar) ranged from 2.1 to 4.37 (3.362 ± 0.393). And finally, we also analyzed both D. intermedius subspecies together at 6 shared loci (255 individuals amplified at all loci; Table 1). Observed heterozygosity (Ho) ranged from 0.226 to 0.946 (0.662 ± 0.106), with the number of alleles ranging from 5 to 37. Allelic richness (Ar) ranged from 2.08 to 4.52 (3.342 ± 0.418).
Mitochondrial genetic diversity
We identified two unique haplotypes in 112 D. ega individuals (Table 2). The most common haplotype had a frequency of 0.991 and nucleotide diversity (π) was 0.00003. We found six unique haplotypes in 50 D. i. floridanus individuals, with the most common haplotype having a frequency (h) of 0.580. Seven unique haplotypes were found in 212 D. i. intermedius (Table 2). The most common haplotype had a frequency of 0.527. In D. i. floridanus nucleotide diversity was 0.00225, whereas in D. i. intermedius it was 0.00177. The minimum spanning haplotype network for D. intermedius revealed two clusters separated by 56 base substitutions which corresponded to D. i. floridanus and D. i. intermedius (Fig. 1).
Table 2. Characterization of mitochondrial diversity for each Dasypterus taxon examined.
Number of individuals (n) of each taxon analyzed for mtDNA diversity using number of unique haplotypes (H), haplotype diversity (h), and nucleotide diversity (π). mtDNA sequences were also used to calculate Tajimas D, Fu’s Fs, and Watterson’s estimator (theta).
Taxon | n | H | h | π | Tajima’s D | Fu’s Fs | θ |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
D. ega | 112 | 2 | 0.018 | 0.00003 | −1.011 | −2.344 | 0.188 |
D. i. floridanus | 50 | 6 | 0.588 | 0.00225 | −0.821 | −0.369 | 1.786 |
D. i. intermedius | 203 | 7 | 0.542 | 0.00177 | −0.825 | −0.663 | 1.522 |
Figure 1. Minimum spanning haplotype network of unique mitochondrial COI sequences.
Minimum spanning haplotype network of unique COI sequences from Dasypterus i. floridanus (Dinf) and D. i. intermedius (Dini) individuals from this study and from GenBank. Circles indicate haplotypes and the size of each circle corresponds to the number of individuals having that haplotype. Vertical hatch marks represent the number of nucleotide substitutions between haplotypes.
Population structure
Genetic differentiation between D. ega and D. intermedius was high once values were corrected for heterozygosity (FST = 0.13, P = 0.001; F′ST = 0.610, Nei’s = 0.788). There was low but significant genetic differentiation at microsatellite loci that increased slightly after correcting for heterozygosity between D. i. floridanus and D. i. intermedius (FST = 0.014, P = 0.001; F′ST = 0.057, Nei’s = 0.046). The STRUCTURE analyses indicated that the most likely number of genetic clusters within each of the three taxa was K = 1. When D. i. floridanus and D. i. intermedius were analyzed together, the most likely number of clusters (K) was one. When D. ega and D. intermedius were analyzed together, the LnP(D) method provided evidence of K = 3 as the number of clusters with the highest support; however, it was apparent that the largest change of LnP(D) was between K = 1 and 2, which more often corresponds to the true K (Pritchard, Wen & Falush, 2010; Fig. 2A). The Evanno, Regnaut & Goudet (2005) method also identified K = 2 as the best-supported number of clusters when D. ega and D. intermedius were analyzed together. At K = 2, D. ega and D. intermedius belonged to separate genetic clusters (Figs. 2B and 3). The STRUCTURE analysis provided some evidence of hybridization between D. ega and D. i. intermedius (Fig. 3). One individual with a D. ega mtDNA haplotype had 95% ancestry with D. intermedius, whereas four other individuals with D. ega haplotypes had on average 21% ancestry (13–24%) with D. intermedius. There were two individuals with D. intermedius mtDNA haplotypes that had 64% and 74% ancestry, respectively, with D. ega (Fig. 3).
Figure 2. Most likely number of populations as calculated by STRUCTURE for all bats.
(A) Mean of Ln estimated probability of data ± SD. (B) Delta K from Evanno, Regnaut & Goudet (2005).
Figure 3. STRUCTURE plot showing the proportion of ancestry for all Dasypterus bats.
STRUCTURE plot for K = 2 showing the proportion of ancestry for D. ega and D. intermedius. Vertical bars with both colors indicate individuals of mixed ancestry.
Population expansion and effective population size
Tajima’s D and Fu’s F were −1.011 and −2.344 in D. ega, −0.821 and -0.369 in D. i. floridanus and −0.825 and −0.663 in D. i. intermedius, respectively (Table 2). None of the values were significantly different from zero and therefore do not support a history of past demographic expansion. Estimates of NEf were lower for D. ega than D. intermedius, whereas estimates for the two D. intermedius subspecies were similar (Table 3). Contemporary estimates of Ne all had upper bounds of infinity. Similar to estimates of NEf, the point estimates of Ne and the lower 95% CI of Ne was lower for D. ega than D. intermedius.
Table 3. Estimated effective population size for each Dasypterus taxon examined.
Estimated current effective population size (Ne) with 95% confidence intervals and estimated historic female effective population size (NEf) using low and high mutation rates for each taxon in this study.
Taxon | n | Ne | Lower 95% CI | Upper 95% CI | NEfLow | NEfHigh |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
D. ega | 118 | 423 | 169 | ∞ | 1,031 | 13,924 |
D. i. floridanus | 50 | ∞ | 551 | ∞ | 9,797 | 132,277 |
D. i. intermedius | 212 | 1,032 | 325 | ∞ | 8,349 | 112,724 |
D. intermedius | 262 | 2,880 | 396 | ∞ | – | – |
Discussion
Genetic diversity and effective population size
Both mitochondrial and nuclear microsatellite genetic diversity were lower in D. ega and D. intermedius compared to two closely related species, A. cinereus (Ho = 0.86, h = 0.78–0.87) and L. borealis (Ho = 0.81–0.82, h = 0.95–0.99; Vonhof & Russell, 2015; Korstian, Hale & Williams, 2015; Pylant et al., 2016). There are three non-mutually exclusive hypotheses why genetic diversity may be lower in yellow bats. First, both A. cinereus and L. borealis mate while undertaking seasonal migration, leading to gene flow between geographically distanced populations which would maintain high nuclear and matrilineal genetic diversity (Cryan et al., 2012; Vonhof & Russell, 2015; Korstian, Hale & Williams, 2015; Pylant et al., 2016). In contrast, yellow bats are thought to be non-migratory and so local populations like the ones we sampled may not have as high of diversity as these other species (Baker, Mollhagen & Lopez, 1971; Decker et al., 2020). Second, the lower genetic diversity found in our study could also be due to genetic drift since our study site is located at a geographic range-edge for both taxa (Webster, Jones & Baker, 1980; Decker et al., 2020). The samples collected at our study site may therefore only represent a subset of the genetic diversity found at the range-center of these species (Eckert, Samis & Lougheed, 2008; Cahill & Levinton, 2015). Third, the lower diversity we observed in yellow bats compared to A. cinereus and L. borealis may be due to ascertainment bias as the microsatellite loci used in this study were developed for use in those other species (Li & Kimmel, 2013). Median allele sizes in D. ega and D. intermedius were similar to what was observed in A. cinereus and L. borealis for the loci used in this study; suggesting that ascertainment bias at microsatellite loci is not strong for these species.
Estimates of historic (long-term) effective population size for yellow bats were similar to A. cinereus (103–104) but lower than L. borealis (105–106; (Vonhof & Russell, 2015; Korstian, Hale & Williams, 2015; Pylant et al., 2016). Estimates of current Ne have confidence limits that broadly overlap those from A. cinereus and L. borealis from those previous studies. Estimating contemporary Ne is difficult for species with Ne > 1,000 using the LD method (Waples & Do, 2010). The upper limits to the 95% confidence intervals were infinite for all taxa. To achieve greater confidence in estimates of Ne, future studies will require many more additional genetic markers (Waples & Do, 2010). Nonetheless, the lower bound to the 95% confidence interval may still be informative as to the occurrence of bottlenecks if Ne is repeatedly estimated as part of a genetic monitoring protocol for yellow bats over time (Waples & Do, 2010; Korstian, Hale & Williams, 2015). We recommend future population-genetic studies of bats use next generation sequencing methods with many more markers (e.g., SNPs) to increase the power of conclusions inferred from genetic data.
Population structure and expansion
Both D. ega and D. intermedius have geographic ranges that extend along the Gulf Coast and south beyond the border with Mexico into Central America (and into South America for D. ega; Barquez & Diaz, 2016; Miller & Rodriguez, 2016). D. ega also appears to be expanding northward following plantings of ornamental palm trees, their preferred roost, and so they may be a more recent colonist of south Texas (Spencer, Choucair & Chapman, 1988; Demere et al., 2012; Decker et al., 2020). Using STRUCTURE, we found no evidence of population substructure in any of the three yellow bat taxa which might be expected since we may be sampling non-migratory populations at the edge of their ranges. D. i. floridanus has a star-shaped minimum-spanning haplotype network, which is expected under a scenario of past population range expansion (Avise, 2000); however, Tajima’s D and Fu’s F were not significantly different from zero for any of the taxa, providing no statistical evidence of past demographic population expansion.
Taxonomy
Both the mitochondrial locus and microsatellite loci clearly distinguish D. ega and D. intermedius and both F′ST and Nei’s genetic distance are high between the two species. We found evidence that hybridization sometimes occurs between D. ega and D. intermedius in south Texas and this deserves further study to determine if hybridization occurs throughout the region of sympatry between these two species in Mexico and Central America or if it is occurring primarily at their range edges. Bats are thought to have lower rates of cross-species hybridization than some other taxa, although an increasing number of studies are reporting evidence for hybridization, which has probably played an important role in speciation (e.g., Bogdanowicz, Piksa & Tereba, 2012; Çoraman et al., 2019).
Using mtDNA, we found two monophyletic clades that corresponded to the two subspecies of D. intermedius (Chipps et al., 2020; Decker & Ammerman, 2020; Fig. 1); and yet, when we compared microsatellite genotypes between these two clades we found little differentiation. These results are consistent with two other recent studies that also found little to no genetic differentiation at either a nuclear intron or microsatellite loci (Decker, 2019; Decker & Ammerman, 2020). Differentiation as measured by FST (∼0.01) between these groups was significant but also below the lower threshold at which STRUCTURE can distinguish between groups (FST∼0.03–0.05 or an F′ST of ∼0.30; Latch et al., 2006). The five loci that were used in these analyses were fairly polymorphic (average HE = 0.75; average number of alleles = 10–11) and easily discriminated between D. intermedius and D. ega and so it seems unlikely that low diversity per se may have resulted in low differentiation between these groups.
There are several possibilities for the low divergence at nuclear loci, including hybridization following secondary contact and incomplete lineage sorting. A previous study of these subspecies has suggested the mito-nuclear discordance is most likely due to secondary contact and hybridization (Decker & Ammerman, 2020), which would be consistent with our results and evidence for morphological intergradation between the subspecies. Populations isolated for long periods of time can become differentiated at both mitochondrial and nuclear loci due to adaptation and genetic drift, although it is expected that mtDNA will complete the process of lineage sorting before nuclear DNA since it has an effective size that of the nuclear genome (Hudson & Turelli, 2003; Zink & Barrowclough, 2008; Toews & Brelsford, 2012). Future studies will need to sample D. intermedius across its entire range and use a larger suite of markers to determine the most likely cause of the mito-nuclear discordance we see in this region of overlap in Texas.
Conservation genetics and wind energy development
Mitigating the impacts of climate change by increasing electricity generation from renewable sources like wind power has the potential to benefit wildlife conservation (e.g., Kiesecker et al., 2011; Allison et al., 2019). Nonetheless, there are increasing concerns that wind energy development could cause declines in bat populations (e.g., Kunz et al., 2007; Erickson et al., 2016; Frick et al., 2017). For most bat species, however, we lack estimates of population sizes which makes it exceedingly difficult to place this new source of mortality in context. Thus, researchers are increasingly turning to intrinsic markers like stable isotopes and genetic characteristics to estimate population parameters, identify migratory pathways, and measure demographic trends (e.g., Lehnert et al., 2014; Korstian, Hale & Williams, 2015; Pylant et al., 2016), with the intent of reducing uncertainty regarding the impacts of wind energy on bat populations. With respect to genetic data, for example, we know that when formerly large populations are reduced to small sizes, genetic diversity is lost, the possibility of inbreeding depression increases, and deleterious variants can accumulate through fixation such that individual and population fitness are reduced (Frankham, Ballou & Briscoe, 2009; Koepfli & Gooley, 2020). Therefore, understanding the amount of genetic diversity within wild populations and how it is distributed among geographic populations is a major concern for conserving the integrity and sustainability of species.
To ascertain whether certain bat species are at risk of suffering from negative effects associated with reduced population size and low genetic diversity, several recent studies have used population genetic approaches to elucidate patterns of genetic variation, identify potential barriers to gene flow, and estimate Ne for three migratory tree bats killed at wind energy facilities across North America. For L. borealis, studies estimating Ne have concluded that the effective population size is in the hundreds of thousands to millions of individuals, with no evidence of barriers to gene flow among groups of samples, suggesting L. borealis is one panmictic population (Korstian, Hale & Williams, 2015; Vonhof & Russell, 2015; Pylant et al., 2016; Sovic, Carstens & Gibbs, 2016). Similarly for A. cinereus, there is no evidence of population genetic structure (Korstian, Hale & Williams, 2015; Pylant et al., 2016; Sovic, Carstens & Gibbs, 2016); although the estimates of Ne are smaller for this species (ranging from several thousand to hundreds of thousands of individuals) compared to L. borealis (Pylant et al., 2016). For L. noctivigans, Sovic, Carstens & Gibbs (2016) found no evidence for population structure in this species, although it had the smallest estimated Ne of the three species. Collectively, based on the results from these studies, we would predict that L. borealis would be somewhat more resilient to population declines caused by wind turbine mortality compared to A. cinereus and L. noctivigans. Furthermore, the high levels of gene flow and connectivity across the population ranges of these migratory tree bats indicate that monitoring and management efforts must integrate information from across their entire ranges as the potential impacts of mortality in any given region may have far-reaching implications. To date, there is no strong genetic evidence of population declines in these species; however, data from other sources suggest their populations may be decreasing (e.g., Winhold, Kurta & Foster, 2008; Ford et al., 2011; Francl et al., 2012; Frick et al., 2017; Rodhouse et al., 2019).
The results from this study indicate that genetic diversity is lower in both Dasypterus species compared to what has been reported for the other tree bat species studied to date using similar methods (e.g., Korstian, Hale & Williams, 2015; Pylant et al., 2016). If these populations are in fact non-migratory, this would limit gene flow with populations in other parts of their range and reduce to the likelihood of demographic rescue via immigration if wind turbine mortality were to cause local population declines. Currently the migratory habits of D. ega and D. intermedius are poorly known and thus warrant further investigation. D. intermedius is thought to be non-migratory, roosting year-round in Spanish moss or in palm trees in Texas (Decker et al., 2020). Similarly, D. ega is thought to be a year-round resident in far-south Texas, roosting in ornamental palm trees (Schmidly & Bradley, 2016), but it may be migratory in other parts of its range (Ammerman, Hice & Schmidly, 2012). Thus, due to uncertainty around the migratory status and population sizes of Dasypterus species, additional data should be collected to determine if there is the potential for wind energy development to affect persistence of local Dasypterus populations. We therefore recommend that periodic population genetic assessment take place in order to gauge the impacts of wind turbine mortality on these species.
Conclusions
Our study provides population genetic data for two species of yellow bats in the Lower Rio Grande River Valley of Texas, and demonstrates the utility of continuing to use lower cost methods such as microsatellites and mtDNA sequence data to investigate genetic variation in new species of interest for which genomics tools are not yet available (Koepfli & Gooley, 2020). We do recommend, however, that future efforts should focus on developing genomic resources, obtaining better estimates of mutation rates, and conducting range-wide population genetic studies to better estimate historical and current population sizes of tree bat species impacted by wind energy development. By increasing the number of markers, genomics will provide greater power to estimate and monitor Ne, identify population bottlenecks, improve identification of evolutionarily significant units and management units, and may provide additional power to detect more subtle patterns of differentiation and estimate demographic patterns and parameters with greater precision (Allendorf, Hohenlohe & Luikart, 2010). We also recommend that genetic monitoring be continued over time as a means of assessing the impacts of wind turbine mortality on bat populations (Schwartz, Luikart & Waples, 2007). With baseline genetic data that will allow us to assess population status and trends, we will improve our chances of developing sound conservation and mitigation strategies for this important and diverse vertebrate group.
Supplemental Information
Alignment used for minimum spanning haplotype network of unique COI sequences from Dasypterus i. floridanus (Dinf) and D. i. intermedius (Dini) individuals from this study and from GenBank.
Acknowledgments
We thank NextEra Energy Resources for their continued interest of our wind-wildlife research efforts. We thank Duke Energy and EDP Renewables for allowing access to their wind energy facilities, and the many field technicians who collected tissue samples.
Funding Statement
This research was funded by a TCU College of Science & Engineering SERC Graduate Student Grant (G 190301) and a TCU Biology Department Adkins Fellowship to Austin S. Chipps. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Additional Information and Declarations
Competing Interests
Sara P Weaver is employed by the Bowman Consulting Group.
Author Contributions
Austin S. Chipps and Dean A. Williams conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.
Amanda M. Hale conceived and designed the experiments, analyzed the data, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.
Sara P. Weaver conceived and designed the experiments, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.
Animal Ethics
The following information was supplied relating to ethical approvals (i.e., approving body and any reference numbers):
Texas State University Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee approved the study (IACUC: permit number 20171185494).
Field Study Permissions
The following information was supplied relating to field study approvals (i.e., approving body and any reference numbers):
Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD SPR-0213-023)
Duke Energy and EDP Renewables (EDPR 0320007188)
DNA Deposition
Data Availability
The following information was supplied regarding data availability:
Raw data is available in the Supplemental Files.
References
- Allendorf, Hohenlohe & Luikart (2010).Allendorf FW, Hohenlohe PA, Luikart G. Genomics and the future of conservation genetics. Nature Reviews Genetics. 2010;11:697–709. doi: 10.1038/nrg2844. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Allison et al. (2019).Allison TD, Diffendorfer JE, Baerwald EF, Beston JA, Drake D, Hale AM, Hein CD, Huso MM, Loss SR, Lovich JE, Strickland MD. Impacts to wildlife of wind energy siting and operation in the United States. Issues in Ecology. 2019;21:1–24. [Google Scholar]
- AWWI (2018).American Wind Wildlife Institute (AWWI) AWWI technical report: a summary of bat fatality data in a nationwide database. Washington, D.C: 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Ammerman, Hice & Schmidly (2012).Ammerman LK, Hice CL, Schmidly DJ. Bats of Texas. Texas A & M University Press; College Station: 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Antao, Pérez-Figueroa & Luikart (2011).Antao T, Pérez-Figueroa A, Luikart G. Early detection of population declines: high power of genetic monitoring using effective population size estimators. Evolutionary Applications. 2011;4:144–154. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-4571.2010.00150.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Arnett & Baerwald (2013).Arnett EB, Baerwald EF. Impacts of wind energy development on bats: implications for conservation. In: Adams RS Pedersen SC., editor. Bat evolution, ecology and conservation. Springer Science & Business Media; New York: 2013. pp. 435–456. [Google Scholar]
- Arnett et al. (2016).Arnett EB, Baerwald EF, Mathews F, Rodrigues L, Rodríguez-Durán A, Rydell J, Villegas-Patraca R, Voigt CC. Impacts of wind energy development on bats: a global perspective. In: Voigt CC Kingston T., editor. Bats in the anthropocene: conservation of bats in a changing world. Springer International Publishing; New York: 2016. pp. 295–323. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Avise (2000).Avise JC. Phylogeography: the history and formation of species. Harvard University Press; Cambridge: 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Baird et al. (2017).Baird AB, Braun JK, Engstrom MD, Holbert AC, Huerta MG, Lim BK, Mares MA, Patton JC, Bickham JW. Nuclear and mtDNA phylogenetic analyses clarify the evolutionary history of two species of native Hawaiian bats and the taxonomy of Lasiurini (Mammalia: Chiroptera) PLOS ONE. 2017;12(10):e0186085. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0186085. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Baird et al. (2015).Baird AB, Braun JK, Mares MA, Morales JC, Patton JC, Tran CQ, Bickham JW. Molecular systematic revision of tree bats (Lasiurini): doubling the native mammals of the Hawaiian Islands. Journal of Mammalogy. 2015;96:1255–1274. doi: 10.1093/jmammal/gyv135. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Baker, Mollhagen & Lopez (1971).Baker RJ, Mollhagen T, Lopez G. Notes on Lasiurus ega. Journal of Mammalogy. 1971;52:849–852. doi: 10.2307/1378946. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Barilani et al. (2007).Barilani M, Sfougaris A, Giannakopoulos A, Mucci N, Tabarroni C, Randi E. Detecting introgressive hybridisation in rock partridge populations (Alectoris graeca) in Greece through Bayesian admixture analyses of multilocus genotypes. Conservation Genetics. 2007;8:343–354. doi: 10.1007/s10592-006-9174-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Barquez & Diaz (2016).Barquez R, Diaz M. Lasiurus ega: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T11350A22119259. 2016. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016-3.RLTS.T11350A22119259.en https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016-3.RLTS.T11350A22119259.en
- Bogdanowicz, Piksa & Tereba (2012).Bogdanowicz W, Piksa K, Tereba A. Hybridization hotspots at bat swarming sites. PLOS ONE. 2012;7(12):e53334. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0053334. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Bohling, Adams & Waits (2013).Bohling JH, Adams JR, Waits LP. Evaluating the ability of Bayesian clustering methods to detect hybridization and introgression using an empirical red wolf data set. Molecular Ecology. 2013;22:74–86. doi: 10.1111/mec.12109. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Cahill & Levinton (2015).Cahill AE, Levinton JS. Genetic differentiation and reduced genetic diversity at the northern range edge of two species with different dispersal modes. Molecular Ecology. 2015;25:515–526. doi: 10.1111/mec.13497. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Çoraman et al. (2019).Çoraman E, Dietz C, Hempel E, Ghazaryan A, Levin E, Presetnik P, Zagmajster M, Mayer F. Reticulate evolutionary history of a Western Palearctic Bat Complex explained by multiple mtDNA introgressions in secondary contact. Journal of Biogeography. 2019;46:343–354. doi: 10.1111/jbi.13509. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Chipps et al. (2020).Chipps AS, Hale AM, Weaver SP, Williams DA. Genetic approaches are necessary to accurately understand bat-wind turbine impacts. Diversity. 2020;12:236. doi: 10.3390/d12060236. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Clare et al. (2007).Clare EL, Lim BK, Engstrom MD, Eger JL, Hebert PDN. DNA barcoding of Neotropical bats: species identification and discovery within Guyana. Molecular Ecology Notes. 2007;7:184–190. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2006.01657.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Crawford et al. (1998).Crawford AM, Kappes SM, Paterson KA, deGotari MJ, Dodds KF, Freking BA, Stone RT, Beattie CW. Microsatellite evolution: testing the ascertainment bias hypothesis. Journal of Molecular Evolution. 1998;46:256–260. doi: 10.1007/PL00006301. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Cryan et al. (2012).Cryan PM, Jamesson JW, Baerwald EF, Willis CKR, Barclay RMR, Snider EA, Crichton EG. Evidence of late-summer mating readiness and early sexual maturation in migratory tree-roosting bats found dead at wind turbines. PLOS ONE. 2012;7(10):e47586. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0047586. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Decker (2019).Decker SK. Undergraduate Honors Thesis. 2019. Phylogeographic analysis of northern yellow bats (Dasypterus intermedius) by molecular analysis. [Google Scholar]
- Decker & Ammerman (2020).Decker SK, Ammerman LK. Phylogeographic analysis reveals mito-nuclear discordance in Dasypterus intermedius. Journal of Mammalogy. 2020 doi: 10.1093/jmammal/gyaa106. Epub ahead of print 2020 04 September. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Decker et al. (2020).Decker SK, Krejsa DM, Lindsey LL, Amoateng RP, Ammerman LK. Updated distributions of three species of yellow bat (Dasypterus) in Texas based on specimen records. Western Wildlife. 2020;7:2–8. [Google Scholar]
- Demere et al. (2012).Demere KD, Lewis AM, Mayes B, Baker RJ, Ammerman LK. Noteworthy county records for 14 bat species based on specimens submitted to the Texas Department of State Health Services. Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech University. 2012;315:1–12. [Google Scholar]
- Do et al. (2014).Do C, Waples RS, Peel D, Macbeth GM, Tillett BJ, Ovenden JR. NeEstimator v2: re-implementation of software for the estimation of contemporary effective population size (Ne) from genetic data. Molecular Ecology Resources. 2014;14:209–214. doi: 10.1111/1755-0998.12157. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Eckert, Samis & Lougheed (2008).Eckert CG, Samis KE, Lougheed C. Genetic variation across species’ geographical ranges: the central-marginal hypothesis and beyond. Molecular Ecology. 2008;17:1170–1188. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2007.03659.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Erickson et al. (2016).Erickson RA, Thogmartin WE, Diffendorfer JE, Russell RE, Szymanski JA. Effects of wind energy generation and white-nose syndrome on the viability of the Indiana bat. PeerJ. 2016;4:e2830. doi: 10.7717/peerj.2830. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Evanno, Regnaut & Goudet (2005).Evanno G, Regnaut S, Goudet J. Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using software STRUCTURE: a simulation study. Molecular Ecology. 2005;14:2611–2620. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2005.02553.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Excoffier & Lischer (2010).Excoffier L, Lischer HEL. Arlequin suite ver 3.5: a new series of programs to perform population genetics analyses under Linux and Windows. Molecular Ecology Resources. 2010;10:564–567. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2010.02847.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ford et al. (2011).Ford WM, Britzke ER, Dobony CA, Rodrigue JL, Johnson JB. Patterns of acoustical activity of bats prior to and following white-nose syndrome occurrence. Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management. 2011;2:125–134. doi: 10.3996/042011-JFWM-027. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Francl et al. (2012).Francl KE, Ford WM, Sparks DW, Brack Jr V. Capture and reproductive trends in summer bat communities in West Virginia: assessing the impact of white-nose syndrome. Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management. 2012;3:33–42. doi: 10.3996/062011-JFWM-039. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Frankham, Ballou & Briscoe (2009).Frankham R, Ballou JD, Briscoe DA. Introduction to conservation genetics. 2nd Edition. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Frick et al. (2017).Frick WF, Baerwald EF, Pollock JF, Barclay RMR, Szymanski JA, Weller TJ, Russell AL, Loeb SC, Medellin RA, McGuire LP. Fatalities at wind turbines may threaten population viability of a migratory bat. Biological Conservation. 2017;209:172–177. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2017.02.023. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Frick, Kingston & Flanders (2019).Frick WF, Kingston T, Flanders J. A review of the major threats and challenges to global bat conservation. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 2019;1469:5–25. doi: 10.1111/nyas.14045. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Fu (1997).Fu YX. Statistical tests of neutrality of mutations against population growth, hitchhiking and background selection. Genetics. 1997;147:915–925. doi: 10.1093/genetics/147.2.915. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hall & Jones Jr (1961).Hall ER, Jones Jr JK. North American yellow bats, Dasypterus and a list of the named kinds of the genus Lasiurus Gray. University of Kansas Publications. 1961;14:73–98. [Google Scholar]
- Hudson & Turelli (2003).Hudson RR, Turelli M. Stochasticity overrules the three-times rule: genetic drift, genetic draft, and coalescence times for nuclear loci versus mitochondrial DNA. Evolution. 2003;57:182–190. doi: 10.1111/j.0014-3820.2003.tb00229. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ivanova et al. (2007).Ivanova NV, Zemlak TS, Hanner RH, Hebert PDN. Universal primer cocktails for fish DNA barcoding. Molecular Ecology Notes. 2007;7:544–548. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.01748. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Jakobsson & Rosenberg (2007).Jakobsson M, Rosenberg NA. CLUMPP: a cluster matching and permutation program for dealing with label switching and multimodality in analysis of population structure. Bioinformatics. 2007;23:1801–1806. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btm233. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Johnson et al. (2015).Johnson BB, White TA, Phillips CA, Zamudio KR. Asymmetric introgression in a spotted salamander hybrid zone. Journal of Heredity. 2015;106:608–617. doi: 10.1093/jhered/esv042. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Jones et al. (2009).Jones G, Jacobs DS, Kunz TH, Willig MR, Racey PA. Carpe noctem: the importance of bats as bioindicators. Endangered Species Research. 2009;8:93–115. doi: 10.3354/esr00182. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Kalinowski (2005).Kalinowski ST. HP-RARE 1.0: a computer program for performing rarefaction on measures of allelic richness. Molecular Ecology Notes. 2005;5:187–189. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2004.00845. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Keller et al. (2014).Keller SR, Trott R, Pylant C, Nelson DM. Genome-wide microsatellite marker development from next-generation sequencing of two non-model bat species impacted by wind turbine mortality: Lasiurus borealis and L. cinereus (Vespertilionidae) Molecular Ecology Resources. 2014;14:435–436. doi: 10.1111/1755-0998.12221. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kiesecker et al. (2011).Kiesecker JM, Evans JS, Fargione J, Doherty K, Foresman KR, Kunz TH, Naugle D, Nibbelink NP, Niemuth ND. Win-win for wind and wildlife: a vision to facilitate sustainable development. PLOS ONE. 2011;6(4):e17566. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0017566. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Koepfli & Gooley (2020).Koepfli K-P, Gooley RM. A modern synthesis of mammal conservation genetics. In: Ortega J Maldonado, P., editor. Conservation genetics in mammals –integrative research using novel approaches. Springer; Switzerland: 2020. pp. 3–12. [Google Scholar]
- Korstian et al. (2013).Korstian JM, Hale AM, Bennett VJ, Williams DA. Advances in sex determination in bats and its utility in wind-wildlife studies. Molecular Ecology Resources. 2013;13:776–780. doi: 10.1111/1755-0998.12118. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Korstian, Hale & Williams (2014).Korstian JM, Hale AM, Williams DA. Development and characterization of microsatellite loci for eastern red and hoary bats (Lasiurus borealis and L. cinereus) Conservation Genetics Resources. 2014;6:605–607. doi: 10.1007/s12686-014-0151-6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Korstian, Hale & Williams (2015).Korstian JM, Hale AM, Williams DA. Genetic diversity, historic population size, and population structure in 2 North American tree bats. Journal of Mammalogy. 2015;96:972–980. doi: 10.1093/jmammal/gyv101. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Kumar et al. (2018).Kumar S, Stecher G, Li M, Knyaz C, Tamura K. MEGA X: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis across computing platforms. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 2018;35:1547–1549. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msy096. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kunz et al. (2007).Kunz TH, Arnett EB, Erickson WP, Hoar AR, Johnson GD, Larkin RP, Strickland MD, Thresher RW, Tuttle MD. Ecological impacts of wind energy development on bats: questions, research needs, and hypotheses. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 2007;5:315–324. doi: 10.1890/1540-9295(2007)5[315:EIOWED]2.0.CO;2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Latch et al. (2006).Latch EK, Dharmarajan G, Glaubitz JC, Rhodes Jr OE. Relative performance of Bayesian clustering software for inferring population substructure and individual assignment at low levels of population differentiation. Conservation Genetics. 2006;7:295–302. doi: 10.1007/s10592-005-9098-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Lehnert et al. (2014).Lehnert LS, Kramer-Schadt S, Schönborn S, Lindecke O, Niermann I, Voigt CC. Wind farm facilities in Germany kill noctule bats from near and far. PLOS ONE. 2014;9(8):e103106. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0103106. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Leigh & Bryant (2015).Leigh JW, Bryant D. POPART:full-feature software for haplotype network construction. Methods in Ecology and Evolution. 2015;6:1110–1116. doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.12410. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Li & Kimmel (2013).Li B, Kimmel M. Factors influencing ascertainment bias of microsatellite allele sizes: impact on estimates of mutation rates. Genetics. 2013;195:563–572. doi: 10.1534/genetics.113.154161. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Luikart et al. (2010).Luikart G, Ryman N, Tallmon DA, Schwartz MK, Allendorf FW. Estimation of census and effective population sizes: the increasing usefulness of DNA-based approaches. Conservation Genetics. 2010;11:355–373. doi: 10.1007/s10592-010-0050-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Meirmans & Hedrick (2011).Meirmans PG, Hedrick PW. Assessing population structure: FST and related measures. Molecular Ecology Resources. 2011;11:5–18. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2010.02927.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Miller & Rodriguez (2016).Miller B, Rodriguez B. Lasiurus intermedius (errata version published in 2017). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016. 2016. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016-3.RLTS.T11352A22119630.en https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016-3.RLTS.T11352A22119630.en
- Nabholz, Glémin & Galtier (2008).Nabholz B, Glémin S, Galtier N. Strong variations of mitochondrial mutation rate across mammals—the longevity hypothesis. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 2008;25:120–130. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msm248. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- O’Shea et al. (2016).O’Shea TJ, Cryan PM, Hayman DTS, Plowright RK, Steicker DG. Multiple mortality events in bats: a global review. Mammal Review. 2016;46:175–190. doi: 10.1111/mam.12064. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Peakall & Smouse (2006).Peakall R, Smouse PE. Genalex 6: genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research. Molecular Ecology Notes. 2006;6:288–295. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2005.01155. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Peakall & Smouse (2012).Peakall R, Smouse PE. GenAlEx 6.5: genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research, an update. Bioinformatics. 2012;28:2537–2539. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bts460. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Piaggio, Figueroa & Perkins (2009).Piaggio AJ, Figueroa JA, Perkins SL. Development and characterization of 15 polymorphic microsatellite loci isolated from Rafinesque’s big-eared bat, Corynorhinus rafinesquii. Molecular Ecology Resources. 2009;9:1191–1193. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2009.02625. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Piaggio et al. (2009).Piaggio AJ, Miller KEG, Motocq MD, Perkins SL. Eight polymorphic microsatellite loci developed and characterized from Townsend’s big-eared bat, Corynorhinus townsendii. Molecular Ecology Resources. 2009;9:258–260. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2008.02243. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Pritchard, Stephens & Donnelly (2000).Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P. Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics. 2000;155:945–959. doi: 10.1093/genetics/155.2.945. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Pritchard, Wen & Falush (2010).Pritchard JK, Wen X, Falush D. 2010. Documentation for structure software: version 2.3. https://web.stanford.edu/group/pritchardlab/structure_software/release_versions/v2.3.4/structure_doc.pdf
- Puechmaille (2016).Puechmaille SJ. The program structure does not reliably recover the correct population structure when sampling is uneven: subsampling and new estimators alleviate the problem. Molecular Ecology Resources. 2016;16:608–627. doi: 10.1111/1755-0998.12512. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Pylant et al. (2016).Pylant CL, Nelson DM, Fitzpatrick MC, Gates JE, Keller SR. Geographic origins and population genetics of bats killed at wind-energy facilities. Ecological Applications. 2016;26:1381–1395. doi: 10.1890/15-0541. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rodhouse et al. (2019).Rodhouse TJ, Rodriguez RM, Banner KM, Ormsbee PC, Barnett J, Irvine KM. Evidence of region-wide bat population decline from long-term monitoring and Bayesian occupancy models with empirically informed priors. Ecology and Evolution. 2019;9:11078–11088. doi: 10.1002/ece3.5612. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rousset (2008).Rousset F. genepop’007: a complete re-implementation of the genepop software for Windows and Linux. Molecular Ecology Resources. 2008;8:103–106. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.01931.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rozas et al. (2017).Rozas J, Ferrer-Mata A, Sánchez-DelBarrio JC, Guirao-Rico S, Librado P, Ramos-Onsins SE, Sánchez-Gracia A. DnaSP v6: DNA sequence polymorphism analysis of large datasets. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 2017;34:3299–3302. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msx248. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sanz et al. (2009).Sanz N, Araguas RM, Fernández R, Vera M, García-Marín J-L. Efficiency of markers and methods for detecting hybrids and introgression in stocked populations. Conservation Genetics. 2009;10:225–236. doi: 10.1007/s10592-008-9550-0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Schenekar & Weiss (2011).Schenekar T, Weiss S. High rate of calculation errors in mismatch distribution analysis results in numerous false inferences of biological importance. Heredity. 2011;107:511–512. doi: 10.1038/hdy.2011.48. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Schmidly & Bradley (2016).Schmidly DJ, Bradley RD. The mammals of Texas. 7th edition. University of Texas Press; Austin: 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Schorr, Ellison & Lukacs (2014).Schorr RA, Ellison LE, Lukacs PM. Estimating sample size for landscape-scale mark-recapture studies of North American migratory tree bats. Acta Chiropterologica. 2014;16:231–239. doi: 10.3161/150811014X683426. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Schwartz, Luikart & Waples (2007).Schwartz MK, Luikart G, Waples RS. Genetic monitoring as a promising tool for conservation and management. Trends in Ecology and Evolution. 2007;22:25–33. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2006.08.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Smallwood (2013).Smallwood KS. Comparing bird and bat fatality-rate estimates among North American wind-energy projects. Wildlife Society Bulletin. 2013;37:19–33. doi: 10.1002/wsb.260. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Sovic, Carstens & Gibbs (2016).Sovic MG, Carstens BC, Gibbs HL. Genetic diversity in migratory bats: results from RADseq data for three tree bat species at an Ohio windfarm. PeerJ. 2016;4:e1647. doi: 10.7717/peerj.1647. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Spencer, Choucair & Chapman (1988).Spencer SG, Choucair PC, Chapman BR. Northward expansion of the southern yellow bat, Lasiurus ega, in Texas. Southwestern Naturalist. 1988;33:493. [Google Scholar]
- Tajima (1989).Tajima F. Statistical method for testing the neutral mutation hypothesis by DNA polymorphism. Genetics. 1989;123:585–595. doi: 10.1093/genetics/123.3.585. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Thaxter et al. (2017).Thaxter CB, Buchanan GM, Carr J, Butchart SHM, Newbold T, Green RE, Tobias JA, Foden WB, O’Brien S, Pearce-Higgins JW. Bird and bat species’ global vulnerability to collision mortality at wind farms revealed through a trait-based assessment. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2017;284 doi: 10.1098/rspb.2017.0829. Article 20170829. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Toews & Brelsford (2012).Toews DP, Brelsford A. The biogeography of mitochondrial and nuclear discordance in animals. Molecular Ecology. 2012;21:3907–3930. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2012.05664.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Vähä & Primmer (2006).Vähä J-P, Primmer CR. Efficiency of model-based Bayesian methods for detecting hybrid individuals under different hybridization scenarios and with different numbers of loci. Molecular Ecology. 2006;15:63–72. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2005.02773. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Van Oosterhout et al. (2004).Van Oosterhout C, Hutchinson WF, Wills DPM, Shipley P. micro-checker: software for identifying and correcting genotyping errors in microsatellite data. Molecular Ecology Notes. 2004;4:535–538. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2004.00684. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Vonhof & Russell (2015).Vonhof MJ, Russell AL. Genetic approaches to the conservation of migratory bats: a study of the eastern red bat (Lasiurus borealis) PeerJ. 2015;3:e983. doi: 10.7717/peerj.983. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Wang (2017).Wang J. The computer program STRUCTURE for assigning individuals to populations: easy to use but easier to misuse. Molecular Ecology Resources. 2017;17:981–990. doi: 10.1111/1755-0998.12650. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Waples & Do (2010).Waples RS, Do C. Linkage disequilibrium estimates of contemporary Ne using highly variable genetic markers: a largely untapped resource for applied conservation and evolution. Evolutionary Applications. 2010;3:244–262. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-4571.2009.00104.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Weaver (2019).Weaver SP. Ph.D. Dissertation. 2019. Understanding wind energy impacts on bats and testing reduction strategies in south Texas. [Google Scholar]
- Weaver et al. (2020).Weaver SP, Hein CD, Simpson TR, Evans JW, Castro-Arellano I. Ultrasonic acoustic deterrents significantly reduce bat fatalities at wind turbines. Global Ecology and Conservation. 2020 doi: 10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e01099. Epub ahead of print 2020 08 May. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Webster, Jones & Baker (1980).Webster WM, Jones JK, Baker RJ. Lasiurus intermedius. Mammalian Species. 1980;132:1–3. [Google Scholar]
- Winhold, Kurta & Foster (2008).Winhold L, Kurta A, Foster R. Long-term change in an assemblage of North American bats: are eastern red bats declining? Acta Chiropterologica. 2008;10:359–366. doi: 10.3161/150811008X414935. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Zimmerling & Francis (2016).Zimmerling JR, Francis CM. Bat mortality due to wind turbines in Canada. Journal of Wildlife Management. 2016;80:1360–1369. doi: 10.1002/jwmg.21128. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Zink & Barrowclough (2008).Zink RM, Barrowclough GF. Mitochondrial DNA under siege in avian phylogeography. Molecular Ecology. 2008;17:2107–2121. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2008.03737. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Citations
- Pritchard JK, Wen X, Falush D. 2010. Documentation for structure software: version 2.3. https://web.stanford.edu/group/pritchardlab/structure_software/release_versions/v2.3.4/structure_doc.pdf
Supplementary Materials
Alignment used for minimum spanning haplotype network of unique COI sequences from Dasypterus i. floridanus (Dinf) and D. i. intermedius (Dini) individuals from this study and from GenBank.
Data Availability Statement
The following information was supplied regarding data availability:
Raw data is available in the Supplemental Files.