Spatial genetic and morphologic structure of wolves and coyotes in relation to environmental heterogeneity in a Canis hybrid zone
Article first published online: 22 NOV 2012
© 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Volume 21, Issue 24, pages 5934–5954, December 2012
How to Cite
Benson, J. F., Patterson, B. R. and Wheeldon, T. J. (2012), Spatial genetic and morphologic structure of wolves and coyotes in relation to environmental heterogeneity in a Canis hybrid zone. Molecular Ecology, 21: 5934–5954. doi: 10.1111/mec.12045
- Issue published online: 6 DEC 2012
- Article first published online: 22 NOV 2012
- Manuscript Accepted: 22 AUG 2012
- Manuscript Revised: 16 AUG 2012
- Manuscript Received: 2 APR 2012
- Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources
- Trent University
- World Wildlife Fund Canada
- Wildlife Conservation Society Canada
- W. Garfield Weston Foundation
Fig. S1 Individual wolves, coyotes, and hybrids in and adjacent to APP (n = 121) and the NEON outgroup (n = 40) arranged along axes 1 and 2 of principal components analysis (PCA), which explained 6.7% and 4.6% of the total variation, respectively.
Fig. S2 Original individual genetic assignments before PCA corroboration procedure with individuals (n = 161) grouped by genetic populations and admixed categories.
Fig. S3 Coyote ancestry as a smooth function (s) of: (a) mean moose density (P = 0.041, n = 51) in study units outside of APP, and (b) secondary road density (P = 0.013, n = 85) across the study area (including APP) as predicted by generalized additive mixed models.
Fig. S4 Coyote ancestry as a smooth function(s) of tertiary road density showing the significant interaction between tertiary road density and harvest protection as predicted by generalized additive mixed model.
Table S1 Summary data from Structure and K-means procedures for evaluating support for the number of Canis genetic clusters in central Ontario in and adjacent to Algonquin Provincial Park, 2004–2011.
Table S2 Q-scores from program Structure at K = 3 for each individual (n = 161) in main analysis. ID for each individual indicates study unit of residency [AP, Algonquin Provincial Park; KH, Kawartha Highlands; 47, WMU47; 49, WMU49; NE, Northeast Ontario (outgroup)].
Table S3 Q-scores from program Structure inferred at K = 2 for each individual (n = 161) in main analysis.
Table S4 Mean prey availability and road densities within home ranges (95% fixed kernels) of study animals across the four study units of our study area in and adjacent to Algonquin Provincial Park (2004–2011).
Table S5 Correlation matrix of predictor variables included in generalized additive models (GAMMs) used to investigate associations between Canis ancestry and landscape variables in central Ontario, 2004–2011.
Table S6 Mitochondrial DNA haplotypes from individuals included in our main analysis of resident wolves, coyotes, and hybrids from central Ontario inhabiting four study units [Algonquin Provincial Park (APP), WMU49, Kawartha Highlands (KH), and WMU47], 2004–2011.
Table S7 Y-Chromosome haplotypes based on four microsatellites loci (see Appendix S1, Supporting information) from individuals included in our main analysis of resident wolves, coyotes, and hybrids from central Ontario inhabiting four study units [Algonquin Provincial Park (APP), WMU49, Kawartha Highlands (KH), and WMU47], 2004–2011.
|mec12045-sup-0003-Appendix-S1.pdf||PDF document||174K||Appendix S1 Methods.|
Please note: Wiley Blackwell is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.