ArticleHeredity2018
Comparing genetic diversity and demographic history in co-distributed wild South American camelids.
Article in Heredity, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Conflict between Farmers and Guanacos (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Parasitological status of vicuñas (Vicugna vicugna) from southeastern Peru and its relationship with fiber quality.Tropical animal health and production · 2021Article
- Article
- Mitochondrial Sequence Variation, Haplotype Diversity, and Relationships Among Dromedary Camel-Types.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Article
- Genomic analysis of the domestication and post-Spanish conquest evolution of the llama and alpaca.Genome biology · 2020Article
- Article
- Demography of avian scavengers after Pleistocene megafaunal extinction.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Phylogeography and Population Genetics ofFrontiers in genetics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 8 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vicuñas and guanacos are two species of wild South American camelids that are key ruminants in the ecosystems where they occur. Although closely related, these species feature differing ecologies and life history characters, which are expected to influence both their genetic diversity and population differentiation at different spatial scales. Here, using mitochondrial and microsatellite genetic markers, we show that vicuña display lower genetic diversity within populations than guanaco but exhibit more structure across their Peruvian range, which may reflect a combination of natural genetic differentiation linked to geographic isolation and recent anthropogenic population declines. Coalescent-based demographic analyses indicate that both species have passed through a strong bottleneck, reducing their effective population sizes from over 20,000 to less than 1000 individuals. For vicuña, this bottleneck is inferred to have taken place ~3300 years ago, but to have occurred more recently for guanaco at ~2000 years ago. These inferred dates are considerably later than the onset of domestication (when the alpaca was domesticated from the vicuña while the llama was domesticated from the guanaco), coinciding instead with a major human population expansion following the mid-Holocene cold period. As importantly, they imply earlier declines than the well-documented Spanish conquest, where major mass mortality events were recorded for Andean human and camelid populations. We argue that underlying species' differences and recent demographic perturbations have influenced genetic diversity in modern vicuña and guanaco populations, and these processes should be carefully evaluated in the development and implementation of management strategies for these important genetic resources.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.