7842

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 7842
• Author: Knopf, F. L.
• Title: Biological Diversity in Wildlife Management.
• USFW Year: 1992.
• USFW - Doc Type: 1992.
• Copyright Material: NO

(Shannon Wiener index) was also related to species diversity for these assemblages.
This suggests that diversity at different hierarchical levels may be correlated, possibly
because genetic information contained at one level is heavily dependent upon the
information content at lower hierarchical levels. Interrelationships among diversity
at different levels need further study, and hypotheses need to be generated as to what
the relationships should be.
Species
There are three genetic considerations that need to be taken into account in a
management program designed to conserve species. These include genetic dissimi-
larity, genetic variability and degree of genetic adaptation to environmental differ-
ences. Decisions should be made by considering all three together.
Large amounts of data have been collected on genetic diversity within species and
genetic distances among species (Nevo et al. 1984, Avise and Aquadro 1982). The
best example for wildlife species may be for members of the Cervidae. The genetic
relationships among, and genetic variability within several Cervid species are sum-
marized in Figure 3. These species do not really comprise a species assemblage
within a community, but illustrate how the results of such an analysis might appear.
Cervid species separated from others in the dendrogram by greater branch lengths
are the most genetically dissimilar forms. For example, North American elk and
Eurasian red deer (both Cervus elaphus) are genetically most similar to one another,
MOOSE
CARIBOU
REINDEER
ROE DEER
MULE DEER
WHITE-TAILED
DEER
ELK
RED DEER
0.40 0.48 0.56 0.64 0.72 0.80 0.88
GENETIC SIMILARITY
H P A
0.4 2.4 1.27
0.0 0.0 1.00
2.2 17.7 1.24
2.4 10.5 1.11
3.6 17.1 1.2
10.4 32.3 1.94
2.1 17.9 ----
2.1 22.8 1.26
Figure 3. A dendrogram representing genetic relationships among 8 forms of Cervidae was con-
structed using an unweighted pair group cluster analysis with genetic identity values (Nei 1972)
taken from Baccus et al. (1983). Measures of genetic variability within each species are given as
percent multilocus heterozygosity (H), percent polymorphic loci (0.01 criterion, P) and average
number of alleles per locus (A). Values of H, P and A were taken from Smith et al. (1990) and
Baccus et al. (1983). Scientific names of species that are not provided in the text are: caribou,
Rangifer tarandus; moose, Alces atces; mule deer, Odocoileus hemionus; reindeer, Rangifer tarandus;
and roe deer, Capreolus capreolus.
246 ? Trans. 57 th N. A. Wildl. & Nat. Res. Conf. (1992)
0.40 0.48 0.56 0.64 0.72 0.80 0.88