4. Posudzovanie zdravotného stavu a genetika / Health screening and genetics________________________________________________________________________________________(4.6) than for period 2 (3.7). This is due to thesignificantly smaller sample size in period 2.Differentiation: There was no significant geneticdifferentiation between the two periods. The Fstvalue was -0.00339 (95% CI -0.01497 – 0.01134).Values below 0.05 are considered to be a verysmall differentiation.Bottleneck: In the time sample of period 1 there areno signs of a significant bottleneck in the past(P=0.512, Wilcoxon Test, Heterozygosity excess,under S.M.M. model). The distribution of the allelefrequencies is L-shaped as expected in a largepopulation (Fig. 1). In a population that has beenthrough a bottleneck and experienced significantgenetic drift, the proportion of rare alleles (≤ 0.10)is diminished and the proportion in the middleclasses increased. The L-shape then disappears.The sample size for period 2 does not yet allowsuch an analysis.Relatedness: Relatedness among the genotypedanimals in the two sample periods did not differ (-0.07 vs -0.04; t-Test, P=0.360). Values around 0 areunrelated animals. The mean values suggestedpopulations without significant inbreeding.Conclusions and recommendationsThe sample size of the second period is not yetbig enough to say anything in regard tofragmentation and substructure within the current<strong>lynx</strong> population in Slovakia compared to the firstsampling period. All possible comparisons show nodifference between the two periods. Werecommend increasing sampling effort in the nextfew years to collate at least 30 samples for thesecond period and then redo the comparisons.For future genetic monitoring in Slovakia, whichcould detect possible inbreeding (depression), werecommend the following considerations:• Collect samples systematically from allmortalities, including information on necropsy.Identify a host organisation for samplecollection.• Samples should ideally be temporally andspatially spread, otherwise there is a risk ofanalysing families rather than a representativepopulation. These samples can best becollected from mortalities as they happeneverywhere and over long time periods.• Use a marker panel that allows at leastresolving paternity to be able to detect relatedanimals. Ideally it would be enough forpedigree reconstruction. A pedigree providescomplementary data on individual inbreeding.This is especially important if samples arecollected during a research project withtelemetry where genetic material can becollected during captures. However pedigree(re)construction is often only possible incombination with other methods (cameratrapping, telemetry). The combination ofdifferent datasets should be assured.• Genomic scale is needed to test association toparticular loci, so the marker panel should bedistributed over as many chromosomes aspossible and not linked.• In addition to the genetic samples also collectmorphological and demographic parameters,as many of these traits may reveal a change ininbreeding levels:- Reproduction: litter size, cub survivalrate, reproductive interval, age of sexualmaturity, semen quality, individualreproductive success;- Survival (in different age classes),longevity;- Health: body condition, parasite load,infectious and non-infectious disease,congenital disease, malformations;- Data on mortality causes;- Methods for these additional data:camera traps (systematic for capturerecaptureand opportunistic data), snowtracking, visual observations, telemetry.A combination of telemetry and cameratrapping gives optimal results.________________________________________________________________________________________<strong>Monitoring</strong> <strong>Lynx</strong> <strong>lynx</strong> <strong>carpathicus</strong>, Rigg & Kubala (2015) 76
________________________________________________________________________________________5Osveta a zvýšenie povedomiaEducation & awareness raising________________________________________________________________________________________<strong>Monitoring</strong> <strong>Lynx</strong> <strong>lynx</strong> <strong>carpathicus</strong>, Rigg & Kubala (2015) 77
Change language