Abstract
Advances in molecular techniques have enabled the study of genetic diversity and population structure in many different contexts. Studies that assess the genetic structure of cetacean populations often use biopsy samples from free-ranging individuals and tissue samples from stranded animals or individuals that became entangled in fishery or aquaculture equipment. This leads to the question of how representative the location of a stranded or entangled animal is with respect to its natural range, and whether similar results would be obtained when comparing carcass samples with samples from free-ranging individuals in studies of population structure. Here we use tissue samples from carcasses of dolphins that stranded or died as a result of bycatch in South Australia to investigate spatial population structure in two species: coastal bottlenose (Tursiops sp.) and short-beaked common dolphins (Delphinus delphis). We compare these results with those previously obtained from biopsy sampled free-ranging dolphins in the same area to test whether carcass samples yield similar patterns of genetic variability and population structure. Data from dolphin carcasses were gathered using seven microsatellite markers and a fragment of the mitochondrial DNA control region. Analyses based on carcass samples alone failed to detect genetic structure in Tursiops sp., a species previously shown to exhibit restricted dispersal and moderate genetic differentiation across a small spatial scale in this region. However, genetic structure was correctly inferred in D. delphis, a species previously shown to have reduced genetic structure over a similar geographic area. We propose that in the absence of corroborating data, and when population structure is assessed over relatively small spatial scales, the sole use of carcasses may lead to an underestimate of genetic differentiation. This can lead to a failure in identifying management units for conservation. Therefore, this risk should be carefully assessed when planning population genetic studies of cetaceans.
Highlights
Tissue samples obtained from stranded cetaceans and from entanglements of fisheries or aquaculture interactions have been used for many genetic studies [1]
There was a considerable difference in sample numbers between Spencer Gulf and western coastal regions, which was a result of limited access to dolphin carcasses in the western coast, and the lack of control over where carcasses strand (Table 1)
Our study shows that the ability to detect population structure along the South Australian coast was reduced when using samples from bottlenose dolphin carcasses compared to biopsied free-ranging individuals
Summary
Tissue samples obtained from stranded cetaceans and from entanglements of fisheries or aquaculture interactions have been used for many genetic studies [1]. Cetaceans die or live strand for many reasons, including disease, neonatal death, pollutants, entanglement in fishing and aquaculture gear, boat strikes and intentional killing [10,11,12]. Well documented interactions with finfish farms resulting in dolphin mortalities have been reported for several regions, including in Australia and Chile [12,17,18]. Perhaps the most significant contributor to fishery induced mortality of dolphins is purse-seine fishing, with millions of dolphins killed by the US eastern tropical Pacific tuna purse-seine fishery between the 1970s and 1990s [19]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
