Search

We are nearing the 20-year anniversary of a groundbreaking paper which details how microsatellite marker development in Lepidoptera is "extremely difficult for no apparent reason." How far have we come in these past 20 years? Microsatellites are still the marker of choice in many population genetics studies for their ease of use, high degrees of polymorphism, species-specificity, and low cost. The rise of next-generation sequencing technologies (e.g. 454, Illumina, PacBio, etc.) has greatly advanced our abilities to generate many microsatellite markers per species. In this paper, we summarize the improvements in marker development using next-generation technology. Using case studies, we review the use and implementation of microsatellite markers in different conservation programs. Lastly, we provide a guide to data interpretation of microsatellite data generated for butterflies, with the goal of supporting student researchers and conservation practitioners in evaluating the meaning in their data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: The Republic of India is a tropical megadiverse country, encompassing four global biodiversity hot-spots and harboring 1379 butterfly species within its borders. Despite a long history of documenting Indian biodiversity, there are extremely few quantitative studies that have analyzed species-richness patterns within the country. We capitalized on the division of the country into 36 federal states and territories, and compiled and revised per-states butterfly checklists. Then, we analyzed the species-richness patterns, as well as the richness of endemic species and the numbers of species belonging to main biogeographic elements with respect to geography, climate, land covers and socioeconomic conditions of the administrative units. Such common macroecological predictors as area, latitude and land covers diversity did not affect the species richness, whereas the topographic diversity and energy availability had major effects. This is due to the peculiar biogeography of India, i.e., the peninsula narrowing towards the Equator, being isolated from the northern mainland by high mountains, and connected to species-rich eastern regions by only a narrow conduit. In multiple regression models, geographic variables were the strongest predictors of species-richness patterns, followed by climate and land covers. Our approach can be used as an initial step toward understanding distribution patterns in those regions of the world, for which detailed distribution data are not yet available but checklists per administrative units exist. Butterflies are widely used to analyze biogeographical patterns, both at the global and regional scales. Thus far, most of the latter originated from well-surveyed northern regions, while the species-rich tropical areas lag due to a lack of appropriate data. We used checklists of 1379 butterfly species recorded in 36 federal states of the Republic of India (1) to explore the basic macroecological rules, and (2) to relate species richness and the distribution of endemics and geographic elements to geography, climate, land covers and socioeconomic conditions of the states. The area, land covers diversity and latitude did not affect species richness, whereas topographic diversity and the precipitation/temperature ratio (energy availability) were positive predictors. This is due the geographic and climatic idiosyncrasies of the Indian subcontinent, with its highest species richness in the small, densely forested mountainous northeast that receives summer monsoons. The peninsular effect that decreases the richness towards the tip of subcontinent is counterbalanced by the mountainous forested Western Ghats. Afrotropical elements are associated with savannahs, while Palearctic elements are associated with treeless habitats. The bulk of Indian butterfly richness, and the highest conservation priorities, overlap with global biodiversity hotspots, but the mountainous states of the Western Himalayas and the savannah states of peninsular India host distinctive faunas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In human‐altered landscapes, specialist butterflies typically form spatially restricted populations, genetically differentiated due to dispersal restrictions. Generalists, in contrast, display minimum differentiation but high genetic diversity. While local‐level actions suffice to conserve specialists and landscape‐level actions are necessary for generalists, minimum information exists regarding conservation of species with intermediate features. We targeted two congeneric butterflies, the recently re‐expanding Argynnis adippe and the strongly declining A. niobe, co‐occurring in the pastoral landscape of the Carpathian Mountains, Czech Republic. We integrated species distribution models, mark–recapture and microsatellite analysis to compare their habitat requirements, adult demography, dispersal and genetic patterns, and expanded the genetic analysis across the Carpathian Arc and beyond to delimit spatial conservation units. In two mountain valleys, both species formed interconnected populations numbering thousands of individuals. Mobility patterns suggested the populations' interconnection across the Czech Carpathians. Genetic diversity was extremely poor in the nonthreatened A. adippe and moderate in the declining A. niobe. No population differentiation was detected within the Czech Carpathians (~1500 km2). Low genetic diversity and no differentiation was preserved in A. adippe across East Central Europe, whereas in A. niobe, populations from Serbia were differentiated from the Carpathian Arc + Alps. The high adult mobility linked to low differentiation probably reflects the distribution of larval resources, historically widespread but sparse and currently declining for A. niobe (grazing‐disturbed grounds), while currently increasing for A. adippe (abandonment scrub, disturbed woodlands). Units as large as entire mountain systems define population boundaries, and hence conservation management units, for both species. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]