Consequences of population topology for studying gene flow using link-based landscape genetic methods

What can optimized cost distances based on genetic distances offer? A simulation study on the use and misuse of ResistanceGA

Modelling population connectivity is central to biodiversity conservation and often relies on resistance surfaces reflecting multi-generational gene flow. ResistanceGA (RGA) is a common optimization framework for parameterizing these surfaces by maximizing the fit between genetic distances and cost distances using maximum likelihood population effect models. As the reliability of this framework has rarely been studied, we investigated the conditions maximizing its accuracy for both prediction and interpretation of landscape features' permeability. We ran demo-genetic simulations in contrasted landscapes for species with distinct dispersal capacities and specialization levels, using corresponding reference cost scenarios. We then optimized resistance surfaces from the simulated genetic distances using RGA. First, we evaluated whether RGA identified the drivers of the genetic patterns, that is, distinguished Isolation-by-Resistance (IBR) patterns from either Isolation-by-Distance or patterns unrelated to ecological distances. We then assessed RGA predictive performance using a cross-validation method, and its ability to recover the reference cost scenarios shaping genetic structure in simulations. IBR patterns were well detected and genetic distances were predicted with great accuracy. This performance depended on the strength of the genetic structuring, sampling design and landscape structure. Matching the scale of the genetic pattern by focusing on population pairs connected through gene flow and limiting overfitting through cross-validation further enhanced inference reliability. Yet, the optimized cost values often departed from the reference values, making their interpretation and extrapolation potentially dubious. While demonstrating the value of RGA for predictive modelling, we call for caution and provide additional guidance for its optimal use.

Sensitivity of habitat network models to changes in maximum dispersal distance

Predicting the presence or absence (occurrence-state) of species in a certain area is highly important for conservation. Occurrence-state can be assessed by network models that take suitable habitat patches as nodes, connected by potential dispersal of species. To determine connections, a connectivity threshold is set at the species' maximum dispersal distance. However, this requires field observations prone to underestimation, so for most animal species there are no trustable maximum dispersal distance estimations. This limits the development of accurate network models to predict species occurrence-state. In this study, we performed a sensitivity analysis of the performance of network models to different settings of maximum dispersal distance. Our approach, applied on six amphibian species in Switzerland, used habitat suitability modelling to define habitat patches, which were linked within a dispersal distance threshold to form habitat networks. We used network topological measures, patch suitability, and patch size to explain species occurrence-state in habitat patches through boosted regression trees. These modelling steps were repeated on each species for different maximum dispersal distances, including a species-specific value from literature. We evaluated mainly the predictive performance and predictor importance among the network models. We found that predictive performance had a positive relation with the distance threshold, and that almost none of the species-specific values from literature yielded the best performance across tested thresholds. With increasing dispersal distance, the importance of the habitat-quality-related variable decreased, whereas that of the topology-related predictors increased. We conclude that the sensitivity of these models to the dispersal distance parameter stems from the very different topologies formed with different movement assumptions. Most reported maximum dispersal distances are underestimated, presumably due to leptokurtic dispersal distribution. Our results imply that caution should be taken when selecting a dispersal distance threshold, considering higher values than those derived from field reports, to account for long-distance dispersers.

Inferring landscape resistance to gene flow when genetic drift is spatially heterogeneous

In connectivity models, land cover types are assigned cost values characterizing their resistance to species movements. Landscape genetic methods infer these values from the relationship between genetic differentiation and cost distances. The spatial heterogeneity of population sizes, and consequently genetic drift, is rarely included in this inference although it influences genetic differentiation. Similarly, migration rates and population spatial distributions potentially influence this inference. Here, we assessed the reliability of cost value inference under several migration rates, population spatial patterns and degrees of population size heterogeneity. Additionally, we assessed whether considering intra-population variables, here using gravity models, improved the inference when drift is spatially heterogeneous. We simulated several gene flow intensities between populations with varying local sizes and spatial distributions. We then fit gravity models of genetic distances as a function of (i) the 'true' cost distances driving simulations or alternative cost distances, and (ii) intra-population variables (population sizes, patch areas). We determined the conditions making the identification of the 'true' costs possible and assessed the contribution of intra-population variables to this objective. Overall, the inference ranked cost scenarios reliably in terms of similarity with the 'true' scenario (cost distance Mantel correlations), but this 'true' scenario rarely provided the best model goodness of fit. Ranking inaccuracies and failures to identify the 'true' scenario were more pronounced when migration was very restricted (<4 dispersal events/generation), population sizes were most heterogeneous and some populations were spatially aggregated. In these situations, considering intra-population variables helps identify cost scenarios reliably, thereby improving cost value inference from genetic data.

Validating graph-based connectivity models with independent presence-absence and genetic data sets

Habitat connectivity is a key objective of current conservation policies and is commonly modeled by landscape graphs (i.e., sets of habitat patches [nodes] connected by potential dispersal paths [links]). These graphs are often built based on expert opinion or species distribution models (SDMs) and therefore lack empirical validation from data more closely reflecting functional connectivity. Accordingly, we tested whether landscape graphs reflect how habitat connectivity influences gene flow, which is one of the main ecoevolutionary processes. To that purpose, we modeled the habitat network of a forest bird (plumbeous warbler [Setophaga plumbea]) on Guadeloupe with graphs based on expert opinion, Jacobs' specialization indices, and an SDM. We used genetic data (712 birds from 27 populations) to compute local genetic indices and pairwise genetic distances. Finally, we assessed the relationships between genetic distances or indices and cost distances or connectivity metrics with maximum-likelihood population-effects distance models and Spearman correlations between metrics. Overall, the landscape graphs reliably reflected the influence of connectivity on population genetic structure; validation R² was up to 0.30 and correlation coefficients were up to 0.71. Yet, the relationship among graph ecological relevance, data requirements, and construction and analysis methods was not straightforward because the graph based on the most complex construction method (species distribution modeling) sometimes had less ecological relevance than the others. Cross-validation methods and sensitivity analyzes allowed us to make the advantages and limitations of each construction method spatially explicit. We confirmed the relevance of landscape graphs for conservation modeling but recommend a case-specific consideration of the cost-effectiveness of their construction methods. We hope the replication of independent validation approaches across species and landscapes will strengthen the ecological relevance of connectivity models.

Assessing the influence of the amount of reachable habitat on genetic structure using landscape and genetic graphs

Genetic structure, i.e. intra-population genetic diversity and inter-population genetic differentiation, is influenced by the amount and spatial configuration of habitat. Measuring the amount of reachable habitat (ARH) makes it possible to describe habitat patterns by considering intra-patch and inter-patch connectivity, dispersal capacities and matrix resistance. Complementary ARH metrics computed under various resistance scenarios are expected to reflect both drift and gene flow influence on genetic structure. Using an empirical genetic dataset concerning the large marsh grasshopper (Stethophyma grossum), we tested whether ARH metrics are good predictors of genetic structure. We further investigated (i) how the components of the ARH influence genetic structure and (ii) which resistance scenario best explains these relationships. We computed local genetic diversity and genetic differentiation indices in genetic graphs, and ARH metrics in the unified and flexible framework offered by landscape graphs, and we tested the relationships between these variables. ARH metrics were relevant predictors of the two components of genetic structure, providing an advantage over commonly used habitat metrics. Although allelic richness was significantly explained by three complementary ARH metrics in the best PLS regression model, private allelic richness and MIW indices were essentially related with the ARH measured outside the focal patch. Considering several matrix resistance scenarios was also key for explaining the different genetic responses. We thus call for further use of ARH metrics in landscape genetics to explain the influence of habitat patterns on the different components of genetic structure.

Analysing landscape effects on dispersal networks and gene flow with genetic graphs

Graph-theoretic approaches have relevant applications in landscape genetic analyses. When species form populations in discrete habitat patches, genetic graphs can be used (a) to identify direct dispersal paths followed by propagules or (b) to quantify landscape effects on multi-generational gene flow. However, the influence of their construction parameters remains to be explored. Using a simulation approach, we constructed genetic graphs using several pruning methods (geographical distance thresholds, topological constraints, statistical inference) and genetic distances to weight graph links (F_ST , D_PS , Euclidean genetic distances). We then compared the capacity of these different graphs to (a) identify the precise topology of the dispersal network and (b) to infer landscape resistance to gene flow from the relationship between cost-distances and genetic distances. Although not always clear-cut, our results showed that methods based on geographical distance thresholds seem to better identify dispersal networks in most cases. More interestingly, our study demonstrates that a sub-selection of pairwise distances through graph pruning (thereby reducing the number of data points) can counter-intuitively lead to improved inferences of landscape effects on dispersal. Finally, we showed that genetic distances such as the D_PS or Euclidean genetic distances should be preferred over the F_ST for landscape effect inference as they respond faster to landscape changes.

Consequences of population topology for studying gene flow using link-based landscape genetic methods

Many landscape genetic studies aim to determine the effect of landscape on gene flow between populations. These studies frequently employ link‐based methods that relate pairwise measures of historical gene flow to measures of the landscape and the geographical distance between populations. However, apart from landscape and distance, there is a third important factor that can influence historical gene flow, that is, population topology (i.e., the arrangement of populations throughout a landscape). As the population topology is determined in part by the landscape configuration, I argue that it should play a more prominent role in landscape genetics. Making use of existing literature and theoretical examples, I discuss how population topology can influence results in landscape genetic studies and how it can be taken into account to improve the accuracy of these results. In support of my arguments, I have performed a literature review of landscape genetic studies published during the first half of 2015 as well as several computer simulations of gene flow between populations. First, I argue why one should carefully consider which population pairs should be included in link‐based analyses. Second, I discuss several ways in which the population topology can be incorporated in response and explanatory variables. Third, I outline why it is important to sample populations in such a way that a good representation of the population topology is obtained. Fourth, I discuss how statistical testing for link‐based approaches could be influenced by the population topology. I conclude the article with six recommendations geared toward better incorporating population topology in link‐based landscape genetic studies.