https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8614-6489
Figures
Abstract
The Ryukyu flying fox (Pteropus dasymallus) is distributed throughout the island chain spanning across southern Japan, Taiwan, and possibly the Philippines. Although P. dasymallus is listed as VU (vulnerable) in the IUCN Red List, only few genetic works have been conducted to support its conservation. In this study we analyzed 19 markers (mtDNA haplotypes and 18 microsatellite markers) to evaluate genetic diversity and investigate the genetic structure of this species. mtDNA analysis was conducted with 142 DNA remote samples, mostly from faeces, and wing tissues collected on eight islands (Miyako, Ishigaki, Kohama, Kuroshima, Hateruma, Taketomi, Iriomote, Yonaguni). 39 haplotypes were identified in 526bp of the control region, and haplotype network showed no clear genetic structure. Microsatellite analysis was also conducted with 155 samples collected on six islands (Miyako, Ishigaki, Kohama, Taketomi, Iriomote, Yonaguni). It showed that the Yonaguni population exhibits low genetic diversity, high inbreeding, and clear genetic differentiation from other populations. Gene flow between Ishigaki and Miyako through small stepstone islands might be preventing inbreeding of the Miyako population. We provide for the first time indirect proof of long-distance inter-island dispersal in the Ryukyu flying fox and revealed genetic diversity, gene flow and genetic differentiation among the archipelago’s populations. These results will be useful for delineating conservation units and designing specific conservation policies for each island based on metapopulation genetic structure.
Citation: Taki Y, Vincenot CE, Sato Y, Inoue-Murayama M (2021) Genetic diversity and population structure in the Ryukyu flying fox inferred from remote sampling in the Yaeyama archipelago. PLoS ONE 16(3): e0248672. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0248672
Editor: Tzen-Yuh Chiang, National Cheng Kung University, TAIWAN
Received: November 9, 2020; Accepted: March 4, 2021; Published: March 18, 2021
Copyright: © 2021 Taki et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: All sequence files are available from DNA Data Bank of Japan (accession numbers LC528174-LC528212, LC506191-LC506193, LC506193, LC506197-LC506198, LC506200-LC506202, LC506205-LC506209, LC506212-LC506213, LC506220, LC506223.).
Funding: This work was financially supported by KAKENHI No. 20H00420 for M.I.-M., and Leading graduate program in Primatology and Wildlife Science. Sample collection and initial genetics works were performed under KAKENHI No. 17K15054 and Pro Natura Japan support granted to C.E.V. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: I have read the journal’s policy and one the authors of this manuscript has the following competing interests: C.E. Vincenot is an Academic Editor of PLOS ONE. This role as a PLOS ONE Academic Editor does not alter the authors’ adherence to all PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. The other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Introduction
The Chiroptera represent a speciose and highly threatened group of mammals [1]. In Japan, 37 of the 122 mammal species are bats, yet academic research on this order has been lacking and misdirected towards the least threatened species. The country features significantly high endemicity with endemic bats most endangered while at the same time most poorly studied [2].
Flying foxes, defined hereafter as paleotropical fruit bats belonging to the Pteropus genus, serve important ecosystem functions as pollinators [3] and seed dispersers [4], and play a disproportionally large ecological role in maintaining forest structure and biodiversity [5]. Their seed dispersing capacity relies on their ability to carry large seeds across remarkably large foraging ranges. For instance, the Mauritian flying fox Pteropus niger was reported to fly up to 92 km in a single night [6], while some other large Pteropus species have demonstrated an ability to migrate between islands [7]. This is particularly critical as many paleotropical islands have lost their megafauna [8], leaving only flying foxes to perform large seed dispersal [9]. Nonetheless, their service to forested insular ecosystems is easily disrupted by demographic declines, as flying foxes cease to function as seed dispersers long before they become rare [9]. This reckoning is all the more alarming as flying foxes are arguably the most endangered group of bats worldwide and are most threatened on islands [10]. The intense pressure that they face is best epitomized by the regular conflicts and mass fatalities observed in Australia [11–14] and the notorious mass culling campaigns inflicted to the remaining population of P. niger by the Mauritian government [10, 15–17].
The Ryukyu flying fox (Pteropus dasymallus) is distributed across the Ryukyu archipelago in Japan, two small islands of Taiwan, and possibly in the Philippines [18, 19]. P. dasymallus mainly eats fruits, nectar, and sometimes leaves, and plays an important role in pollination and seed dispersal [20–23]. P. dasymallus is listed as Vulnerable in the IUCN Red List [24] and has been the object of conservation concerns, due to rampant habitat degradation as well as to the recent discovery of previously unreported threat factors, such as predation by feral animals, powerline electrocutions, climatic stress (esp. due to typhoons and heat-induced dehydration), and most importantly conflicts with farmers and culling which have resulted in important fatality [18, 25, 26]. Low likeability and lack of support for conservation further warrant increased attention [27].
Considering the largely insular distribution range of these bats, genetic information such as diversity, gene flow and genetic differentiation between islands is important for their conservation. Indeed, genetic analyses on another species, Pteropus mariannus, for instance revealed genetic structure and gene flow between islands, and suggested new subspecies classification and conservation units [28]. Yet, tissue sample collection is tedious in the case of solitary, tree-dwelling fruit bats. On the other hand, non-invasive DNA extraction from faeces also potentially poses technical challenges due to the small size and consistency of the faeces coupled with heavy concentration in polyphenols—a known PCR inhibitor [29]. Hence, to this date, few genetic studies have been conducted on P. dasymallus and no solid knowledge exists on long-range dispersal capabilities and population structure. In this study, we try to remedy this situation by focusing on the Yaeyama archipelago, which hosts the most extensive part of the Ryukyu flying fox population and is inhabited by one allopatric subspecies, the Yaeyama flying fox P.d. yayeyamae. mtDNA haplotype and microsatellite analysis of P. d. yaeyamae were conducted based on remote DNA sampling using mostly faeces and feeding marks. This work provided the first indirect evidence of gene flow between islands and revealed the genetic diversity and structure among the eight major islands of the chain.
Materials and methods
Samples
DNA was recovered from various direct and indirect sources, namely faeces, tissue, feeding marks of fruits or flowers, blood and hair. Faeces and fruit samples were collected from 2012 to 2019 (Fig 1) by selection of appropriate sites (mostly foraging sites, but also a few roosts) based on experience. We avoided picking several samples from the same sites, except on islands on which population density was so low that only few sites were available at the time of collection. Faeces and fruit samples were stored in either silica beads or 99% EtOH. Tissue samples, on the other hand, were obtained on Ishigaki island using the standard procedure for bats, which involved capturing P. dasymallus individuals at night using mistnets and taking one 3mm wing biopsy from the plagiopatagium or between the 4th and 5th finger in the distal part of the chiropatagium, depending on wing condition (see detailed protocol used in [29, 30]).
Ratio of the number of samples of each haplotype is shown for each island on the map. The sizes of circles represent the sample sizes. Haplotypes shared between islands are shown with the same colors. Source of the map was the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan (https://maps.gsi.go.jp).
In total, 135 samples from 8 islands (faeces: n = 95, tissue: n = 17, fruits: n = 23) were used for mtDNA sequencing while 155 samples collected in 6 islands (faeces: n = 99, tissue: n = 8, feeding marks: n = 32, hair: n = 15, blood: n = 1) were used for microsatellite analysis. The number of analyzed individuals for each island is shown in S1 Table. DNA extraction was conducted with QIAGEN DNeasy Blood and Tissue Kit (QIAGEN) for tissue samples and QIAamp DNA Stool Mini Kit (QIAGEN) for fecal samples.
mtDNA haplotype analysis
A part of control region of mtDNA was amplified through PCR. ppM01F (5’-accagaaaaggggarcaacc-3’) and ppmtCR-RS2(5’-caagcatcccccaaaaatta-3’) [29] were used as primers and PCR System 9700 (GeneAmp) was used as a thermal cycler. The PCR conditions were: 95°C for 2 min; 40–45 cycles at 95°C for 30s, 50–55°C for 30s, 74°C for 1 min; then a 10 min final extension at 74°C. PCR products were purified with High Pure PCR Product Purification Kit (Roche). After sequencing reaction, 526bp of control region was sequenced by ABI PRISM 3130xl Genetic Analyzer (Applied Biosystems).
SNPs were detected through sequence alignment by MEGA7 [31]. Haplotypes were identified based on the SNPs. Phylogenetic analysis was conducted by MEGA7 [31] and the haplotype network [32] was constructed by PopART [33]. Also, haplotype diversity (h) and haplotype richness (hr) were calculated by Contrib [34].
Microsatellite analysis
18 microsatellite loci (Accession number: LC506191-LC506193, LC506193, LC506197-LC506198, LC506200-LC506202, LC506205-LC506209, LC506212-LC506213, LC506220, LC506223) which we developed specifically for P. dasymallus [30] were amplified through PCR using a PCR System 9700 Thermal Cycler (GeneAmp). Forward primers were synthesized with an M13 tag sequence (5’-GTTGTAAAACGACGGCCAGT-3’) for fluorescent labeling. PCR was conducted in a final volume of 10 μl, containing 1 μl DNA, 5 μl Multiplex PCR Master Mix (QIAGEN), 0.2 μM of M13-tailed forward primer, reverse primer and a M13 fluorescent primer labeled with FAM, NED, or HEX, and 0.1 μg of T4 gene 32 Protein (Nippon Gene, Tokyo, JPN). The PCR conditions were: 94°C for 5 min; 45 cycles at 94°C for 30s, 60°C for 45s, 72°C for 45s; then 8 cycles for M13 at 94°C for 30s, 53°C for 45s, 72°C for 45s, and a 10 min final extension at 72°C. Amplicon size was measured using an ABI PRISM 3130xl Genetic Analyzer (Applied Biosystems), and genotypes were scored by eye with Peak Scanner Software (Applied Biosystems).
Genetic diversity analysis and Principal Coordinate Analysis (PCoA) were conducted by GenAlEx (version) [35, 36]. Also, we investigated genetic structure with STRUCUTE [37]. Finally, Fst was calculated by GENEPOP on the Web [38, 39] to check genetic differentiation and geneflow between islands. Taketomi was included in only PCoA because the number of analyzed individuals was not enough for the other analyses.
Ethical statements
Samples were collected under permission granted to C.E. Vincenot by the Japanese Ministry of Environment (capture permits ref. 11–79, 11–105 and 11–62). The experimental protocol for capture, handling and sample collection was also approved by Kyoto University’s Animal Experimentation Committee (ref. Inf-K15009, Inf-K17003, Inf-K19003).
Results
mtDNA haplotype analysis
45 SNPs were detected in 526 bp sequences (including 35 bp which is a part of neighboring translated gene) of 135 samples, and 39 haplotypes (RFF1~RFF39, Accession number: LC528174-LC528212) were defined. The SNPs of each haplotype are shown in S1 Fig, and the number of samples for each haplotype on each island is shown in S2 Table.
Haplotype network suggested that haplotypes from each island did not form any clusters and no clear genetic structure was detected (S2 Fig). However, in the phylogenetic tree by maximum likelihood method, Miyako population seemed closer to Ishigaki population (S3 Fig).
Haplotype distribution among islands revealed that 14 haplotypes out of 39 were shared between multiple islands (Fig 1). While some haplotypes (RFF14, RFF36) were widely shared from the east end to the west end of the distribution, others were only found in certain areas. RFF16 and RFF21 were only found in Iriomote and Yonaguni (the west area), while RFF7, RFF24, RFF30, RFF35, and RFF38 were only found in Miyako and Ishigaki (the east area).
The number of haplotypes (Nh), the number of unique haplotypes (unique), haplotype diversity (h), and haplotype richness (hr) of 4 islands are shown in Table 1. The h of Ishigaki and Iriomote were 0.96 and 1.00, while that of Miyako and Yonaguni were 0.69 and 0.61, respectively. Also, the hr of Ishigaki and Iriomote were 7.51 and 9.00, while that of Miyako and Yonaguni were 3.77 and 2.79, respectively. Genetic diversity was higher in Ishigaki and Iriomote than Miyako, and the diversity of Yonaguni was the lowest.
Microsatellite analysis
The number of analyzed individuals (n), observed heterozygosity (Ho), expected heterozygosity (He), and inbreeding coefficient (F) of each island are shown in Table 2. Ho of Ishigaki, Kohama, Iriomote, Miyako were 0.666, 0.650, 0.631, 0.512, respectively. On the other hand, Ho of Yonaguni was 0.388 and F was 0.355. Yonaguni population had low genetic diversity and showed high level of inbreeding compared to the other islands.
PCoA shows genetic distance between individuals, and there were 3 clusters: Yonaguni cluster, center cluster (Ishigaki, Taketomi, Kohama, Iriomote and a part of Miyako), and Miyako cluster (Fig 2).
Each dot represents an individual and populations are shown with colors. Three clusters are shown with circles.
In STRUCTURE, LnP(D) suggested that K = 4 provides the best model (S4 Fig), and the latter is shown in S5 Fig. Ishigaki, Kohama, Iriomote and a part of Miyako populations had the same genetic composition, while the rest of Miyako and Yonaguni populations had each different genetic structure.
Fst between Yonaguni and the other islands were generally high (Table 3), and it shows Yonaguni population is genetically differentiated from the other islands’ populations.
Discussion
Genetic diversity and its differentiations
Genetic diversity was high in populations of the central area (Ishigaki, Taketomi, Kohama, and Iriomote) and the lowest in Yonaguni population. Miyako population exhibited a medium level of genetic diversity. Comparing the Ho of each island (Table 2) to that of wild population of the notoriously endangered Pteropus rodricensis (Ho = 0.5718) [40], Yonaguni (Ho = 0.388) had much lower value, while that of Miyako (Ho = 0.512) was slightly lower. The other islands’ were, however, higher (Ho = 0.631~0.666). Also, inbreeding coefficient was high in Yonaguni population. This indicates that genetic diversity has been getting low due to inbreeding depression in Yonaguni population.
In mtDNA haplotype analysis, no clear genetic differentiations between islands was detected. However, in microsatellite analysis, populations of 6 islands were genetically divided into 3 groups: Miyako group (Miyako), the Central group (Ishigaki, Taketomi, Kohama, and Iriomote), and Yonaguni group (Yonaguni). Populations in the central group had the same genetic composition, and Miyako group was partly differentiated from them. Yonaguni group was highly differentiated from the other 2 groups.
Gene flow between islands
The main habitats of the Yaeyama flying fox are Ishigaki island and Iriomote island (Central group) and populations in these two have higher genetic diversity than other islands. Other islands of the Central group might be keeping their diversity because of the gene flow linking them with the Ishigaki and Iriomote populations.
The Miyako group is geographically far from the Central group, but there are some islands such as Tarama between Ishigaki and Miyako. There could be gene flow between the two groups through these islands, and that might be why Miyako group was not differentiated completely from the Central group (Fig 2, Table 3) and had a middle level of genetic diversity. Also, Miyako and Ishigaki had the lowest Fst value (0.0221). This could be just because of active gene flow between Ishigaki and Miyako through islands between them. However, it might also be explained by the establishment of the Miyako population through recent migration from Ishigaki, which would explain the high ratio of RFF30 in Miyako in mtDNA haplotype analysis, assuming that the founders had that haplotype. This is also supported by the mtDNA phylogenetic tree (S3 Fig), in which the Miyako population seemed closer to Ishigaki population. Our dataset, however, does not allow to conclude on whether or not the colonization of Miyako effectively occurred recently and engendered a founder effect, or if the haplotype composition of Miyako is representative of a genetic drift resulting from strong population decline.
As regards Yonaguni, there is no steppingstone between this island and the Central group. In a research on the endangered Bonin flying fox Pteropus pselaphon, the other Japanese Pteropus species, genetic diversity of an isolated island was similar to that of Yonaguni [41]. Since Yonaguni lies far away from its closest islands, it can be considered geographically isolated and migration can safely be assumed to happen only on special occasions such as typhoons, which regularly sweep the region westwards. This is supported by our results, which show that Yonaguni is genetically differentiated from the other populations, and that is causing low genetic diversity.
Conservation implications
The observation of gene flow between islands provides the first indirect evidence that long-distance inter-island dispersal is occurring in the Ryukyu flying fox. This indicates that this species is capable of long flights and thus that individual activity may not be assumed to be limited to a small range. This confirms results of ongoing VHF and GPS tracking studies (Vincenot C.E., unpub. data) and casts doubt on the validity of general population trends deduced on the basis of counts conducted in only a small set of geographically localized foraging sites. Furthermore, our results show that island populations may be connected through flight capability and thus generate demographic and genetic interdependence, which need to be resolved to inform conservation policies. This interconnection into a metapopulation may also explain seasonal changes in perceived abundance, which so far have been considered signs of increased activity only. For instance, local inhabitants of Hateruma island, among others, have consistently reported spotting significantly more individuals in summer than the rest of the year, a phenomenon that they attributed to seasonal migrations from Iriomote island (Vincenot C.E., pers. obs.). Our findings, although inconclusive as regards Hateruma island, give some scientific credit to such local claims, especially on island featuring high gene flow.
Considering the results of our genetic research, the Yaeyama subspecies of the Ryukyu flying fox could be divided into 3 conservation units: Miyako unit (populations in Miyako islands), the central unit (populations in the center of distribution including Ishigaki, Taketomi, Kohama, and Iriomote populations), and Yonaguni unit (Yonaguni islands) (Fig 3). The central unit has many individuals and high genetic diversity, and gene flow between the central unit and Miyako unit might be preventing extinction of the Miyako unit. However, the Yonaguni unit is isolated from other populations and could be highly endangered. Recovery of genetic diversity is crucial for population viability of the Yonaguni unit. Particular care should be exerted to reduce pressure on this population by reducing threat factors (see [18, 25]).
Source of the map was the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan (https://maps.gsi.go.jp).
In conclusion, our analysis supports that island populations, especially the ones forming the backbone of the archipelago, should be considered as variably interconnected through exchanges of individuals. This observation may allow future population monitoring to better comprehend changes in local population sizes and, on the longer term, in genetic diversity by integrating the knowledge gained on gene flow among the different islands. We hope that the present results will be integrated into the design of conservation strategies, which are regrettably still lacking. We propose in particular that outer populations, such as the one on Yonaguni, be the object of focused attention and protection measures, as they seem most at risk of stochastic demographic collapse and inbreeding depression.
Supporting information
S1 Fig. SNPs of each mtDNA haplotype.
Base No shows positions in the 526bp sequence.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0248672.s001
(TIFF)
S2 Fig. mtDNA haplotype network.
Each haplotype is shown as a circle with ratio of the number of samples of each island. The sizes of circles represent the sample sizes.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0248672.s002
(TIFF)
S3 Fig. Phylogenetic tree of mtDNA sequences by maximum likelihood method.
Population and sample number are shown in each place in the tree.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0248672.s003
(TIFF)
S4 Fig. Selection of K for STRUCTURE.
LnP(D) shows the accuracy of the analysis for each K. K = 4 is chosen as the best model.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0248672.s004
(TIFF)
S5 Fig. The result of STRUCTURE at K = 4.
Each ancestral population is shown with colors.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0248672.s005
(TIFF)
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to Dr Anja Collazo (Island Bat Research Group, IBRG) for years of contribution in collecting samples and Hiromi Kobayashi for her helpful assistance in genotyping. We thank Paul A Racey and one anonymous reviewer for their helpful comments to improve this paper.
Note
Preliminary results of this project were presented at the Island Biology Conference in Hawaii (2014). More advanced versions of this work were presented at The International Symposium on Primatology and Wildlife Science (10~13th) (2018~2020), The Annual Meeting of the Japanese Society for DNA Polymorphism Research (27~28th) (2018~2019), The 66th Annual Meeting of the Ecological Society of Japan (2019), The 63rd PRIMATES Conference (2019), and The 14th International Conference on Environmental Enrichment (2019).
References
- 1.
Voigt CC, Kingston T, editors. Bats in the Anthropocene: Conservation of Bats in a Changing World. 1st ed. Springer International Publishing; 2016.
- 2.
Preble J, Ohte N, Vincenot CE. In the Shadow of the Rising Sun: A Systematic Review of Japanese Bat Research and Conservation. Mammal Review, in press.
- 3. Aziz SA, Clements GR, McConkey KR, Sritongchuay T, Pathil S, Yazid MN, et al. Pollination by the locally endangered island flying fox (Pteropus hypomelanus) enhances fruit production of the economically important durian (Durio zibethinus). Ecology and Evolution. 2017;7: 8670–8684. pmid:29152168
- 4. Oleksy R, Racey PA, Jones G. High-resolution GPS tracking reveals habitat selection and the potential for long-distance seed dispersal by Madagascan flying foxes Pteropus rufus. Global Ecology and Conservation. 2015;3:678–692.
- 5. Florens FBV, Baider C, Marday V, Martin GMN, Zmanay Z, Oleksy R, et al. Disproportionately large ecological role of a recently mass-culled flying fox in native forests of an oceanic island. Journal for Nature Conservation. 2017;40:85–93.
- 6. Oleksy RZ, Ayady CL, Tatayah V, Jones C, Howey PW, Froidevaux JSP, et al. The movement ecology of the Mauritian flying fox (Pteropus niger): a long-term study using solar-powered GSM/GPS tags. Movement Ecology. 2019;7(12). pmid:31016019
- 7. Epstein JH, Olival KJ, Pulliam JRC, et al. Pteropus vampyrus, a hunted migratory species with a multinational home-range and a need for regional management. Journal of Applied Ecology. 2009;46(5):991–1002.
- 8. Hansen DM, Galetti M. The Forgotten Megafauna. Science. 2009;324 (5923):42–43. pmid:19342573
- 9. McConkey KR, Drake DR. Low redundancy in seed dispersal within an island frugivore community. AoB PLANTS. 2015;7: plv088. pmid:26194167
- 10. Vincenot C.E., Florens F.B.V., Kingston T. Can we protect island flying foxes? Science. 2017;355 (6332):1368–1370. pmid:28360279
- 11. Westcott DA, Caley P, Heersink DK, McKeown A. A state-space modelling approach to wildlife monitoring with application to flying-fox abundance. Scientific Reports. 2018;8:4038. pmid:29511249
- 12. Tait J, Perotto-Baldivieso HL, McKeown A, Westcott DA. Are flying-foxes coming to town? Urbanisation of the spectacled flying-fox (Pteropus conspicillatus) in Australia. PLoS One. 2014;9(10):e109810. pmid:25295724
- 13. Vincenot C, Petit S. Australia too casual with protection law. Nature. 2016;539:168. pmid:27830806
- 14. Welbergen JA, Klose SM, Markus N, Eby P. Climate change and the effects of temperature extremes on Australian flying-foxes. Proc. R. Soc. B. 2007;275:419–425.
- 15. Florens FBV, Baider C. Mass-culling of a threatened island flying fox species failed to increase fruit growers’ profits and revealed gaps to be addressed for effective conservation. Journal for Nature Conservation. 2019;47:58–64.
- 16. Florens FBV, Vincenot CE. Broader conservation strategies needed. Science. 2018;362(6413):409. pmid:30361363
- 17. Nuwer R. These endangered bats are being killed by the thousands—here’s why. National Geogrphic; 2019.
- 18. Vincenot CE, Collazo A.M., Russo D. The Ryukyu Flying Fox (Pteropus dasymallus)—A Review of Conservation Threats and Call for Reassessment. Mammalian Biology. 2017;83(4):71–77.
- 19.
Hintsche S. Pteropus dasymallus, in Wilson D.E., Mittermeier R.A (eds.) Handbook of the Mammals of the World–Vol 9, Bats. Lynx Editions, Barcelona: 1008 pp. ISBN: 978-84-16728-19-0.
- 20. Lee YF, Takaso TY, Chiang YM, Nakanishi N, Tzeng HY, Yasuda K. Variation in the nocturnal foraging distribution of and resource use by endangered Ryukyu flying-foxes (Pteropus dasymallus) on Iriomotejima, Japan. Contributions to Zoology. 2009;78: 51–64.
- 21. Lee YF., Kuo YM., Chang HY. et al. Foraging dispersion of Ryukyu flying-foxes and relationships with fig abundance in East-Asian subtropical island forests. BMC Ecol. 2017;17: 35. pmid:29137616
- 22. Nakamoto A., Kinjo K. & Izawa M. The role of Orii’s flying-fox (Pteropus dasymallus inopinatus) as a pollinator and a seed disperser on Okinawa-jima Island, the Ryukyu Archipelago, Japan. Ecol Res. 2009;24: 405–414.
- 23. Funakoshi K., Watanabe H. and Kunisaki T. Feeding ecology of the northern Ryukyu fruit bat, Pteropus dasymallus dasymallus, in a warm‐temperate region. Journal of Zoology. 1993;230: 221–230.
- 24. Vincenot CE (2017) Pteropus dasymallus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2017; e.T18722A22080614
- 25. Vincenot CE, Koyama L, Russo D. Near threatened? First report of unsuspected human-driven decline factors in the Ryukyu flying fox (Pteropus dasymallus) in Japan. Mamm Biol. 2015;80: 273–277.
- 26.
Weerach C, Shibata S, Vincenot CE. Amidst Nets and Typhoons–Conservation Implications of Bat-Farmer Conflicts on Okinawa Island. Forthcoming, under review.
- 27. Vincenot CE, Collazo AM, Wallmo K, Koyama L. Public awareness and perceptual factors in the conservation of elusive species: The case of the endangered Ryukyu flying fox. Global Ecology and Conservation. 2015;3:526–540.
- 28. Brown VA, Brooke AP, Fordyce JA, McCracken GF. Genetic analysis of populations of the threatened bat Pteropus mariannus. Conservation Genetics. 2011;12: 933–941.
- 29.
Vincenot CE, Collazo A, Kinoshita M, Koyama L. Good DNA from fruit bat guano? A Computational Framework for remote genetic sampling assessment, in preparation.
- 30.
Taki Y, Vincenot CE, Sato Y, Nakajima N, Inoue-Murayama M. Development of 34 microsatellite markers for the Ryukyu flying fox (Pteropus dasymallus) Conservation Genetics Resources. 2020; in press.
- 31. Kumar S, Stecher G, Tamura K. MEGA7: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis version 7.0 for bigger datasets. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 2016;33: 1870–1874. pmid:27004904
- 32. Bandelt H, Forster P, Röhl A. Median-joining networks for inferring intraspecific phylogenies. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 1999;16: 37–48. pmid:10331250
- 33. Leigh J, Bryant D. PopART: Full-feature software for haplotype network construction. Methods in Ecology and Evolution. 2015;6: 1110–1116.
- 34. Petit R, Mousadik A, Pons O. Identifying populations for conservation on the basis of genetic markers. Conservation Biology. 1998;12: 844–855.
- 35. Peakall ROD, Smouse PE. GenAlEx 6: genetic analysis in excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research. Mol Ecol Notes. 2006;6:288–295.
- 36. Peakall R, Smouse PE. GenAlEx 6.5: genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research-an update. Bioinformatics. 2012;28: 2537–2539. pmid:22820204
- 37. Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P. Inference of Population Structure Using Multilocus Genotype Data. Genetics. 2000;155: 945–959. pmid:10835412
- 38. Rousset F, Raymond M. Statistical analyses of population genetic data: new tools, old concepts. Torends Ecol Evol. 1997;12:313–317. pmid:21238087
- 39. Rousset F. Genepop’007: a complete reimplementation of the Genepop software for Windows and Linux. Mol. Ecol. Resources. 2008;8: 103–106.
- 40. O’Brien J, McCracken GF, Say L, Hayden TJ. Rodrigues fruit bats (Pteropus rodricensis, Megachiroptera: Pteropodidae) retain genetic diversity despite population declines and founder events. Conserv Genet. 2007;8:1073.
- 41. Okada A, Suzuki H, Inaba M, Horikoshi K, Shindo J. Genetic Structure and Cryptic Genealogy of the Bonin Flying Fox Pteropus pselaphon Revealed by Mitochondrial DNA and Microsatellite Markers. Acta Chiropterologica. 2014;16(1): 15–26.