Molecular techniques, wildlife management and the importance of genetic population structure and dispersal: a case study with feral pigs

By J. Hampton, P. Spencer, D. Alpers, L. Twigg, A. Woolnough, J. Doust, T. Higgs, J. Pluske. 2004

181 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Using spatial Bayesian methods to determine the genetic structure of a continuously distributed population: clusters or isolation by distance? (2009, methodology): “Genotyping was performed using 14 unlinked microsatellite loci (Hampton et al. 2004): S0002 , S0005 , S0026 , S0090 ,”
Global change and species interactions in terrestrial ecosystems. (2008, background): “…and animals can indirectly influence virus incidence in native species by increasing populations of vectors or by acting as source populations for pathogens themselves (Hampton et al. 2004; Malmstrom et al. 2005), although they have also been shown to act as a sink for pathogens in some cases.”
ILLEGAL TRANSLOCATION AND GENETIC STRUCTURE OF FERAL PIGS IN WESTERN AUSTRALIA (2005, background): “Understanding spatial structure is valuable if managers are to make informed decisions about how to control a population, such as which populations may be more important to target for control operations (e.g., Zenger et al. 2003, Hampton et al. 2004).”
Do cities represent sources, sinks or isolated islands for urban wild boar population structure? (2017, unknown): “Genotyping was performed using 13 unlinked microsatellite loci: [S0002, S0005, S0226, Sw155, Sw0090, S0097, Sw122, Sw857, S0026, Sw240, Sw632, Sw936, Sw911; (Alexander, Rohrer & Beattie 1996; Hampton et al. 2004)].”