abstract |
The article presents the results of a comprehensive craniological analysis of the American mink (Neogale vison Schreber 1777) based on skulls from three different geographic samples: 1) Upper Dnipro (Kyiv Oblast) and its first-order tributary (Desna, Chernihiv Oblast); 2) The animal farm of the Cherkasy Oblast Consumer Union on the territory of the Sosnovsky hunting ground; and 3) the Siversky Donets River basin (Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts). The research included standard analysis based on craniometric measurements of 19 parameters, analysis of the shape of skulls by geometric morphometrics separately for the dorsal and ventral sides of the skull and buccal surface of the left mandible. The total sample comprised 29 specimens. The study showed that, according to the average values, skulls from the Siverky Donets River basin are the smallest in size, while the skulls of the American mink from Cherkasy Oblast are the largest among the studied samples. The analysis by geometric morphometrics showed the presence of inter-population differences, which is expressed between geographically distant samples. The most important features that distinguish the studied samples include the shape of the nasal and frontal bones, the braincase region on the dorsal side of the skull, as well as the shape of structures associated with the diastema and the proximal part of the hard palate, and the shape of the occipital bones of the skull. The differences in the shape of the mandible are related to the position of the coronal process in relation to the jaw base and articular process. In the majority of specimens from the Siversky Donets and Upper Dnipro basins, the coronal and articular processes are closer to each other than in specimens from Cherkasy Oblast. The identified features and the results of the comparison of samples from Ukraine and other territories suggest that in the case of natural populations of Neogale vison, the leading role in the variability of geographically separated populations is played by such factors as origin (founder effect), trophic adaptations, and population status. Comparison of the results of our study with studies from other countries indicates that skull dimensions are larger in those regions where stable and powerful populations have formed as a result of the introduction, but in regions where the species is still spreading or forming populations, skull sizes were smaller. |
references |
Abelentsev, V. I. 1968. Mustelidae. Naukova dumka, Kyiv, 1–280. (Series: Fauna of Ukraine. Vol. 1: Mammals; Issue 3). [Ukrainian] [Ukrainian] http://terioshkola.org.ua/library/classic/abelentsev-1968.pdf
Anderson, M. J. 2001. A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Austral Ecology, 26: 32–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9993.2001.01070.pp.x
Bowman J., A. G., Kidd, R. M. Gorman, A. I. Schulte-Hostedde. 2007. Assessing the potential for impacts by feral mink on wild mink in Canada. Biological conservation, 139: 12–1 8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2007.05.020
Chernyavsky, F. B. 1984. Mammals of the extreme North-East of Siberia. Nauka, Moscow, 1–388. [Russian] http://libarch.nmu.org.ua/handle/GenofondUA/74573
Egorov, Y. E. 1983. Mechanisms of Divergence. Nauka Press, Moskva, 1–176. [Russian]
Hammer, Ø., D. A. T. Harper, P. D. Ryan. 2001. PAST: Paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontologia Electronica, 4 (1): a04.
Klingenberg, C. P., G. S. McIntyre. 1998. Geometric morphometrics of developmental instability: Analyzing patterns of fluctuating asymmetry with procrustes methods. Evolution, 52 (5): 1363–1375. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1998.tb02018.x
Klingenberg, C. P. 2011. MorphoJ: an integrated software package for geometric morphometrics. Molecular Ecology Resources, 11: 353–357. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-0998.2010.02924.x
Kolosov, A. M., N. P. Lavrov. 1968. Enrichment of the Commercial Fauna of the USSR. Forest industry. Moskva, 1–256. [Russian]
Korablev, M. P., N. P. Korablev, P. N. Korablev. 2013. Morphophenetic analysis of American mink (Neovison vison) populations from the Caspian-Baltic watershed. Russian Journal of Biological Invasions, 4: 23–38. [Russian] https://doi.org/10.1134/S2075111713010050
Lazariev, D. 2023. Alien mammal species in floodplain habitats of the Siversky Donets basin (Ukraine). Theriologia Ukrainica, 25: 15–33. https://doi.org/10.53452/TU2504
Lazariev, D., Z. Barkaszi. 2023. Craniological analysis of the muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus) from different river basins of Ukraine. Theriologia Ukrainica, 26: 71–86. https://doi.org/10.53452/TU2608
Machado, F. A., T. M. G. Zahn, G. Marroig. 2018. Evolution of morphological integration in the skull of Carnivora (Mammalia): Changes in Canidae lead to increased evolutionary potential of facial traits. Evolution, 72 (7): 1399–1419. https://doi:10.1111/evo.13495
Mucha, A., M. Zaton-Dobrowolska, M. Moska, H. Wierzbicki, A. Dziech et al. 2021. How selective breeding has changed the morphology of the american mink (Neovison vison)—A comparative analysis of farm and feral animals. Animals, 11 (1): 106. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11010106
Panov, G. M. 2002. Dynamics of ranges and of abundances of semi-water fur-bearing mammals in Ukraine during second of the 20th century. Bulletin of Lviv University. Biological series, 30: 119–132. [Ukrainian] https://u.to/sjpKIA
Panteleev, P. A. 1996. On the intraspecific taxonomy and taxonomic significance of exterior and craniometric characters in subspecies of the water vole Arvicola terrestris. Vestnik zoologii, 30 (3): 21–25. [Russian]
Panteleev, P. A. 2001. Ecomorphology. In: Panteleev, P. A. (ed.). Water Vole. Mode of the Species. Nauka, Moscow, 174–192. [Russian]
Pavlov, M. P. 1973. Acclimatisation of Hunting and Fishing Animals and Birds in the USSR. Kirov, Volgo-Vyatsk Book Publishing House, 1–535. [Russian]
Pavlinin, V. N. 1962. Materials on variability of the American mink in the Ural. Proceedings of the Institute of Biology, UF AS USSR. Sverdlovsk. 29: 97–119. [Russian]
Sedalishchev, V. T., V. A. Odnokurtsev. 2012. On the ecology of the American mink (Neovison vison Schreber, 1777). Povolzhskii Ekologicheskii Zhurnal, 3: 302–310. [Russian]
Stepanova, V. V., N. V. Mamaev, M. M. Sidorov, I. M. Okhlopkov. 2023. American Mink (Neovison vison) in Yakutia: mophology, distribution, abundance. Russian Journal of Biological Invasions, 14 (4): 634–644. https://doi.org/10.1134/S207511172304015X
Tamlin, A. L., J. Bowman, D. F. Hackett. 2009. Separating wild from domestic American mink Neovison vison based on skull morphometrics. Wildlife Biology, 15: 266–277. https://doi.org/10.2981/08-004
Taraska, M., M. Sulik, D. Lasota. 2016. Comparison of the craniometric parameters of wild and farm American mink (Mustela Vison). Folia Morphologica, 75 (2): 251–256. https://doi.org/10.5603/FM.a2015.0092
Ternovsky, D. V. 1958. Biology and acclimatisation of the American mink (Lutreola vison Brisson) in Altai. Novosibirsk Book Publishing, 1–138. [Russian]
Thom, M. D., L. A. Harrington, D. W. Macdonald. 2004. Why are American mink sexually dimorphic? A role for niche separation. Oikos, 105: 525–535. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0030-1299.2004.12830.x
Zagorodniuk, I. 2006. Adventive mammal fauna of Ukraine and a significance of invasions in historical changes of fauna and communities. Proceedings of the Theriological School, 8: 18–47. [Ukrainian]
Zagorodniuk, I. 2012. Study of osteological samples of mammals: key craniometric characters. Proceedings of the Theriological School, 11: 16–32. [Ukrainian] https://doi.org/10.15407/ptt2012.11.016
Zagorodniuk, I., I. Shydlovskyy. 2014. Acronyms for zoological collections of Ukraine. In: Zagorodniuk, I. (ed.). Zoological Collections and Museums. National Museum of Natural History, NAS of Ukraine, Kyiv, 33–43. [Ukrainian] http://zoomus.lviv.ua/files/DZM2014-105-zag-muz-index.pdf |
