Mountain Gorilla genetics
- Thread starter Chlidonias
- Start date
It looks like the mountain gorilla population has been small like it is now for thousands of years. People assumed that it had been a large population fragmented and reduced in size by humans, but that appears not to have been the case anytime in the recent past.
Not surprisingly the mountain gorillas and Eastern lowland gorilla populations are much less genetically diverse that their western lowland cousins. This is not surprising because small populations are usually less genetically diverse than large ones because eventually everyone is closely related.
Thank you David,
Quote
"Fewer harmful loss-of-function variants were found in the mountain gorilla population than in the more numerous western gorilla populations."
Not sure if this as well?
Thank you
Some copies of genes (variants) lose their function because they mutate and they can produce harmful effects like cancer.
It appears that the mountain gorillas don't have as many of these harmful variants as larger lowland gorilla populations. This may be because the few individuals that had these variants have died out of the small mountain gorilla population and are no longer reproducing in it. With everyone in the mountain gorilla population being fairly closely related, essentially the harmful gene variants have been purged out.
On the basis of these findings, would it be scientifically correct to describe it as a 'relict' population?
The Gorillas of Bwindi Forest were evidently not included in this study but while showing some different characteristics, are often classed with the Virunga Gorillas as the total population of 'Mountain Gorillas' which is then given as the sum of these two sub- populations.
On another note, I read recently that other studies have show that Mountain Gorilla groups frequently contain several silverbacks(multi-male) whereas this trait is less or not apparent in the Eastern or Western Lowland species.
taun
Well-Known Member
This is well documented, just surprised it seems to be a little know fact. Shame that the change from single male to mulitple male groups could not have been documented to give us the reasoning. All attempts now will just be unproven theories.
Group sizes are larger also compared to the other species of gorilla, which begs the more questions with multi male groups why there is not smaller but more nurmous groups. Limted range has to be a factor in it all but whether its the overiding factor will remain to be seen.
[ame="http://www.amazon.co.uk/Gorilla-Society-Conflict-Compromise-Cooperation/dp/0226316033/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1430999857&sr=8-1&keywords=gorilla+society"]Gorilla Society: Conflict, Compromise, and Cooperation Between the Sexes: Amazon.co.uk: Alezander H Harcourt, Kelly J Stewart: 9780226316031: Books[/ame]
Well worth the read, (plus I got mine for a couple of £ new!)
I would imagine this is not a recent change-over e.g. that it hasn't taken place within the last few decades of scientific study,, and that the largest Mountain gorilla family groups have always frequently contained more than one/several adult males. Or am I wrong there?
Last edited:
taun
Well-Known Member
Thats what I was alluding too. It probably started not long after they were made to be such a small population thousands of years ago. (as the study suggests).
Yes, the biggest group 30 plus individuals had 5 silverback if I remember correctly.
Until recently there was one group of 64! Don't know how many silverbacks but several. I think it has split now though.
taun
Well-Known Member
wow, never heard of one that big. References?
Can't give it to you- I think it was on the GorillaHaven website and was mentioned very briefly as an aside as it has now split into two or more. I found it hard to imagine too, but there was a photo on that website showing proof of other big groups- there were at least 4 silverbacks in the shot and about 25/30 other Gorillas in the photo.
are you sure it was 64 Pertinax? Some googling finds the largest group as having been 42 animals (the group is called Susa, and as you say is now split into two smaller groups).
It definately said 64. Unfortunately I cannot find the reference again. It could have been wrong or a misprint of course. Even 42 is pretty huge though.
I can't even find the website! The one I think you mean (www. gorilla-haven. org) comes back as "server not found". There's another one (www. gorillahaven. site90. com) which tells pretty much nothing about anything. And then there's a Facebook page (www. facebook. com / gorillahaven) where it would be hard to find any specific item because it is Facebook (although I was intrigued by the "about" description of the page, namely "I apologize for improperly posting statements concerning my ex-husband and his business management abilities.").
Pretty sure that is where I saw it, on the facebook page. It was a few months back though. The husband and wife team that used to run this project 'Gorilla Haven' split up hence the announcement you quote which appeared on there quite recently. The husband now has another site- Dewar Wildlife, while his ex wife operates just a Facebook page under the old Gorilla Haven name.
She concentrates on Gorillas. His just has things about wildlife as
Gorilla Haven currently has no Gorillas in residence. They have only ever had four males to date. One died-age related, one transferred back to another Zoo, the last two were removed by Atlanta Zoo quite soon after they arrived- no explanations given.
