Data from: Sex-specific genetic analysis indicates low correlation between demographic and genetic connectivity in the Scandinavian brown bear (Ursus arctos)

Species viability is strongly connected to the degree of gene flow within
and among populations. Such genetic population connectivity may closely
track demographic population connectivity or, alternatively, the rate of
gene flow may change relative to the rate of dispersal. In this study, we
have explored the relationship between genetic and demographic population
connectivity using the Scandinavian brown bear as model species, due to
its pronounced male dispersal and female philopatry. Our expectation,
based on published demographic data, was that the philopatric females
shape genetic structure locally whereas the dispersing males act as
genetic mediators among regions. To test this, we used eight validated
microsatellite markers on 1531 individuals sampled non-invasively during
country-wide genetic population monitoring in Sweden and Norway from 2006
to 2013. First, we determined sex-specific genetic structure and
substructure across the study area. Second, we compared genetic
differentiation, migration/gene flow patterns and spatial autocorrelation
results between the sexes both within and among genetic clusters and
geographic regions. Our results indicated that demographic connectivity
was not a reliable indicator of genetic connectivity. On larger geographic
scales, among genetic clusters, we found no consistent difference in long
term gene flow and estimated current migration rates between males and
females. On smaller geographic scales, only females consistently displayed
significant positive spatial autocorrelation, indicating male-biased small
scale dispersal. An exception was displayed in one cluster, where males
showed significant positive spatial autocorrelation, similar to the
females. The Scandinavian brown bear population has experienced
substantial recovery over the last decades; however, our results did not
show any changes in the large scale population structure compared to
previous studies, suggesting that an increase in population size and
dispersal of individuals does not necessary lead to increased genetic
connectivity. Thus, we conclude that estimates of both genetic and
demographic connectivity should be performed so as not to misconceive the
reality of wildlife populations.