Back

Demographic history, geographic distance, and landscape features shape the genetic divergence of wild tigers in northeast India

Sagar, V.; Ghosh, T.; Vadar, K.; Mayekar, V. K.; Harihar, A.; Ramakrishnan, U.

2026-06-06 evolutionary biology
10.64898/2026.06.02.729668 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Habitat fragmentation creates small, isolated populations vulnerable to inbreeding, genetic drift, and high genetic load. For conservation management, it is essential to distinguish contemporary landscape resistance from historical demographic processes as drivers of these genetic patterns, especially for conservation priority regions such as northeast India which intersects two major tiger conservation landscapes. We studied the genetic structure and landscape connectivity of tigers across four protected areas in northeast India: Kaziranga, Manas, Orang, and Nameri, using faecal samples. From 741 samples collected over two field seasons, we identified 654 confirmed tiger specimens. Using methylation-based enrichment and ddRAD-seq of 176 samples, we generated a high-quality dataset of 3091 SNPs across 44 individuals. Population structure analyses identified three genetically distinct clusters: Kaziranga-Nameri, Manas, and Orang. Isolation-by-distance and landscape resistance explained 13% and 17% of the observed genetic divergence, respectively, with human settlements influencing gene flow. Orangs pronounced divergence from Kaziranga, despite geographic proximity and corridors, suggests a post-bottleneck founder effect, as evidenced by reduced heterozygosity (Ho = 0.24), nucleotide diversity (pi = 0.24), and effective population size (Ne = 1.3). These findings reveal that demographic and genetic recovery can decouple: Orangs population has recently grown, yet genome-wide evidence shows ongoing genetic erosion that monitoring has not detected. Similar patterns have been reported in other Indian tiger populations, indicating that such decoupling may be systemic. Target 4 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework requires explicit genetic diversity monitoring; this study demonstrates that non-invasive genomics can operationalise that mandate at a conservation-relevant scale.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Evolutionary Applications
108 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.2%
2
Molecular Ecology
336 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
18.2%
3
Conservation Genetics
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
11.7%
4
Ecology and Evolution
267 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.0%
50% of probability mass above
5
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 36%
3.5%
6
Communications Biology
993 papers in training set
Top 7%
2.7%
7
Current Biology
665 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.7%
8
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 20%
2.6%
9
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 45%
2.4%
10
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 42%
2.4%
11
Genome Biology and Evolution
338 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
12
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
393 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.7%
13
Molecular Biology and Evolution
542 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
14
Journal of Heredity
42 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
15
Peer Community Journal
281 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
16
Biological Conservation
46 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.4%
17
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 49%
1.3%
18
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 23%
1.3%
19
Diversity and Distributions
28 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
20
PeerJ
308 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.1%
21
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
69 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
22
Heredity
64 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.0%
23
Global Change Biology
78 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
24
GigaScience
212 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
25
Journal of Biogeography
46 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%
26
Science
477 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.6%
27
BMC Genomics
406 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.6%
28
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
72 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
29
Biological Journal of the Linnean Society
24 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.6%