Back

Beyond deadwood volume: structural heterogeneity and species-specific dispersal shape saproxylic beetle genetics

Krovi, R. S.; Amer, N. R.; Wierzbicka, A.; Plewa, R.; Kadej, M.; Jaworski, T.; Smolis, A.; Szmatola, T.; Oczkowicz, M.; Kajtoch, L.

2026-07-22 evolutionary biology
10.64898/2026.07.17.738652 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Many rare saproxylic (deadwood-dwelling) beetles are among Europes most threatened insects, yet the relative importance of local microhabitat quality versus broad-scale landscape connectivity in shaping their genetic integrity remains poorly understood. We evaluated environmental drivers for 13 saproxylic beetle species--rare old-growth specialists, common taxa, and economically significant pests--across eight major forest complexes in Poland, using double digest restriction-site associated DNA sequencing (ddRAD-seq) paired with plot-level structural inventories and estimated effective migration surfaces (EEMS) modelling. A beta generalized linear mixed model identified deadwood diversity as the only significant within-species predictor of observed heterozygosity ({beta} = 0.041, 95% CI 0.0227-0.0586, p < 10-); total deadwood volume, forest age, time since logging, stump density, and veteran tree density were not significant. Management-category contrasts in observed heterozygosity (Ho) and the inbreeding coefficient (Fis) were non-significant after Tukey adjustment. Predictor x ecological-tier interactions did not differ detectably between rare and common species for five of six structural predictors; time since last logging was the exception ({chi}{superscript 2} = 4.56, p = 0.033). EEMS patterns differed among species and fell into three broad groups: regional lineage barriers, asymmetrical corridors, and surfaces close to isolation- by-distance expectations. These results associate plot-level heterozygosity with deadwood diversity and show that regional gene-flow patterns cannot be generalised across saproxylic beetles. Conservation planning should therefore combine local deadwood restoration with species-specific assessment of landscape connectivity.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.