Fine-scale spatial genetic structure of deer in a suburban landscape: Deer Spatial Genetic Structure in Suburbs

Hunting regulations traditionally applied to manage deer populations in rural areas are not well suited to management in heavily populated suburban landscapes. We evaluated the spatial genetic structure of a suburban deer population to assess the feasibility of localized management at the scale of social groups. We used fecal DNA from white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) in suburban Michigan to determine whether deer in suburban landscapes maintain the matrilineal social structure that has been observed in studies of rural deer. We amplified 7 microsatellite loci from fecal pellets (n=591) collected from August to October 2013 on public and private lands throughout Meridian Township, Ingham County, central Michigan, USA. Based on multi-locus genotypes, we identified individuals, quantified the extent of spatial genetic structure at multiple spatial scales, identified the location and spatial extent of aggregations of related females and males, and estimated genetic neighborhood size. We also used landscape genetic analyses to evaluate associations between measures of land cover, edge density, the presence of major roads, and inter-individual genetic distance. Spatial genetic autocorrelation was positive and significant up to a distance of 0.5km. We did not detect correlations between landscape variables and inter-individual genetic distance. Results indicate that deer in suburban landscapes exhibit familial structure reported for deer in more rural areas, albeit at a smaller spatial scale, and with substantial overlap among groups. Management at the spatial scales of genetically related groups of deer may be feasible in suburban communities. (c) 2018 The Wildlife Society. We detected significant spatial genetic autocorrelation between white-tailed deer up to a distance of 0.5km, demonstrating that deer in suburban landscapes exhibit familial structure reported for deer in more rural areas, albeit at a smaller spatial scale, and with substantial overlap among groups. Using our findings as a guide, we recommend that management actions focus on a circular area with a radius between 500m and 1,000m in suburban landscapes.