Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Understanding how sociality shapes genetic structure remains largely unexplored across many social mole‐rat species. Some African mole‐rats are cooperative breeders with complex social systems, where dispersal costs and ecological constraints influence colony‐relatedness and population connectivity. We compared two semi‐arid dwelling subspecies of Hottentot mole‐rats ( Cryptomys hottentotus ), the highveld mole‐rat ( C. h. pretoriae ) and the Mahali mole‐rat ( C. h. mahali ), to uncover differences and similarities in their genetic and demographic patterns. Mahali mole‐rats have by far a greater distributional range occupying habitats with different levels of aridity and may occur in arid habitats. Conversely, highveld mole‐rats have a more restricted distribution and are often found in semi‐arid habitats. We combined microsatellite‐based genetic analyses with mark–recapture demographic monitoring to assess intra‐colony relatedness, inbreeding, dispersal distances and colony dynamics. Both subspecies exhibited high intra‐colony relatedness and limited gene flow across colonies, consistent with cooperative breeding theory. However, highveld mole‐rats showed significant isolation by distance (IBD), and higher colony attrition with increasing group size. In contrast, Mahali mole‐rats maintained more effective dispersal, and higher post‐dispersal reproductive success likely because of an increased population density. Notably, highveld mole‐rats dispersed longer distances, but these movements were largely ineffective likely due to a low population density that reinforced philopatry. Our findings reveal that differences pertaining to population ecology may shape genetic structure and social dynamics with little effects on the overall genetic structure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Süess et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: