Genetics in conservation management: Revised recommendations for the 50/500 rules, Red List criteria and population viability analyses
By R. Frankham, Corey J. A. Bradshaw, Barry W. Brook. 2014
996 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Conservation managers typically need to make prompt decisions based on limited information and resources. Consequently, generalisations have essential roles in guiding interventions. Here, we (i) critique information on some widely accepted generalisations and variables affecting them, (ii) assess how adequately genetic factors are currently incorporated into population viability analysis (PVA) models used to estimate minimum viable population sizes, and (iii) relate the above to population size thresholds of the IUCN Red List criteria for threatened species that were derived from genetic considerations. Evidence accumulated since 1980 shows that genetically effective population size (Ne) = 50 is inadequate for preventing inbreeding depression over five generations in the wild, with Ne ⩾ 100 being required to limit loss in total fitness to ⩽10%. Further, even Ne = 500 is too low for retaining evolutionary potential for fitness in perpetuity; a better approximation is Ne ⩾ 1000. Extrapolation from census population size (N) to Ne depends on knowing the ratio of Ne/N, yet this information is unavailable for most wild populations. Ratio averages (∼0.1–0.2) from meta-analyses are sufficient, provided adjustments are made for dissimilar life histories. Most PVA-based risk assessments ignore or inadequately model genetic factors. PVA should routinely include realistic inbreeding depression, and genetic impacts on evolutionary potential should be incorporated where appropriate. Genetic generalisations used in conservation, the treatment of genetics in PVAs, and sections of the IUCN Red List criteria derived from genetic considerations, all require revision to be more effective conservation tools.
Subfields: Ecological Modeling, Genetics
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2999a87eefdd30845be8ab1e795432f17e15dc59
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Ecological Modeling
In Genetics
Citations in the corpus
- Restoration of plant species and genetic diversity depends on landscape‐scale dispersal (2018, background): “…of biodiversity, resulting in decreases in species and genetic diversity, reduced abundance and viability of populations, and disruptions in the functioning of biotic interactions (Aguilar et al. 2006; Fischer & Lindenmayer 2007; Leimu et al. 2010; Frankham et al. 2014; Humphrey et al. 2015).”
- Genetic rescue of small inbred populations: meta-analysis reveals large and consistent benefits of gene flow. (2015, background): “Despite this, only ~ 10–20 genetic rescues have been attempted for conservation purposes (Adams et al. 2011; Frankham et al. 2011), probably a miniscule proportion of the populations that might benefit from outcrossing (Frankham et al. 2014).”
- The importance of considering genetic diversity in shark and ray conservation policies (2017, background): “As advised in previous studies (Frankham 2010, 2014; Laikre 2010; Rivers et al.”
- Responsible genetic approach to stock restoration, sea ranching and stock enhancement of marine fishes and invertebrates (2017, background): “The capacity for adaptive change is influenced by several elements, but most importantly, by the additive genetic variance, which underpins ecologically important quantitative traits (Bürger and Lynch 1995; Hill et al. 2008; Frankham et al. 2014).”