Genetic factors in threatened species recovery plans on three continents

By Jennifer C Pierson, David J Coates, J. G. B. Oostermeijer, Steven R. Beissinger, Jason G. Bragg, P. Sunnucks, Nathan H. Schumaker, Andrew Young. 2016

105 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Genetic diversity is considered important but interpreted narrowly in country reports to the Convention on Biological Diversity: Current actions and indicators are insufficient (2021, unknown): “In spite of this, biodiversity assessments often exclude genetic diversity (Vernesi et al., 2008; Laikre et al., 2010; Pierson et al., 2016), with some exceptions (see Santamaría and Mendez, 2012).”
Call for a Paradigm Shift in the Genetic Management of Fragmented Populations (2018, background): “Yet inbreeding is mentioned in only 7% of endangered species recovery plans in the United States, Australia, and Europe, and even fewer discuss active genetic management (Pierson et al. 2016).”
Genetic Diversity and Conservation Units: Dealing With the Species-Population Continuum in the Age of Genomics (2018, background): “More broadly we echo recommendations made recently in a number reviews (Frankham, 2010; Santamaría and Méndez, 2012; Hoban et al., 2013; Moritz and Potter, 2013; Laity et al., 2015; Pierson et al., 2016; Cook and Sgrò, 2017; Taylor et al., 2017) that highlight the need for scientists to improve comm”