Rapid genetic deterioration in captive populations: Causes and conservation implications

By L. Woodworth, M. E. Montgomery, D. Briscoe, R. Frankham. Conservation Genetics, 2002

210 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ce7c7216f063f68a3f44805c81208dc6ee18e990

How researchers see this paper

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

In Genetics

In Insect Science

Citations in the corpus

Genetic adaptation to captivity in species conservation programs (2008, background): “For example, our Ne = 500 treatment after 50 generations in captivity had a relative fitness in the wild environment of only 14% that of the wild population (Woodworth et al. 2002).”
Dynamics of genetic adaptation to captivity (2003, background): “Frankham et al. (2000) and Woodworth et al. (2002) demonstrated that increases of reproductive fitness associated with adaptation to a captive environment in Drosophila corresponded directly with a significant reduction in reproductive fitness under conditions representing the ‘wild’ environment.”
The effect of captivity on the cutaneous bacterial community of the critically endangered Panamanian golden frog (Atelopus zeteki) (2014, background): “However, managing species under captive conditions cannot only permanently deteriorate the host’s genome (Woodworth et al., 2002), but also alter symbiotic microbial communities associated with these organisms.”
Genetic and demographic population management in zoos and aquariums: recent developments, future challenges and opportunities for scientific research (2011, background): “Nevertheless this is important, because individuals that are well adapted to the circumstances in captivity may be less well adapted to the circumstances in the wild and may show lower fitness upon reintroduction (Woodworth et al., 2002; Frankham, 2008; Williams & Hoffman, 2009).”
Minimizing genetic adaptation in captive breeding programs: A review (2009, background): “As threatened species have small population sizes, there has been little replication and control in studies examining genetic adaptation to captivity other than those using model organisms (Woodworth et al., 2002; Margan et al., 1998; Frankham and Loebel, 1992).”
Genetic estimates of contemporary effective population size: what can they tell us about the importance of genetic stochasticity for wild population persistence? (2008, background): “While the theoretical basis for this relationship is well established (Lynch et al. 1995), strong empirical support for mutational meltdowns is thus far lacking (Gilligan et al. 1997; Woodworth et al. 2002).”
Genetics in conservation management: Revised recommendations for the 50/500 rules, Red List criteria and population viability analyses (2014, background): “Subsequent to 1980, inbreeding depression has been reported in many laboratory populations with Ne P 50 (Latter and Mulley, 1995; Bryant et al., 1999; Reed and Bryant, 2000; Woodworth et al., 2002).”
Implications of different species concepts for conserving biodiversity (2012, background): “These populations suffered 30% and 88% inbreeding depression in reproductive fitness in benign and stressful conditions and showed 59% and nearly sixfold genetic rescue effect in the two environments, respectively (Woodworth et al., 2002).”
Differences in juvenile phenotypes and survival between hatchery stocks and a natural population provide evidence for modified selection due to captive breeding (2004, background): “The characteristics of a hatchery program may cause one mechanism or the other to be more important (Woodworth et al. 2002).”
Genetics and extinction (2005, background): “…with Ne of 400 maintained under benign conditions, but whose fitness was measured under stressful conditions, their results appear to be due adaptations to the benign captive environment that were deleterious when moved to a stressful environment (Gilligan et al., 1997; Woodworth et al., 2002).”
Captive breeding genetics and reintroduction success (2009, background): “Interestingly, several recent experiments on flies have shown that crosses among independent breeding units bred in benign conditions perform much better in non benign conditions than populations from single units (Margan et al., 1998; Woodworth et al., 2002).”
Wildlife conservation and animal temperament: causes and consequences of evolutionary change for captive, reintroduced, and wild populations (2006, background): “Furthermore, the relaxation of natural selection can result in the persistence of behavioural traits and deleterious genes that are selected against in the wild (Carlstead, 1996; Woodworth et al., 2002).”