Assessing the benefits and risks of translocations in changing environments: a genetic perspective
By A. Weeks, C. Sgrò, A. Young, R. Frankham, N. Mitchell, Kim A. Miller, M. Byrne, D. Coates, Mark Eldridge, P. Sunnucks and 3 more. Evolutionary Applications, 2011
833 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Translocations are being increasingly proposed as a way of conserving biodiversity, particularly in the management of threatened and keystone species, with the aims of maintaining biodiversity and ecosystem function under the combined pressures of habitat fragmentation and climate change. Evolutionary genetic considerations should be an important part of translocation strategies, but there is often confusion about concepts and goals. Here, we provide a classification of translocations based on specific genetic goals for both threatened species and ecological restoration, separating targets based on ‘genetic rescue’ of current population fitness from those focused on maintaining adaptive potential. We then provide a framework for assessing the genetic benefits and risks associated with translocations and provide guidelines for managers focused on conserving biodiversity and evolutionary processes. Case studies are developed to illustrate the framework.
Subfields: Ecological Modeling, Genetics
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fd9f33ff338b376c80fa4bffa93fbd5795941f8b
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
- A framework for incorporating evolutionary genomics into biodiversity conservation and management (2015, background): “[199] define these types of translocations as genetic rescue (where the aim is to rescue populations from the genetic effects of inbreeding and associated loss of genetic diversity and inbreeding depression) or genetic restoration (where the aim is to restore levels of adaptive genetic diversity via”
- Restoring species through reintroductions: strategies for source population selection (2015, background): “Other guidelines suggest avoiding source populations that could suffer from deleterious genetic effects such as low heritable genetic variation, inbreeding depression, or domestication (Montalvo et al. 1997; Weeks et al. 2011).”
- Getting the message right on nature‐based solutions to climate change (2021, positive): “If non-native species are being introduced, it is important to as - sess and mitigate the associated risks (Sáenz-Romero et al., 2016; Simler et al., 2019; Weeks et al., 2011).”
- Evolution of plant materials for ecological restoration: insights from the applied and basic literature (2017, background): “…that are closest to the restoration site may be small and genetically depauperate with limited potential for adapting to future environmental change (Harris et al. 2006), particularly if they are small and relatively isolated from other populations (e.g. Broadhurst et al. 2008; Weeks et al. 2011).”
- Assisted Gene Flow to Facilitate Local Adaptation to Climate Change (2013, background): “AGF has the potential to introduce genotypes that are preadapted to new local climates or to increase the frequency of these genotypes in existing populations (Broadhurst et al. 2008, Kreyling et al. 2011, Weeks et al. 2011).”
- Unbiased population heterozygosity estimates from genome-wide sequence data (2020, background): “…when making recommendations around genetic mixing of threatened populations, which can target both the masking of deleterious genes expressed as a consequence of inbreeding as well as problems from low levels of genetic variability (Hoffmann et al., 2020; Ralls et al., 2018; Weeks et al., 2011).”
- Genetic factors in threatened species recovery plans on three continents (2016, background): “2015) is often a goal of recovery actions such as translocations or augmentation (Weeks et al. 2011), yet only ~7% of all plans mentioned inbreeding and even fewer discussed inbreeding depression (Figure 5).”
- Ecological and Evolutionary Consequences of Environmental Change and Management Actions for Migrating Fish (2019, background): “By contributing new alleles and enabling creation of novel genotypes and haplotypes, admixture can counteract inbreeding depression, conceal deleterious recessive alleles, and result in heterosis (Lynch, 1991; Fenster and Galloway, 2000; Keller and Waller, 2002; Facon et al., 2005; Drake, 2006; Lave”
- Hybridization as a conservation management tool (2019, background): “…practices and legal policies (Crispo et al., 2011; Hamilton & Miller 2016; Petit, 2004), and include the consideration of evolutionary processes that are essential for maximizing adaptive potential (Eizaguirre & Baltazar-Soares 2014; Hoffmann et al., 2015; Hoffmann & Sgrò 2011; Weeks et al., 2011).”