DNA-based studies and genetic diversity indicator assessments are complementary approaches to conserving evolutionary potential

Abstract Genetic diversity is essential for maintaining healthy populations and ecosystems. Several approaches have recently been developed to evaluate population genetic trends without necessarily collecting new genetic data. Such “genetic diversity indicators” enable rapid, large-scale evaluation across dozens to thousands of species. Empirical genetic studies, when available, provide detailed information that is important for management, such as estimates of gene flow, inbreeding, genetic erosion and adaptation. In this article, we argue that the development and advancement of genetic diversity indicators is a complementary approach to genetic studies in conservation biology, but not a substitute. Genetic diversity indicators and empirical genetic data can provide different information for conserving genetic diversity. Genetic diversity indicators enable affordable tracking, reporting, prioritization and communication, although, being proxies, do not provide comprehensive evaluation of the genetic status of a species. Conversely, genetic methods offer detailed analysis of the genetic status of a given species or population, although they remain challenging to implement for most species globally, given current capacity and resourcing. We conclude that indicators and genetic studies are both important for genetic conservation actions and recommend they be used in combination for conserving and monitoring genetic diversity.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Conservation Genetics
Published
2024-08-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-024-01632-8
Citations
25
Primary Topic
Genetic diversity and population structure
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
13.76

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

DNA-based studies and genetic diversity indicator assessments are complementary approaches to conserving evolutionary potential

Julia C. Geue, Robert Ekblom, Catherine E. Grueber, Joachim Mergeay et al.
25 citations
Conservation Genetics
Genetic diversity and population structure
13.76
article

DNA-based studies and genetic diversity indicator assessments are complementary approaches to conserving evolutionary potential

Julia C. Geue, Robert Ekblom, Catherine E. Grueber, Joachim Mergeay, David O’Brien, Cristiano Vernesi, Linda Laikre, Anna J. MacDonald, Christina Hvilsom, Víctor J. Rincón-Parra, Margaret E. Hunter, Brenna R. Forester, Meredith C. Schuman, Robyn E. Shaw, Rebecca Jordan, Ancuța Fedorca, Jessica M. da Silva, J. Andrew DeWoody, Myriam Heuertz, Paul Sunnucks, W. Chris Funk, Francine Kershaw, Gernot Segelbacher, Mariah H. Meek, Colin K. Khoury, Alicia Mastretta‐Yanes, Fumiko Ishihama, Rebecca S. Taylor, Henrik Thurfjell, Ivan Paz‐Vinas, Sean Hoban, Alice C. Hughes, Viktoria Köppä, Belma Kalamujić Stroil, Maria Rodriguez‐Morales, Luis Castillo‐Reina, Katie L. Millette, Peter M. Hollingsworth
article en
25 citations

Abstract

Abstract Genetic diversity is essential for maintaining healthy populations and ecosystems. Several approaches have recently been developed to evaluate population genetic trends without necessarily collecting new genetic data. Such “genetic diversity indicators” enable rapid, large-scale evaluation across dozens to thousands of species. Empirical genetic studies, when available, provide detailed information that is important for management, such as estimates of gene flow, inbreeding, genetic erosion and adaptation. In this article, we argue that the development and advancement of genetic diversity indicators is a complementary approach to genetic studies in conservation biology, but not a substitute. Genetic diversity indicators and empirical genetic data can provide different information for conserving genetic diversity. Genetic diversity indicators enable affordable tracking, reporting, prioritization and communication, although, being proxies, do not provide comprehensive evaluation of the genetic status of a species. Conversely, genetic methods offer detailed analysis of the genetic status of a given species or population, although they remain challenging to implement for most species globally, given current capacity and resourcing. We conclude that indicators and genetic studies are both important for genetic conservation actions and recommend they be used in combination for conserving and monitoring genetic diversity.

Conservation GeneticsVol. 25(6)
Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 (FR), Fondazione Edmund Mach (IT), University of Sarajevo (BA), United States Geological Survey (US), Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU), Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR), The University of Sydney (AU), Natural Resources Defense Council (US), Australian Antarctic Division (AU), Environment and Climate Change Canada (CA), United States Fish and Wildlife Service (US), Université de Bordeaux (FR), University of Freiburg (DE), Stockholm University (SE), Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh (GB), Universidad Autónoma de la Ciudad de México (MX), University of Canberra (AU), National Institute for Environmental Studies (JP), Research Institute for Nature and Forest (BE), University of Zurich (CH), Purdue University West Lafayette (US), Pontificia Universidad Javeriana (CO), Alexander von Humboldt Biological Resources Research Institute (CO), Society for Conservation Biology (US), Morton Arboretum (US), Copenhagen Zoo (DK), Denver Botanic Gardens (US), Transylvania University of Brașov (RO), Institut National de Recherche pour l'Agriculture, l'Alimentation et l'Environnement (FR), National Institute for Research and Development in Forestry "Marin Drăcea" (RO), Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (SE), Swedish Species Information Centre (SE), UMR BIOdiversity, GEnes & Communities (FR), Department of Forestry (MW), International Union for Conservation of Nature (CH), Secretaría de Ciencia, Humanidades, Tecnología e Innovación (MX), McGill University (CA), Monash University (AU), Trent University (CA), International Space Science Institute (CH), Michigan State University (US), University of Hong Kong (HK), Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (MX), University of Palermo (IT), Colorado State University (US), KU Leuven (BE)
University of Sydney
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Genetic diversity and population structure
13.76
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.