Designatable units for status assessment of endangered species

Conservation Biology

Volumn 19, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 1813-1820

  Green, David M ^a  

^a MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Conservation policy; COSEWIC; Distinct population; Endangered Species Act; Evolutionary significant unit; Extinction risk; Species at Risk Act

Indexed keywords

ASSESSMENT METHOD; CONSERVATION STATUS; ENDANGERED SPECIES; EXTINCTION RISK;

EID: 33244463261     PISSN: 08888892     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00284.x     Document Type: Review

References (55)

1. Abell, R., et al. 2000. Freshwater ecoregions of North America: a conservation assessment. Island Press, Washington, D.C.
2. Agapow, P.-M., O. R. P. Bininda-Emonds, K. A. Crandall, J. L. Gittleman, G. M. Mace, J. C. Marshall, and A. Purvis. 2004. The impact of species concept on biodiversity studies. Quarterly Review of Biology 79:161-179.
3. Austin, J. D., S. C. Lougheed, L. Neidrauer, A. A. Chek, and P. T. Boag. 2002. Cryptic lineages in a small frog: the post-glacial history of the spring peeper, Pseudacris crucifer (Anura Hylidae). Molecular Phylogenetics & Evolution 25:316-329.
4. Avise, J. C. 2000. Phylogeography: the history and formation of species. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
5. Barry, D. 1999. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants: determination of threatened status for bull trout in the coterminous United States. Federal Register 64:58910-58933.
6. Bos, D. H., and J. W. Sites. 2001. Phylogeography and conservation genetics of the Columbia spotted frog (Rana luteiventris; Amphibia, Ranidae). Molecular Ecology 10:1499-1513.
7. Bowen, B. W. 1998. What is wrong with ESUs? The gap between evolutionary theory and conservation principles. Journal of Shellfish Research 17:1355-1358.
8. Bowen, B. W. 1999. Preserving genes, species, or ecosystems? Healing the fractured foundations of conservation policy. Molecular Ecology 8:S5-S10.
9. Crandall, K. A., O. R. P. Bininda-Emonds, G. M. Mace, and R. K. Wayne. 2000. Considering evolutionary processes in conservation biology. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 15:290-295.
10. Daugherty, C. H., A. Cree, J. M. Hay, and M. B. Thompson. 1990. Neglected taxonomy and continuing extinctions of tuatara (Sphenodon). Nature 347:177-179.
11. de Queiroz, K. 1998. The general lineage concept of species, species criteria, and the process of speciation: a conceptual unification and terminological recommendations. Pages 57-75 in D. J. Howard and S. H. Berlocher, editors. Endless forms. Species and speciation. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom.
12. Dimmick, W. W., M. J. Ghedotti, M. J. Grose, A. M. Maglia, D. J. Meinhardt, and D. S. Pennock. 1999. The importance of systematic biology in defining units of conservation. Conservation Biology 13:653-660.
13. Ereshefsky, M. 1991. Species, higher taxa and the units of evolution. Philosophy of Science 58:84-101.
14. Fay, J. J., and M. Nammack. 1996. Policy regarding the recognition of district vertebrate population. Federal Register 61:4721-4725.
15. Ferris, S. D., R. D. Sage, C. M. Huang, J. T. Nielsen, U. Ritte, and A. C. Wilson. 1983. Flow of mitochondrial DNA across a species boundary. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America: Biological Sciences 80:2290-2294.
16. Fraser, D. J., and L. Bernatchez. 2001. Adaptive evolutionary conservation: towards a unified concept for defining conservation units. Molecular Ecology 10:2741-2752.
17. Funk, D. J., and K. E. Omland. 2003. Species-level paraphyly and polyphyly: frequency, causes and consequences, with insights from animal mitochrondrial DNA. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution & Systematics 34:397-423.
18. Gärdenfors, U. 2001. Classifying threatened species at national versus global levels. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 16:511-516.
19. Herman, T. B., T. D. Power, and B. R. Eaton. 1995. COSEWIC report: status of Blanding's turtles (Emydoidea blandingii) in Nova Scotia, Canada. Canadian Field-Naturalist 109:182-191.
20. Hey, J. 2002. Genes, categories, and species. The evolutionary and cognitive causes of the species problem. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom.
21. Hey, J., R. S. Waples, M. L. Arnold, R. K. Butlin, and R. G. Harrison. 2003. Understanding and confronting species uncertainty in biology and conservation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 18:597-603.
22. Hoffman, E. A., and M. S. Blouin. 2004. Evolutionary history of the northern leopard frog: reconstruction of phylogeny, phylogeography, and historical changes in population demography from mitochondrial DNA. Evolution 58:145-159.
23. Irschick, D. J., and H. B. Shaffer. 1997. The polytypic species revisited: morphological differentiation among tiger salamanders (Ambystoma tigrinum) (Amphibia: Caudata). Herpetologica 53: 30-49.
24. Johnson, N. K., J. V. Remsen Jr., and C. Cicero. 1999. Resolution of the debate over species concepts in ornithology: a new comprehensive biologic species concept. Pages 1470-1482 in N. J. Adams and R. H. Slotow, editors, Proceedings of the 22nd ornithological congress, Durban. Birdlife South Africa, Johannesburg.
25. Johnson, O. W., M. H. Ruckelshaus, W. S. Grant, F. W. Waknitz, A. M. Garrett, G. J. Bryant, K. Neely, and J. J. Hard. 1999. Status review of coastal cutthroat trout from Washington, Oregon, and California. Technical memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-37. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Seattle.
26. Lee, M. S. Y. 2003. Species concepts and species reality: salvaging a Linnaean rank. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 16:179-188.
27. Mace, G. M. 2004. The role of taxonomy in species conservation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B 359:711-719.
28. Mace, G. M., and R. Lande. 1991. Assessing extinction threats: toward a reevaluation of IUCN threatened species categories. Conservation Biology 5:148-157.
29. Mayden, R. L. 1997. A hierarchy of species concepts: the denouement in the saga of the species problem. Pages 381-424 in M. F. Claridge, H. A. Dawah, and M. R. Wilson, editors. Species: the units of biodiversity. Chapman & Hall, London.
30. Mayden, R. L., and R. M. Wood. 1995. Systematics, species concepts, and the evolutionarily significant unit in biodiversity and conservation biology. Pages 58-113 in J. L. Nielsen, editor. Evolution and the aquatic ecosystem: defining unique units in population conservation. Symposium 17. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland.
31. Moritz, C. 1994. Defining "evolutionarily significant units" for conservation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 9:373-375.
32. Moritz, C. 2002. Strategies to protect biological diversity and the evolutionary processes that sustain it. Systematic Biology 51:238-254.
33. Pearman, P. B. 2001. Conservation value of independently evolving units: sacred cow or testable hypothesis? Conservation Biology 15:780-783.
34. Pennock, D. S., and W. W. Dimmick. 1997. Critique of the evolutionarily significant unit as a definition for distinct population segments under the US Endangered Species Act. Conservation Biology 11: 611-619.
35. Ricketts, T. H., et al. 1999. Terrestrial ecoregions of North America: a conservation assessment. Island Press, Washington, D.C.
36. Roe, K. J., and C. Lydeard. 1998. Species delineation and the identification of evolutionarily significant units: lessons from the freshwater mussel genus Potamilus (Bivalvia: Unionidae). Journal of Shellfish Research 17:1359-1363.
37. Rognon, X., and R. Guyomard. 2003. Large extent of mitochondrial DNA transfer from Oreochromis aureus to O. niloticus in West Africa. Molecular Ecology 12:435-445.
38. Rossello-Mora, R., and R. Amann. 2001. The species concept for prokaryotes. FEMS Microbiology Reviews 25:39-67.
39. Ryder, O. A. 1986. Species conservation and systematics: the dilemma of subspecies. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 1:9-10.
40. Schock, D. M. 2001. COSEWIC status report on the tiger salamander, Ambystoma tigrinum, in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, Ottawa.
41. Seburn, C. N. L., and D. C. Seburn. 1998. COSEWIC status report on the northern leopard frog Rana pipiens (southern mountain and western boreal/prairie populations) in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, Ottawa.
42. Seburn, C. N. L., and D. C. Seburn. 1999. COSEWIC status report on the northern leopard frog Rana pipiens (eastern populations) in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, Ottawa.
43. Shaffer, H. B., and M. L. McKnight. 1996. The polytypic species revisited: genetic differentiation and molecular phylogenetics of the tiger salamander Ambystoma tigrinum (Amphibia: Caudata) complex. Evolution 50:417-433.
44. Sober, E. 1993. Philosophy of biology. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.
45. Taylor, B. L., and A. E. Dizon. 1999. First policy then science: why a management unit based solely on genetic criteria cannot work. Molecular Ecology 8:S11-S16.
46. Turner, G. F. 1999. What is a fish species? Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 9:281-297.
47. Waits, L. P. Taberlet, J. E. Swenson, F. Sandegren, and R. Franzen. 2000. Nuclear DNA microsatellite analysis of genetic diversity and gene flow in the Scandinavian brown bear (Ursus arctos). Molecular Ecology 9:421-431.
48. Waples, R. S. 1991. Pacific salmon, Onchorhynchus spp. and the definition of "species" under the Endangered Species Act. Marine Fisheries Review 53:11-22.
49. Waples, R. S. 1995. Evolutionarily significant units and the conservation of biological diversity under the Endangered Species Act. Pages 8-27 in J. L. Nielsen, editor. Evolution and the aquatic ecosystem: defining unique units in population conservation. Symposium 17. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland.
50. Waples, R. S. 1998. Evolutionarily significant units, distinct population segments, and the Endangered Species Act: reply to Pennock and Dimmick. Conservation Biology 12:718-721.
51. Waples, R. S. 2005. Identifying conservation units of Pacific salmon using alternative ESU concepts. In press in D. D. Goble, J. M. Scott and F. W. Davis, editors. The Endangered Species Act at thirty: renewing the conservation promise. Island Press, Washington, D.C.
52. Wilkins, J. S. 2003. How to be a chaste species pluralist-realist: the origins of species modes and the synapomorphic species concept. Biology & Philosophy 18:621-638.
53. Young, K. A. 2001. Defining units of conservation for intraspecific biodiversity: reply to Dimmick et al. Conservation Biology 15:784-787.
54. Zamudio, K. R., and W. K. Savage. 2003. Historical isolation, range expansion, and secondary contact of two highly divergent mitochondrial lineages in spotted salamanders (Ambystoma maculatum). Evolution 57:1631-1652.
55. Zink, R. M. 2004. The role of subspecies in obscuring avian biological diversity and misleading conservation policy. Proceedings of the Royal Society, London Series B 271:561-564.