Genetic data and the listing of species under the U.S. endangered species act

Conservation Biology

Volumn 21, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 1186-1195

  Fallon, Sylvia M ^a  

^a NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL   (United States)

Author keywords

Distinct population segment; Listing decisions; U.S. Endangered Species Act

Indexed keywords

MITOCHONDRIAL DNA;

DATA; ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT; GENETIC MARKER; GENOME; SPECIES CONSERVATION; TAXONOMY;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIRD; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; GENETIC MARKER; GENETICS; GENOME; LEGAL ASPECT; MAMMAL; REPTILE; UNITED STATES;

ANIMALS; BIRDS; CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; DECISION MAKING; DNA, MITOCHONDRIAL; GENETIC MARKERS; GENOME; MAMMALS; REPTILES; UNITED STATES;

EID: 34648843224     PISSN: 08888892     EISSN: 15231739     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00775.x     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Avise, J. C. 2004. Molecular markers, natural history and evolution. 2nd edition. Sinauer Associates. Sunderland, Massachusetts.
2. Avise, J. C., and R. M. Ball. 1990. Principles of genealogical concordance in species concepts and biological taxonomy. Oxford Survey of Evolutionary Biology 7 : 45 67.
3. Ball, R. M. J., S. Freeman, F. C. James, E. Bermingham, and J. C. Avise. 1988. Phylogeographic population structure of red-winged blackbirds assessed by mitochondrial DNA. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 85 : 1558 1562.
4. Bossart, J. L., and D. P. Prowell. 1998. Genetic estimates of population structure and gene flow: limitations, lessons and new directions. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 13 : 202 206.
5. Bowen, B. W., and S. A. Karl. 1999. In war, truth is the first casualty. Conservation Biology 13 : 1013 1016.
6. Brawn, J. D., T. M. Collins, M. Medina, and E. Bermingham. 1996. Associations between physical isolation and geographical variation within three species of Neotropical birds. Molecular Ecology 5 : 33 46.
7. Chan, Y., and P. Arcese. 2003. Morphological and microsatellite differentiation in Melospiza melodia (Aves) at a microgeographic scale. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 16 : 939 947.
8. 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.
9. DeSalle, R., and G. Amato. 2004. The expansion of conservation genetics. Nature Reviews Genetics 5 : 702 712.
10. Dizon, A. E., B. L. Taylro, and G. M. O'Corry-Crowe. 1995. Why statistical power is necessary to link analyses of molecular variation to decisions about population structure. American Fisheries Symposium 17 : 288 294.
11. Fillatre, E. K., P. Etherton, and D. D. Heath. 2003. Bimodal run distribution in a northern population of sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka): life history and genetic analysis on a temporal scale. Molecular Ecology 12 : 1793 1805.
12. Fraser, D. J., and L. Bernatchez. 2001. Adaptive evolutionary conservation: towards a unified concept for defining conservation units. Molecular Ecology 10 : 2741 2752.
13. Goldstein, D. B., and D. D. Pollock. 1997. Launching microsatellites: a review of mutation processes and methods of phylogenetic inference. Journal of Heredity 88 : 335 342.
14. Haig, S. M., et al. 2006. Taxonomic considerations in listing subspecies under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. Conservation Biology 20 : 1584 1594.
15. Hedrick, P. W. 1999. Perspective: highly variable genetic loci and their interpretation in evolution and conservation. Evolution 53 : 313 318.
16. Hoekstra, H. E., K. E. Drumm, and M. W. Nachman. 2004. Ecological genetics of adaptive color polymorphism in pocket mice: geographic variation in selected and neutral genes. Evolution 58 : 1329 1341.
17. Jarne, P., and P. J. L. Lagoda. 1996. Microsatellites, from molecules to populations and back. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 11 : 424 429.
18. Kalinowski, S. T. 2002. How many alleles per locus should be used to estimate genetic distances? Heredity 88 : 62 65.
19. Kalinowski, S. T. 2005. Do polymorphic loci require large sample sizes to estimate genetic distances? Heredity 94 : 33 36.
20. King, T. L., et al. 2006. Comprehensive genetic analyses reveal evolutionary distinction of a mouse (Zapus hudsonius preblei) proposed for delisting from the US Endangered Species Act. Molecular Ecology 15 : 4331 4359.
21. Latta, R. G. 2006. Integrating patterns across multiple genetic markers to infer spatial processes. Landscape Ecology 21 : 809 820.
22. Luikart, G., P. R. England, D. Tallmon, S. Jordan, and P. Taberlet. 2004. The power and promise of population genomics: from genotyping to genome typing. Nature Reviews Genetics 4 : 981 994.
23. Martin, A. P., and S. R. Palumbi. 1993. Body size, metabolic rate, generation time, and the molecular clock. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 90 : 4087 4091.
24. McKay, J. K., and R. G. Latta. 2002. Adaptive population divergence: markers, QTL and traits. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 17 : 285 291.
25. Merilä, J., and P. Crnokrak. 2001. Comparison of genetic differentiation at marker loci and quantitative traits. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 14 : 892 903.
26. Mila, B., T. B. Smith, and R. K. Wayne. 2007. Speciation and rapid phenotypic differentiation in the yellow-rumped warbler Dendroica coronata complex. Molecular Ecology 16 : 159 173.
27. Mitton, J. B. 1994. Molecular approaches to population biology. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 25 : 45 69.
28. Moritz, C. 1994. Defining 'evolutionary significant units' for conservation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 9 : 373 375.
29. Moyle, L. C., J. R. Stinchcombe, B. R. Hudgens, and W. F. Morris. 2003. Conservation genetics in the recovery of endangered animal species: a review of US endangered species recovery plans (1977-1998). Animal Biodiversity and Conservation 26 : 85 95.
30. Nachman, M. W. 2005. The genetic basis of adaptation: lessons from concealing coloration in pocket mice. Genetica 123 : 125 136.
31. National Marine Fisheries Service. 1991. Policy on applying the definition of species under the Endangered Species Act to Pacific salmon. Federal Register 56 : 58612 58618.
32. Palsboll, P. J., M. Bérubé, and F. W. Allendorf. 2007. Identification of management units using population genetic data. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 22 : 11 16.
33. Parker, P. G., A. A. Snow, M. D. Schug, G. C. Booton, and P. A. Fuerst. 1998. What molecules can tells us about populations: choosing and using a molecular marker. Ecology 79 : 361 382.
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. Pennock, D. S., and W. W. Dimmick. 2000. Distinct population segments and congressional intent: reply to Waples. Conservation Biology 14 : 567 569.
36. Quellar, D. C., J. E. Strassmann, and C. R. Hughes. 1993. Microsatellites and kinship. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 8 : 285 288.
37. Ramstad, K. M. C. J. Foote, J. B. Olsen, and D. Rogers. 2003. Genetic and phenotypic evidence of reproductive isolation between seasonal runs of sockeye salmon in Bear Lake, Alaska. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 132 : 997 1013.
38. Rosel, P. E., R. Tiedemann, and M. Walton. 1999. Genetic evidence for limited trans-Atlantic movements of the harbor porpoise Phocoena phocoena. Marine Biology 133 : 583 591.
39. Seutin, G., L. M. Ratcliffe, and P. T. Boag. 1995. Mitochondiral DNA homogeneity in the phenotypically diverse Redpoll Finch complex (Aves: Carduelinae: Carduelis flammea-hornemanni). Evolution 49 : 962 972.
40. Storz, J. F. 2005. Using genome scans of DNA polymorphism to infer adaptive population divergence. Molecular Ecology 14 : 671 688.
41. Sunnucks, P. 2000. Efficient genetic markers for population biology. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 15 : 199 203.
42. Taylor, B. L., and A. E. Dizon. 1996. The need to estimate power to link genetics and demography for conservation. Conservation Biology 10 : 661 664.
43. United States Code. 1973. The Endangered Species Act. Title 16, Section 1531.
44. United States Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service. 1996. Policy regarding the recognition of distinct vertebrate population segments under the Endangered Species Act. Federal Register 61 : 4721 4725.
45. Vasemägi, A., and C. R. Primmer. 2005. Challenges for identifying functionally important genetic variation: the promise of combining complementary research strategies. Molecular Ecology 14 : 3623 3642.
46. Waples, R. S. 1989. Temporal variation in allele frequencies: testing the right hypothesis. Evolution 43 : 1246 1251.
47. Waples, R. S. 1991. Pacific salmon, Oncorhynchus spp., and the definition of 'species' under the Endangered Species Act. Marine Fisheries Review 53 : 11 22.
48. Waples, R. S. 1998a. Evolutionarily significant units, distinct population segments, and the endangered species act: reply to Pennock and Dimmick. Conservation Biology 12 : 718 721.
49. Waples, R. S. 1998b. Separating the wheat from the chaff: patterns of genetic differentiation in high gene flow species. American Genetic Association 89 : 438 450.
50. Waples, R. S., and Gaggiotti. 2006. What is a population? An empirical evaluation of some genetic methods for identifying the number of gene pools and thief degree of connectivity. Molecular Ecology 15 : 1419 1439.