Genomics and the challenging translation into conservation practice

Trends in Ecology and Evolution

Volumn 30, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 78-87

  Shafer, Aaron B A ^a   Wolf, Jochen B W ^a   Alves, Paulo C ^b   Bergström, Linnea ^a   Bruford, Michael W ^c   Brännström, Ioana ^a   Colling, Guy ^d   Dalén, Love ^e   De Meester, Luc ^f   Ekblom, Robert ^a   Fawcett, Katie D ^g   Fior, Simone ^h   Hajibabaei, Mehrdad ⁱ   Hill, Jason A ^j   Hoezel, A Rus ^k   Höglund, Jacob ^a   Jensen, Evelyn L ^l   Krause, Johannes ^m   Kristensen, Torsten N ⁿ   Krützen, Michael ^o   McKay, John K ^p   Norman, Anita J ^q   Ogden, Rob ^r   Österling, E Martin ^s   Ouborg, N Joop ^t   Piccolo, John ^s   Popović, Danijela ^u   Primmer, Craig R ^v   Reed, Floyd A ^w   Roumet, Marie ^h   Salmona, Jordi ^x   Schenekar, Tamara ^y   Schwartz, Michael K ^z   Segelbacher, Gernot ^aa   Senn, Helen ^r   Thaulow, Jens ^ab   Valtonen, Mia ^ac   Veale, Andrew ^l   Vergeer, Philippine ^ad   Vijay, Nagarjun ^a   Vilà, Carles ^ae   Weissensteiner, Matthias ^a   Wennerström, Lovisa ^j   Wheat, Christopher W ^j   Zieliński, Piotr ^af   more..

^a UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b CENTRO DE INVESTIGAÇÃO EM BIODIVERSIDADE E RECURSOS GENÉTICOS   (Portugal)

^c CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^d Centre de recherche scientifique section Zoologie des vertébrés   (Luxembourg)

^e SWEDISH MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY   (Sweden)

^f UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^g UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

^h ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF GUELPH   (Canada)

^j STOCKHOLM UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^k DURHAM UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^l UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^m UNIVERSITY OF TÜBINGEN   (Germany)

ⁿ AALBORG UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

^o UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^p Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences   (United States)

^q SWEDISH UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES   (Sweden)

^r ROYAL ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF SCOTLAND   (United Kingdom)

^s KARLSTAD UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^t RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

^u UNIVERSITY OF WARSAW   (Poland)

^v UNIVERSITY OF TURKU   (Finland)

^w UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII   (United States)

^x INSTITUTO GULBENKIAN DE CIÊNCIA   (Portugal)

^y UNIVERSITY OF GRAZ   (Austria)

^z ROCKY MOUNTAIN RESEARCH STATION   (United States)

^aa UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG   (Germany)

^ab NORWEGIAN INSTITUTE FOR WATER RESEARCH   (Norway)

^ac UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND   (Finland)

^ad WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^ae DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION BIOLOGY   (Spain)

^af JAGIELLONIAN UNIVERSITY   (Poland)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACADEMIC RESEARCH; BIODIVERSITY; CONSERVATION GENETICS; CONSERVATION PLANNING; GENOMICS; INFRASTRUCTURE;

ADAPTATION; BIODIVERSITY; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; GENOME; GENOMICS; POPULATION GENETICS; PROCEDURES;

ADAPTATION, BIOLOGICAL; BIODIVERSITY; CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; GENETICS, POPULATION; GENOME; GENOMICS;

EID: 84921878509     PISSN: 01695347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2014.11.009     Document Type: Review

References (90)

1. Soulé M.E. What is conservation biology?. Bioscience 1985, 35:727-734.
2. Frankham R. Conservation genetics. Annu. Rev. Genet. 1995, 29:305-327.
3. Frankham R., et al. Introduction to Conservation Genetics 2001, Cambridge University Press.
4. DeSalle R., Amato G. The expansion of conservation genetics. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2004, 5:702-712.
5. McMahon B.J., et al. How and why should we implement genomics into conservation?. Evol. Appl. 2014, 7:999-1007.
6. Allendorf F.W., et al. Genomics and the future of conservation genetics. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2010, 11:697-709.
7. Frankham R. Where are we in conservation genetics and where do we need to go?. Conserv. Genet. 2010, 11:661-663.
8. US Fish and Wildlife Service Florida Panther Recovery Plan (Puma concolor coryi), Third Revision 2008, US Fish and Wildlife Service.
9. Seal U.S., Lacy R.C. A Plan for Genetic Restoration and Management of the Florida Panther (Felis concolor coryi) 1994, IUCN.
10. Manel S., et al. Detecting wildlife poaching: identifying the origin of individuals with Bayesian assignment tests and multilocus genotypes. Conserv. Biol. 2002, 16:650-659.
11. Laikre L. Genetic diversity is overlooked in international conservation policy implementation. Conserv. Genet. 2010, 11:349-354.
12. Laikre L., et al. Neglect of genetic diversity in implementation of the convention on biological diversity. Conserv. Biol. 2010, 24:86-88.
13. Sutherland W.J., et al. A horizon scan of global conservation issues for 2010. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2010, 25:1-7.
14. Carroll S.P., et al. Applying evolutionary biology to address global challenges. Science 2014, 346. 10.1126/science.1245993.
15. Ripple W.J., et al. Status and ecological effects of the world's largest carnivores. Science 2014, 343. 10.1126/science.1241484.
16. Fyumagwa R., et al. Roads as a threat to the Serengeti ecosystem. Conserv. Biol. 2013, 27:1122-1125.
17. Danchin É., et al. Beyond DNA: integrating inclusive inheritance into an extended theory of evolution. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2011, 12:475-486.
18. Taberlet P., et al. Environmental DNA. Mol. Ecol 2012, 21:1789-1793.
19. Vandersteen Tymchuk W., et al. Conservation genomics of Atlantic salmon: variation in gene expression between and within regions of the Bay of Fundy. Mol. Ecol. 2010, 19:1842-1859.
20. Harrisson K.A., et al. Using genomics to characterize evolutionary potential for conservation of wild populations. Evol. Appl. 2014, 22:3112-3123.
21. Mamanova L., et al. Target-enrichment strategies for next-generation sequencing. Nat. Methods 2010, 7:111-118.
22. Narum S.R., et al. Genotyping-by-sequencing in ecological and conservation genomics. Mol. Ecol. 2013, 22:2841-2847.
23. Poelstra J.W., et al. An extensive candidate gene approach to speciation: diversity, divergence and linkage disequilibrium in candidate pigmentation genes across the European crow hybrid zone. Heredity 2013, 111:467-473.
24. Robinson M.R., et al. Explaining additional genetic variation in complex traits. Trends Genet. 2014, 30:124-132.
25. Burke M.K. How does adaptation sweep through the genome? Insights from long-term selection experiments. Proc. Biol. Sci. 2012, 279:5029-5038.
26. Poelstra J.W., et al. The genomic landscape underlying phenotypic integrity in the face of gene flow in crows. Science 2014, 344:1410-1414.
27. Soria-Carrasco V., et al. Stick insect genomes reveal natural selection's role in parallel speciation. Science 2014, 344:738-742.
28. Funk W.C., et al. Harnessing genomics for delineating conservation units. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2012, 27:489-496.
29. Steiner C.C., et al. Conservation genomics of threatened animal species. Annu. Rev. Anim. Biosci. 2013, 1:261-281.
30. Kohn M.H., et al. Genomics and conservation genetics. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2006, 21:629-637.
31. Angeloni F., et al. Genomic toolboxes for conservation biologists. Evol. Appl. 2011, 5:130-143.
32. Primmer C.R. From conservation genetics to conservation genomics. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2009, 1162:357-368.
33. Ouborg N.J., et al. Conservation genetics in transition to conservation genomics. Trends Genet. 2010, 26:177-187.
34. Miller J.M., Coltman D.W. Assessment of identity disequilibrium and its relation to empirical heterozygosity fitness correlations: a meta-analysis. Mol. Ecol. 2014, 23:1899-1909.
35. Crandall K., et al. Considering evolutionary processes in conservation biology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2000, 15:290-295.
36. Hoffmann A.A., Willi Y. Detecting genetic responses to environmental change. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2008, 9:421-432.
37. Barton N.H. The role of hybridization in evolution. Mol. Ecol. 2008, 10:551-568.
38. Nolte A.W., Tautz D. Understanding the onset of hybrid speciation. Trends Genet. 2010, 26:54-58.
39. Cruickshank T.E., Hahn M.W. Reanalysis suggests that genomic islands of speciation are due to reduced diversity, not reduced gene flow. Mol. Ecol. 2014, 23:3133-3157.
40. Vitti J.J., et al. Detecting natural selection in genomic data. Annu. Rev. Genet. 2013, 47:97-120.
41. Santure A.W., et al. Genomic dissection of variation in clutch size and egg mass in a wild great tit (Parus major) population. Mol. Ecol. 2013, 22:3949-3962.
42. Robinson M.R., et al. Partitioning of genetic variation across the genome using multimarker methods in a wild bird population. Mol. Ecol. 2013, 22:3963-3980.
43. Ågren J., et al. Genetic mapping of adaptation reveals fitness tradeoffs in Arabidopsis thaliana. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2013, 110:21077-21082.
44. Luikart G., et al. The power and promise of population genomics: from genotyping to genome typing. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2003, 4:981-994.
45. Ellegren H., et al. The genomic landscape of species divergence in Ficedula flycatchers. Nature 2012, 491:756-760.
46. Sandler L., Novitski E. Meiotic drive as an evolutionary force. Am. Nat. 1957, 91:105-110.
47. Charlesworth B., et al. The effects of local selection, balanced polymorphism and background selection on equilibrium patterns of genetic diversity in subdivided populations. Genet. Res. 1997, 70:155-174.
48. Hu X-S., He F. Background selection and population differentiation. J. Theor. Biol. 2005, 235:207-219.
49. Stephan W. Genetic hitchhiking versus background selection: the controversy and its implications. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 2010, 365:1245-1253.
50. Ekblom R., Wolf J.B.W. A field guide to whole genome sequencing, assembly and annotation. Evol. Appl. 2014, 7:1026-1042.
51. Russello M.A., et al. Detection of outlier loci and their utility for fisheries management. Evol. Appl. 2011, 5:39-52.
52. Coleman R.A., et al. Balancing genetic uniqueness and genetic variation in determining conservation and translocation strategies: a comprehensive case study of threatened dwarf galaxias, Galaxiella pusilla (Mack) (Pisces: Galaxiidae). Mol. Ecol. 2013, 22:1820-1835.
53. Bonin A., et al. Population adaptive index: a new method to help measure intraspecific genetic diversity and prioritize populations for conservation. Conserv. Biol. 2007, 21:697-708.
54. Robinson S.J., et al. Emerging prion disease drives host selection in a wildlife population. Ecol. Appl. 2012, 22:1050-1059.
55. Primmer C.R., et al. Annotated genes and nonannotated genomes: cross-species use of Gene Ontology in ecology and evolution research. Mol. Ecol. 2013, 22:3216-3241.
56. Pavlidis P., et al. A critical assessment of storytelling: gene ontology categories and the importance of validating genomic scans. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2012, 29:3237-3248.
57. Cirulli E.T., Goldstein D.B. Uncovering the roles of rare variants in common disease through whole-genome sequencing. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2010, 11:415-425.
58. Romanov M.N., et al. Construction of a California condor BAC library and first-generation chicken-condor comparative physical map as an endangered species conservation genomics resource. Genomics 2006, 88:711-718.
59. Gutenkunst R.N., et al. Inferring the joint demographic history of multiple populations from multidimensional SNP frequency data. PLoS Genet. 2009, 5:e1000695.
60. Robinson J.D., et al. ABC inference of multi-population divergence with admixture from unphased population genomic data. Mol. Ecol. 2014, 23:4458-4471.
61. Hoffman J.I., et al. High-throughput sequencing reveals inbreeding depression in a natural population. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2014, 111:3775-3780.
62. Kardos M., et al. Evaluating the role of inbreeding depression in heterozygosity-fitness correlations: how useful are tests for identity disequilibrium?. Mol. Ecol. Res. 2013, 14:519-530.
63. Hoban S., et al. Comparative evaluation of potential indicators and temporal sampling protocols for monitoring genetic erosion. Evol. Appl. 2014, 7:984-998.
64. Harris K., Nielsen R. Inferring demographic history from a spectrum of shared haplotype lengths. PLoS Genet. 2013, 9:e1003521.
65. Li H., Durbin R. Inference of human population history from individual whole-genome sequences. Nature 2011, 475:493-496.
66. Excoffier L., et al. Robust demographic inference from genomic and SNP data. PLoS Genet. 2013, 9:e1003905.
67. Pinho C., Hey J. Divergence with gene flow: models and data. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2010, 41:215-230.
68. Excoffier L., et al. Bayesian analysis of an admixture model with mutations and arbitrarily linked markers. Genetics 2005, 169:1727-1738.
69. Cornuet J.M., et al. DIYABC v2.0: a software to make approximate Bayesian computation inferences about population history using single nucleotide polymorphism, DNA sequence and microsatellite data. Bioinformatics 2014, 30:1187-1189.
70. Larson W.A., et al. Genotyping by sequencing resolves shallow population structure to inform conservation of Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). Evol. Appl. 2014, 7:355-369.
71. Shafer A.B.A., et al. Demographic inferences using short-read genomic data in an Approximate Bayesian Computation framework: in silico evaluation of power, biases, and proof of concept in Atlantic walrus. Mol. Ecol. 2014, 10.1111/mec.13034.
72. Hayden E.C. Technology: the $1,000 genome. Nature 2014, 507:294-295.
73. Zieliński P., et al. Development, validation and high-throughput analysis of sequence markers in nonmodel species. Mol. Ecol. Res. 2014, 14:352-360.
74. Woolf S.H. The meaning of translational research and why it matters. JAMA 2008, 299:211-213.
75. Hoban S.M., et al. Bringing genetic diversity to the forefront of conservation policy and management. Conserv. Genet. Resour. 2013, 5:593-598.
76. Hoban S., et al. Conservation genetic resources for effective species survival (ConGRESS): bridging the divide between conservation research and practice. J. Nat. Conserv. 2013, 21:433-437.
77. Shafer A.B.A., Wolf J.B.W. Widespread evidence for incipient ecological speciation: a meta-analysis of isolation-by-ecology. Ecol. Lett. 2013, 16:940-950.
78. Taberlet P., et al. Towards next-generation biodiversity assessment using DNA metabarcoding. Mol. Ecol. 2012, 21:2045-2050.
79. Polašek O., et al. Comparative assessment of methods for estimating individual genome-wide homozygosity-by-descent from human genomic data. BMC Genomics 2010, 11:139.
80. Frankham R., et al. Genetics in conservation management: revised recommendations for the 50/500 rules, Red List criteria and population viability analyses. Biol. Conserv. 2014, 170:56-63.
81. Tokarska M., et al. Effectiveness of microsatellite and SNP markers for parentage and identity analysis in species with low genetic diversity: the case of European bison. Heredity 2009, 103:326-332.
82. Hogg J.T., et al. Genetic rescue of an insular population of large mammals. Proc. Biol. Sci. 2006, 273:1491-1499.
83. Miller J.M., et al. Genomic consequences of genetic rescue in an insular population of bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis). Mol. Ecol. 2012, 21:1583-1596.
84. Pääbo S., et al. Genetic analyses from ancient DNA. Annu. Rev. Genet. 2004, 38:645-679.
85. Bi K., et al. Unlocking the vault: next-generation museum population genomics. Mol. Ecol. 2013, 22:6018-6032.
86. Meyer M., et al. A mitochondrial genome sequence of a hominin from Sima de los Huesos. Nature 2013, 505:403-406.
87. Perry G.H., et al. Genomic-scale capture and sequencing of endogenous DNA from feces. Mol. Ecol. 2010, 19:5332-5344.
88. Bos K.I., et al. Pre-Columbian mycobacterial genomes reveal seals as a source of New World human tuberculosis. Nature 2014, 514:494-497.
89. Thiemann T.C., et al. Development of a high-throughput microsphere-based molecular assay to identify 15 common bloodmeal hosts of Culex mosquitoes. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 2011, 12:238-246.
90. Carlson S.M., et al. Evolutionary rescue in a changing world. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2014, 29:521-530.