The reduction of genetic diversity in threatened vertebrates and new recommendations regarding IUCN conservation rankings

Biological Conservation

Volumn 191, Issue , 2015, Pages 495-503

  Willoughby, Janna R ^a   Sundaram, Mekala ^a   Wijayawardena, Bhagya K ^b   Kimble, Steven J A ^a   Ji, Yanzhu ^a   Fernandez, Nadia B ^a,b   Antonides, Jennifer D ^a   Lamb, Maureen C ^b   Marra, Nicholas J ^c   DeWoody, J Andrew ^a,b  

^a PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

Author keywords

Endangered species; IUCN criteria; Microsatellite; Population size; Range extent; Threatened

Indexed keywords

ALLELE; CONSERVATION GENETICS; CONSERVATION STATUS; DATA SET; ENDANGERED SPECIES; ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE; GENETIC DRIFT; GENETIC MARKER; GENETIC VARIATION; HETEROZYGOSITY; INBREEDING; INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION; POPULATION SIZE; RANGE EXPANSION; SPECIES RICHNESS; VERTEBRATE;

VERTEBRATA;

EID: 84939523622     PISSN: 00063207     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2015.07.025     Document Type: Review

References (38)

1. Allendorf F. Genetic drift and the loss of alleles versus heterozygosity. Zoo Biol. 2005, 5:181-190.
2. Allendorf F., Luikart G. Conservation and the Genetics of Populations 2007, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, UK.
3. Avise J.C., Mitchell D. Time to standardize taxonomies. Syst. Biol. 2007, 56:130-133.
4. Bonnell M.L., Selander R.K. Elephant seals: genetic variation and near extinction. Science 1974, 184:908-909.
5. Busch J.D., Waser P.M., DeWoody J.A. Recent demographic bottlenecks are not accompanied by a genetic signature in banner-tailed kangaroo rats (Dipodomys spectabilis). Mol. Ecol. 2007, 16:2450-2462.
6. Coltman D.W., Slate J. Microsatellite measures of inbreeding: a meta-analysis. Evolution 2003, 57:971-983.
7. Cornuet J.-M., Luikart G. Description and power analysis of two tests for detecting recent population bottlenecks from allele frequency data. Genetics 1996, 144:2001-2014.
8. Crnokrak P., Roff D.A. Inbreeding depression in the wild. Heredity 1999, 83:260-270.
9. Crow J.F., Kimura M. Introduction to Population Genetics Theory 1970, Harper & Row, Publishers, New York.
10. Eldridge M.D.B., King J.M., Loupis A.K., Spencer P.B.S., Taylor A.C., Pope L.C., Hall G.P. Unprecedented low levels of genetic variation and inbreeding depression in an island population of the black-footed rock-wallaby. Conserv. Biol. 1999, 13:531-541.
11. Ellis J.S., Knight M.E., Darvill B., Goulson D. Extremely low effective population sizes, genetic structuring and reduced genetic diversity in a threatened bumblebee species, Bombus sylvarum (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Mol. Ecol. 2006, 15:4375-4386.
12. England P.R., Osler G.H.R., Woodworth L.M., Montgomery M.E., Briscoe D.A., Frankham R. Effects of intense versus diffuse population bottlenecks on microsatellite genetic diversity and evolutionary potential. Conserv. Genet. 2003, 4:595-604.
13. Environmental Systems Research Institute ArcMap. Version 10 2010, Environmental System Research Institute, Inc., Redlands, California.
14. Evans S.R., Sheldon B.C. Interspecific patterns of genetic diversity in birds: correlations with extinction risk. Conserv. Biol. 2008, 22:1016-1025.
15. Fagan W.F., Holmes E.E. Quantifying the extinction vortex. Ecol. Lett. 2006, 9:51-60.
16. Frankham R. Effective population size/adult population size ratios in wildlife: a review. Genet. Res. 1995, 66:95-107.
17. Frankham R. Relationship of genetic variation to population size in wildlife. Conserv. Biol. 1996, 10:1500-1508.
18. Garner A., Rachlow J.L., Hicks J.F. Patterns of genetic diversity and its loss in mammalian populations. Conserv. Biol. 2005, 19:1215-1221.
19. Internation Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) IUCN Red List of Threatened Species http://www.iucnredlist.org.
20. Kimble S.J.A., Rhodes O.E., Williams R.N. Unexpectedly low rangewide population genetic structure of the imperiled Eastern Box Turtle Terrapene c. carolina. PLoS One 2014, 9:e92274.
21. Lacy R.C. Importance of genetic variation to the viability of mammalian populations. J. Mammal. 1997, 78:329-335.
22. Le Boeuf B. Male-male competition and reproductive success in elephant seals. Am. Zool. 1974, 14:163-176.
23. Leberg P.L. Effects of population bottlenecks on genetic diversity as measured by allozyme electrophoresis. Evolution 1992, 46:477-494.
24. Markert J.A., Champlin D.M., Gutjahr-Gobell R., Grear J.S., Kuhn A., McGreevy T.J. Population genetic diversity and fitness in multiple environments. BMC Evol. Biol. 2010, 10:205.
25. Marsack K., Swanson B.J. A genetic analysis of the impact of generation time and road-based habitat fragmentation on Eastern box turtles (Terrapene c. carolina). Copeia 2009, 4:647-652.
26. Neel M.C., McKelvey K., Ryman N., Lloyd M.W., Short Bull R., Allendorf F.W., Schwartz M.K., Waples R.S. Estimation of effective population size in continuously distributed populations: there goes the neighborhood. Heredity 2013, 111:189-199.
27. Palstra F.P., Ruzzante D.E. Genetic estimates of contemporary effective population size: what can they tell us about the importance of genetic stochasticity for wild population persistence?. Mol. Ecol. 2008, 17:3428-3447.
28. Roelke M.E., Martenson J.S., O'Brien S.J. The consequences of demographic reduction and genetic depletion in the endangered Florida panther. Curr. Biol. 1993, 3:340-350.
29. Santos T., Diniz-Filho J.A., eLuis Mauricio Bini T.R. PVR: computes phylogenetic eigenvectors regression (PVR) and phylogenetic signal-representation curve (PSR) (with null and Brownian expectations). R package version 0.2.1 http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=PVR.
30. Spielman D., Brook B.W., Frankham R. Most species are not driven to extinction before genetic factors impact them. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2004, 101:15261-15264.
31. Taylor A.C., Sherwin W.B., Wayne R.K. Genetic variation of microsatellite loci in a bottlenecked species: the northern hairy-nosed wombat Lasiorhinus krefftii. Mol. Ecol. 1994, 3:277-290.
32. Tessier N., Bernatchez L. Stability of population structure and genetic diversity across generations assessed by microsatellites among sympatric populations of landlocked Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.). Mol. Ecol. 1999, 8:169-179.
33. Toledo L.F., Becker G.G., Haddad C.F.B., Zamudio K.R. Rarity as an indicator of endangerment in neotropical frogs. Biol. Conserv. 2014, 179:52-62.
34. Vandewoestijne S., Schtickzelle N., Baguette M. Positive correlation between genetic diversity and fitness in a large, well-connected metapopulation. BMC Biol. 2008, 6:46.
35. Wang J. Estimation of effective population sizes from data on genetic markers. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 2015, 360:1395-1409.
36. Westermeier R.L., Brawn J.D., Simpson S.A., Esker T.L., Jansen R.W., Walk J.W., Kershner E.L., Bouzat J.L., Paige K.N. Tracking the long-term decline and recovery of an isolated population. Science 1998, 282:1695-1698.
37. Wright S. Size of population and breeding structure in relation to evolution. Science 1939, 87:430-431.
38. Yu J., Dobson F.S. Seven forms of rarity in mammals. J. Biogeogr. 2000, 27:131-139.