Conservation biologists assign population distinctiveness by classifying populations as evolutionarily significant units (ESUs). Historically, this classification has included ecological and genetic data. However, recent ESU concepts, coupled with increasing availability of data on neutral genetic variation, have led to criteria based exclusively on molecular phylogenies. We argue that the earlier definitions of ESUs, which incorporated ecological data and genetic variation of adaptive significance, are more relevant for conservation. Furthermore, this dichotomous summary (ESU or not) of a continuum of population differentiation is not adequate for determining appropriate management actions. We argue for a broader categorization of population distinctiveness based on concepts of ecological and genetic exchangeability ( sensu Templeton).

Considering evolutionary processes in conservation biology.

Conservation planning has tended to focus more on pattern (representation) than process (persistence) and, for the former, has emphasized species and ecosystem or community diversity over genetic diversity. Here I consider how best to incorporate knowledge of evolutionary processes and the distribution of genetic diversity into conservation planning and priority setting for populations within species and for biogeographic areas within regions. Separation of genetic diversity into two dimensions, one concerned with adaptive variation and the other with neutral divergence caused by isolation, highlights different evolutionary processes and suggests alternative strategies for conservation. Planning for both species and areas should emphasize protection of historically isolated lineages (Evolutionarily Significant Units) because these cannot be recovered. By contrast, adaptive features may best be protected by maintaining the context for selection, heterogeneous landscapes, and viable populations, rather than protecting specific phenotypes. A useful strategy may be to (1) identify areas that are important to represent species and (vicariant) genetic diversity and (2) maximize within these areas the protection of contiguous environmental gradients across which selection and migration can interact to maintain population viability and (adaptive) genetic diversity. These concepts are illustrated with recent results from analysis of a rainforest fauna from northeast Australia.

/pdf/strategies-to-protect-biological-diversity-and-the-24z68mxwou.pdf

Strategies to protect biological diversity and the evolutionary processes that sustain it.

Recent years have seen a debate over various methods that could objectively prioritize conservation value below the species level. Most prominent among these has been the evolutionarily significant unit (ESU). We reviewed ESU concepts with the aim of proposing a more unified concept that would reconcile opposing views. Like species concepts, conflicting ESU concepts are all essentially aiming to define the same thing: segments of species whose divergence can be measured or evaluated by putting differential emphasis on the role of evolutionary forces at varied temporal scales. Thus, differences between ESU concepts lie more in the criteria used to define the ESUs themselves rather than in their fundamental essence. We provide a context-based framework for delineating ESUs which circumvents much of this situation. Rather than embroil in a befuddled debate over an optimal criterion, the key to a solution is accepting that differing criteria will work more dynamically than others and can be used alone or in combination depending on the situation. These assertions constitute the impetus behind adaptive evolutionary conservation.

/pdf/adaptive-evolutionary-conservation-towards-a-unified-concept-4nim3j8f9q.pdf

Adaptive evolutionary conservation: towards a unified concept for defining conservation units.

▪ Abstract Insect molecular systematics has undergone remarkable recent growth. Advances in methods of data generation and analysis have led to the accumulation of large amounts of DNA sequence data from most major insect groups. In addition to reviewing theoretical and methodological advances, we have compiled information on the taxa and regions sequenced from all available phylogenetic studies of insects. It is evident that investigators have not usually coordinated their efforts. The genes and regions that have been sequenced differ substantially among studies and the whole of our efforts is thus little greater than the sum of its parts. The cytochrome oxidase I, 16S, 18S, and elongation factor-1α genes have been widely used and are informative across a broad range of divergences in insects. We advocate their use as standards for insect phylogenetics. Insect molecular systematics has complemented and enhanced the value of morphological and ecological data, making substantial contributions to evolutiona...

The current state of insect molecular systematics: a thriving Tower of Babel.

Genetically distinct populations are an important component of biodiversity. This work estimates the number of populations per area of a sample of species from literature on population differentiation and the average range area of a species from a sample of distribution maps. This yields an estimate of about 220 populations per species, or 1.1 to 6.6 billion populations globally. Assuming that population extinction is a linear function of habitat loss, approximately 1800 populations per hour (16 million annually) are being destroyed in tropical forests alone.

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/278/5338/689.full.pdf

Population Diversity: Its Extent and Extinction

Buckmoths (Hemileuca spp.) are day-flying saturniid moths with diverse ecologies and host plants. Populations that feed on Menyanthes trifoliata, known commonly as Cryan's buckmoths, have been found in only a few bogs and fens near eastern Lake Ontario in New York and near Ottawa in Ontario, Canada. Be- cause of their unique ecological traits, geographic isolation from other Hemileuca populations, and the small number of sites they occupy, there ts concern that the Cryan's buckmoth populations are phylogenetically dis- tinct and should be protected. The Cryan's buckmoths have not yet been taxonomically described and do not appear to have clear distinguishing morphological characters. Both molecular genetic traits (allozymes and mitochondrial DNA sequences) and an ecologically based character (host performance) were investigated to determine whether these populations possess fixed diagnostic characters signifying genetic differentiation from other eastern Hemileuca populations. Such differences would merit separate conservation management as an evolutionarily significant unit. Our studies showed that the Cryan's buckmoths clearly belong to the Hemileuca maia species group, but they could not be readily distinguished from other members of that group by means of molecular genetic techniques. There were no fixed differences in alleles or haplotypes distinguish- ing any of the populations or species, suggesting recent divergence. Nonetheless, in the host-plant performance experiment only the Cryan's buckmoth larvae were able to develop on M. trifoUata, a significant difference from other Hemileuca larvae tested. The Cryan's buckmoth appears to be unique in host performance and warrants protection and management as an evolutionarily significant unit. In cases such as this where groups appear to have recently diverged, investigations into ecologically significant traits may provide indica- tors of conservation significance as reliable as molecular genetic markers.

John T. Legge

Papers

Genetic criteria for establishing evolutionarily significant units in Cryan's buckmoth