Recent improvements in genetic analysis and genotyping methods have resulted in a rapid expansion of the power of molecular markers to address ecological questions. Microsatellites have emerged as the most popular and versatile marker type for ecological applications. The rise of commercial services that can isolate microsatellites for new study species and genotype samples at reasonable prices presents ecologists with the unprecedented ability to employ genetic approaches without heavy investment in specialized equipment. Nevertheless, the lack of accessible, synthesized information on the practicalities and pitfalls of using genetic tools impedes ecologists ability to make informed decisions on using molecular approaches and creates the risk that some will use microsatellites without understanding the steps needed to evaluate the quality of a genetic data set. The first goal of this synthesis is to provide an overview of the strengths and limitations of microsatellite markers and the risks, cost and time requirements of isolating and using microsatellites with the aid of commercial services. The second goal is to encourage the use and consistent reporting of thorough marker screening to ensure high quality data. To that end, we present a multistep screening process to evaluate candidate loci for inclusion in a genetic study that is broadly targeted to both novice and experienced geneticists alike.

Microsatellites for ecologists: a practical guide to using and evaluating microsatellite markers

Invasive mammals are the greatest threat to island biodiversity and invasive rodents are likely responsible for the greatest number of extinctions and ecosystem changes. Techniques for eradicating rodents from islands were developed over 2 decades ago. Since that time there has been a significant development and application of this conservation tool. We reviewed the literature on invasive rodent eradications to assess its current state and identify actions to make it more effective. Worldwide, 332 successful rodent eradications have been undertaken; we identified 35 failed eradications and 20 campaigns of unknown result. Invasive rodents have been eradicated from 284 islands (47,628 ha). With the exception of two small islands, rodenticides were used in all eradication campaigns. Brodifacoum was used in 71% of campaigns and 91% of the total area treated. The most frequent rodenticide distribution methods ( from most to least) are bait stations, hand broadcasting, and aerial broadcasting. Nevertheless, campaigns using aerial broadcast made up 76% of the total area treated. Mortality of native vertebrates due to nontarget poisoning has been documented, but affected species quickly recover to pre-eradication population levels or higher. A variety of methods have been developed to mitigate nontarget impacts, and applied research can further aid in minimizing impacts. Land managers should routinely remove invasive rodents from islands <100 ha that lack vertebrates susceptible to nontarget poisoning. For larger islands and those that require nontarget mitigation, expert consultation and greater planning effort are needed. With the exception of house mice (Mus musculus), island size may no longer be the limiting factor for rodent eradications; rather, social acceptance and funding may be the main challenges. To be successful, large-scale rodent campaigns should be integrated with programs to improve the livelihoods of residents, island biosecurity, and reinvasion response programs.

/pdf/invasive-rodent-eradication-on-islands-4jl6p8fhf1.pdf

Invasive rodent eradication on islands.

Pesticides are widely used to control agricultural pests. Unfortunately, because of their biological activity, they may have detrimental effects on nontarget species. Acute toxicity, resulting in death, is reported worldwide. Although chronic and indirect effects may be even more hazardous for animal populations on a long-term basis, they are usually evaluated as parts of research programs. The purpose of this paper was to review the wildlife-poisoning surveillance systems and their results regarding the circumstances of exposure of wild animals, the pesticides involved and the species exposed. Most data are retrieved from the British and French pesticide poisoning surveillance systems in wildlife, with some data from other European structures.

Pesticides and the intoxication of wild animals.

A fair evaluation of the net benefits provided by pesticides is essential to feed the current debate on their benefits and adverse consequences. Pesticides provide many benefits by killing agricultural and human pests. However, they also entail several types of costs, including internal costs due to the purchase and application of pesticides, and various other costs due to the impact of treatments on human health and the environment. Here, we provide a comprehensive review of these costs and their evaluation. We define four categories of costs: regulatory costs, human health costs, environmental costs and defensive expenditures. Those costs are either internal to the market, but hidden to the users, or external to the market and most often paid by a third party. We analysed 61 papers published between 1980 and 2014, and 30 independent dataset. Regulatory costs reached very large values, e.g. US$4 billion yearly in the United States in the 2000s. However, if all regulations were respected, these costs would have jumped to US$22 billion in this country. Health costs studies generally did not take into account fatal cases due to chronic exposure such as fatal outcomes of cancers. Doing so would have increased estimates of health costs by up to tenfold, e.g. from US$1.5 billion to US$15 billion in the United States in 2005.

/pdf/the-hidden-and-external-costs-of-pesticide-use-2bo8yr3i2z.pdf

The Hidden and External Costs of Pesticide Use

Despite a long history of successful use, routine application of some anticoagulant rodenticides (ARs) may be at a crossroad due to new regulatory guidelines intended to mitigate risk. An adverse outcome pathway for ARs was developed to identify information gaps and end points to assess the effectiveness of regulations. This framework describes chemical properties of ARs, established macromolecular interactions by inhibition of vitamin K epoxide reductase, cellular responses including altered clotting factor processing and coagulopathy, organ level effects such as hemorrhage, organism responses with linkages to reduced fitness and mortality, and potential consequences to predator populations. Risk assessments have led to restrictions affecting use of some second-generation ARs (SGARs) in North America. While the European regulatory community highlighted significant or unacceptable risk of ARs to nontarget wildlife, use of SGARs in most EU member states remains authorized due to public health concerns and the absence of safe alternatives. For purposes of conservation and restoration of island habitats, SGARs remain a mainstay for eradication of invasive species. There are significant data gaps related to exposure pathways, comparative species sensitivity, consequences of sublethal effects, potential hazards of greater AR residues in genetically resistant prey, effects of low-level exposure to multiple rodenticides, and quantitative data on the magnitude of nontarget wildlife mortality.

/pdf/adverse-outcome-pathway-and-risks-of-anticoagulant-1noice0d4g.pdf

Adverse Outcome Pathway and Risks of Anticoagulant Rodenticides to Predatory Wildlife

Because of the rapid decline of the endangered European mink (Mustela lutreola) populations in France, a national conservation program has been put into action, including research to understand the causes of decline. As part of this research, concentrations of eight anticoagulant rodenticides were examined in livers from 122 carcasses of four species of free-ranging mustelids collected between 1990 and 2002 in southwestern France. Bromadiolone residue was found in all species and 9% of the sample (one of 31 European mink, three of 47 American mink [Mustela vison], five of 33 polecats [Mustela putorius], and two of 11 European otters [Lutra lutra]). Liver concentrations ranged from 0.6 μg/g to 9.0 μg/g. Chlorophacinone residue was found in two species and 4% of the sample (in four of the American mink and in one of the otters), with liver concentrations ranging from 3.4 μg/g to 8.5 μg/g. Two polecats and one American mink had lesions and liver residues indicating bromadiolone was directly responsible for t...

/pdf/evidence-of-secondary-poisoning-of-free-ranging-riparian-28fen7uaqf.pdf

Evidence of secondary poisoning of free-ranging riparian mustelids by anticoagulant rodenticides in France: implications for conservation of European mink (Mustela lutreola).

In species of great conservation concern, special attention must be paid to their phylogeography, in particular the origin of animals for captive breeding and reintroduction. The endangered European mink lives now in at least three well-separated populations in northeast, southeast and west Europe. Our aim is to assess the genetic structure of these populations to identify ‘distinct population segments’ (DPS) and advise captive breeding programmes. First, the mtDNA control region was completely sequenced in 176 minks and 10 polecats. The analysis revealed that the western population is characterized by a single mtDNA haplotype that is closely related to those in eastern regions but nevertheless, not found there to date. The northeast European animals are much more variable (π π π = 0.012, h = 0.939), with the southeast samples intermediate (π = 0.0012, h = 0.469). Second, 155 European mink were genotyped using six microsatellites. The latter display the same trends of genetic diversity among regions as mtDNA [gene diversity and allelic richness highest in northeast Europe ( H E = 0.539, R S = 3.76), lowest in west Europe ( H E = 0.379, R S = 2.12)], and provide evidences that the southeast and possibly the west populations have undergone a recent bottleneck. Our results indicate that the western population derives from a few animals which recently colonized this region, possibly after a human introduction. Microsatellite data also reveal that isolation by distance occurs in the western population, causing some inbreeding because related individuals mate. As genetic data indicate that the three populations have not undergone independent evolutionary histories for long (no phylogeographical structure), they should not be considered as distinct DPS. In conclusion, the captive breeding programme should use animals from different parts of the species’ present distribution area.

/pdf/conservation-genetics-and-population-history-of-the-3u4q76osrv.pdf

Conservation genetics and population history of the threatened European mink Mustela lutreola, with an emphasis on the west European population.

Organochlorine pesticides, PCBs, heavy metals and anticoagulant rodenticides in tissues of Eurasian otters (Lutra lutra) from upper Loire River catchment (France).

https://www.lutreola.ee/lutreola/html/pdf/Biological%20conservation%20Mustela%20lutreola1.pdf

Is the western population of the European mink, (Mustela lutreola), a distinct Management Unit for conservation?

Eléments pour l'identification des restes crâniens des poissons dulçaquicoles de Belgique et du Nord de la France. 1. Anguilliformes, Gastérosteiformes, Cyprinodontiformes et Perciformes

René Rosoux

Papers

Evidence of secondary poisoning of free-ranging riparian mustelids by anticoagulant rodenticides in France: implications for conservation of European mink (Mustela lutreola).

Conservation genetics and population history of the threatened European mink Mustela lutreola, with an emphasis on the west European population.

Organochlorine pesticides, PCBs, heavy metals and anticoagulant rodenticides in tissues of Eurasian otters (Lutra lutra) from upper Loire River catchment (France).

Is the western population of the European mink, (Mustela lutreola), a distinct Management Unit for conservation?

Eléments pour l'identification des restes crâniens des poissons dulçaquicoles de Belgique et du Nord de la France. 1. Anguilliformes, Gastérosteiformes, Cyprinodontiformes et Perciformes