Translocations are being increasingly proposed as a way of conserving biodiversity, particularly in the management of threatened and keystone species, with the aims of maintaining biodiversity and ecosystem function under the combined pressures of habitat fragmentation and climate change. Evolutionary genetic considerations should be an important part of translocation strategies, but there is often confusion about concepts and goals. Here, we provide a classification of translocations based on specific genetic goals for both threatened species and ecological restoration, separating targets based on ‘genetic rescue’ of current population fitness from those focused on maintaining adaptive potential. We then provide a framework for assessing the genetic benefits and risks associated with translocations and provide guidelines for managers focused on conserving biodiversity and evolutionary processes. Case studies are developed to illustrate the framework.

/pdf/assessing-the-benefits-and-risks-of-translocations-in-4biiz1bry4.pdf

Assessing the benefits and risks of translocations in changing environments : a genetic perspective

Globally, ecosystems and their constituent flora and fauna face the localized and broad-scale influence of human activities. Conservation practitioners and environmental managers struggle to identify and mitigate threats, reverse species declines, restore degraded ecosystems, and manage natural resources sustainably. Scientific research and evidence are increasingly regarded as the foundation for new regulations, conservation actions, and management interventions. Conservation biolo- gists and managers have traditionally focused on the characteristics (e.g. abundance, structure, trends) of populations, spe- cies, communities, and ecosystems, and simple indicators of the responses to environmental perturbations and other human activities. However, an understanding of the specific mechanisms underlying conservation problems is becoming increasingly important for decision-making, in part because physiological tools and knowledge are especially useful for developing cause- and-effect relationships, and for identifying the optimal range of habitats and stressor thresholds for different organisms. When physiological knowledge is incorporated into ecological models, it can improve predictions of organism responses to environmental change and provide tools to support management decisions. Without such knowledge, we may be left with simple associations. 'Conservation physiology' has been defined previously with a focus on vertebrates, but here we redefine the concept universally, for application to the diversity of taxa from microbes to plants, to animals, and to natural resources. We also consider 'physiology' in the broadest possible terms; i.e. how an organism functions, and any associated mechanisms, from development to bioenergetics, to environmental interactions, through to fitness. Moreover, we consider conservation physiology to include a wide range of applications beyond assisting imperiled populations, and include, for example, the eradication of invasive species, refinement of resource management strategies to minimize impacts, and evaluation of resto - ration plans. This concept of conservation physiology emphasizes the basis, importance, and ecological relevance of physio- logical diversity at a variety of scales. Real advances in conservation and resource management require integration and inter-disciplinarity. Conservation physiology and its suite of tools and concepts is a key part of the evidence base needed to address pressing environmental challenges.

/pdf/what-is-conservation-physiology-perspectives-on-an-38kq6mqa38.pdf

What is conservation physiology? Perspectives on an increasingly integrated and essential science†

European ash (Fraxinus excelsior) dieback - a conservation biology challenge.

Revegetation is one practical application of science that should ideally aim to combine ecology with evolution to maximise biodiversity and ecosystem outcomes. The strict use of locally sourced seed in revegetation programs is widespread and is based on the expectation that populations are locally adapted. This practice does not fully integrate two global drivers of ecosystem change and biodiversity loss: habitat fragmentation and climate change. Here, we suggest amendments to existing strategies combined with a review of alternative seed-sourcing strategies that propose to mitigate against these drivers. We present a provenancing selection guide based on confidence surrounding climate change distribution modelling and data on population genetic and/or environmental differences between populations. Revegetation practices will benefit from greater integration of current scientific developments and establishment of more long-term experiments is key to improving the long-term success. The rapid growth in carbon and biodiversity markets creates a favourable economic climate to achieve these outcomes.

Which provenance and where? Seed sourcing strategies for revegetation in a changing environment

Coral reef ecosystems have suffered an unprecedented loss of habitat-forming hard corals in recent decades. While marine conservation has historically focused on passive habitat protection, demand for and interest in active restoration has been growing in recent decades. However, a disconnect between coral restoration practitioners, coral reef managers and scientists has resulted in a disjointed field where it is difficult to gain an overview of existing knowledge. To address this, we aimed to synthesise the available knowledge in a comprehensive global review of coral restoration methods, incorporating data from the peer-reviewed scientific literature, complemented with grey literature and through a survey of coral restoration practitioners. We found that coral restoration case studies are dominated by short-term projects, with 60% of all projects reporting less than 18 months of monitoring of the restored sites. Similarly, most projects are relatively small in spatial scale, with a median size of restored area of 100 m2. A diverse range of species are represented in the dataset, with 229 different species from 72 coral genera. Overall, coral restoration projects focused primarily on fast-growing branching corals (59% of studies), and report survival between 60 and 70%. To date, the relatively young field of coral restoration has been plagued by similar ‘growing pains’ as ecological restoration in other ecosystems. These include 1) a lack of clear and achievable objectives, 2) a lack of appropriate and standardised monitoring and reporting and, 3) poorly designed projects in relation to stated objectives. Mitigating these will be crucial to successfully scale up projects, and to retain public trust in restoration as a tool for resilience based management. Finally, while it is clear that practitioners have developed effective methods to successfully grow corals at small scales, it is critical not to view restoration as a replacement for meaningful action on climate change.

Ruth Aguraiuja

Papers

How successful are plant species reintroductions