Understanding Local Adaptation to Prepare Populations for Climate Change
BioScience,
Год журнала:
2022,
Номер
73(1), С. 36 - 47
Опубликована: Ноя. 30, 2022
Abstract
Adaptation
within
species
to
local
environments
is
widespread
in
nature.
Better
understanding
this
adaptation
critical
conserving
biodiversity.
However,
conservation
practices
can
rely
on
species’
trait
averages
or
broadly
assume
homogeneity
across
the
range
inform
management.
Recent
methodological
advances
for
studying
provide
opportunity
fine-tune
efforts
managing
and
species.
The
implementation
of
these
will
allow
us
better
identify
populations
at
greatest
risk
decline
because
climate
change,
as
well
highlighting
possible
strategies
improving
likelihood
population
persistence
amid
change.
In
present
article,
we
review
recent
study
highlight
ways
tools
be
applied
efforts.
Cutting-edge
are
available
help
characterize
adaptation.
Indeed,
increased
incorporation
management
decisions
may
meet
imminent
demands
a
rapidly
changing
world.
Язык: Английский
A benefit–risk analysis for biological control introductions based on the protection of native biodiversity
Ecological Applications,
Год журнала:
2024,
Номер
34(6)
Опубликована: Июль 30, 2024
The
release
of
biological
control
agents
has
been
an
important
means
controlling
invasive
species
for
over
150
years.
While
these
releases
have
led
to
the
sustainable
250
pest
and
weed
worldwide,
a
minority
caused
environmental
harm.
A
growing
recognition
risks
focus
on
risk
assessment
beginning
in
1990s
along
with
precipitous
decline
releases.
this
new
greatly
improved
safety
control,
it
came
at
cost
lost
opportunities
solve
problems
associated
species.
framework
that
incorporates
benefits
is
thus
needed
understand
net
effects
We
introduce
such
framework,
using
native
biodiversity
as
common
currency
both
risks.
model
based
interactions
among
four
categories
organisms:
(1)
agent,
(2)
(pest
or
weed)
targeted
by
(3)
one
more
stand
benefit
from
target
species,
(4)
are
being
harmed
released
agent.
Conservation
values
potentially
benefited
incorporated
well,
they
weighted
according
three
axes:
vulnerability
extinction,
ecosystem
services
provided,
cultural
significance.
Further,
we
incorporate
potential
indirect
which
consider
will
result
mainly
ecological
process
agent
enrichment
may
occur
if
exploits
but
does
not
weed.
illustrate
use
retrospectively
analyzing
vedalia
beetle,
Novius
(=
Rodolia)
cardinalis,
cottony
cushion
scale,
Icerya
purchasi,
Galapagos
Islands.
particularly
adaptable
natural
areas,
can
also
be
used
managed
settings,
where
protects
through
reduction
pesticide
use.
Язык: Английский
Risk management recommendations for environmental releases of gene drive modified insects
Biotechnology Advances,
Год журнала:
2021,
Номер
54, С. 107807 - 107807
Опубликована: Июль 25, 2021
The
ability
to
engineer
gene
drives
(genetic
elements
that
bias
their
own
inheritance)
has
sparked
enthusiasm
and
concerns.
Engineered
could
potentially
be
used
address
long-standing
challenges
in
the
control
of
insect
disease
vectors,
agricultural
pests
invasive
species,
or
help
rescue
endangered
species.
However,
risk
concerns
uncertainty
associated
with
potential
environmental
release
drive
modified
insects
(GDMIs)
have
led
some
stakeholders
call
for
a
global
moratorium
on
such
releases
application
other
strict
precautionary
measures
mitigate
perceived
assessment
management
challenges.
Instead,
we
provide
recommendations
may
improve
relevance
frameworks
GDMIs.
These
include:
(1)
developing
additional
more
practical
guidance
ensure
appropriate
levels
safety;
(2)
making
policy
goals
regulatory
decision-making
criteria
operational
use
so
what
constitutes
harm
is
clearly
defined;
(3)
ensuring
dynamic
interplay
between
manage
through
closely
interlinked
pre-release
modelling
post-release
monitoring;
(4)
considering
risks
against
benefits,
comparing
them
those
alternative
actions
account
wider
(management)
context;
(5)
implementing
modular,
phased
approach
authorisations
incremental
acceptance
uncertainty.
Along
providing
stakeholder
engagement
opportunities
analysis
process,
proposed
enable
managers
make
choices
are
proportionate
adaptive
risks,
benefits
GDMI
applications,
socially
robust.
Язык: Английский
Whose intentions? What consequences? Interrogating “Intended Consequences” for conservation with environmental biotechnology
Conservation Science and Practice,
Год журнала:
2021,
Номер
3(4)
Опубликована: Апрель 1, 2021
Abstract
Novel
genetic
interventions
may
offer
innovative
solutions
to
environmental
conservation
challenges,
but
they
also
represent
new
kinds
of
risks
and
concerns
for
diverse
publics.
Yet,
by
focusing
on
potential
negative
outcomes
emerging
technologies
like
gene
editing,
their
utility
in
species
protection
could
lead
overblown
fears
unknown
unanticipated
consequences.
In
response,
Revive
Restore
organized
a
workshop
June
2020
entitled,
“Intended
Consequences,”
highlight
successes
the
discourse
governance
genomic
interventions.
This
article
argues
that
if
we
seek
emphasize
Intended
Consequences
embolden
efforts,
must
simultaneously
query
whose
intentions
are
included
what
consequences
considered
ensure
goals
accompanied
responsibility,
democracy,
justice.
These
questions
reveal
management
always
rest
upon
value
judgements.
Inspired
informed
Responsible
Research
Innovation
framework,
encourage
anticipation
outcomes,
reflection
assumptions
intentions,
inclusion
stakeholders
perspectives,
commitment
responding
thoughtfully
preferences
communities
broader
Язык: Английский
Why intended consequences?
Conservation Science and Practice,
Год журнала:
2021,
Номер
3(4)
Опубликована: Март 25, 2021
Novel
conservation
interventions
such
as
assisted
migration
or
gene
editing
inevitably
raise
the
specter
of
potential
unintended
consequences,
which
can
then
delay
derail
action.
Underappreciated
are
very
real
costs
inaction.
The
rate
climate
change
and
pace
extinction
continue
to
outstrip
predictions
(IPCC,
2019).
current
unprecedented
environmental
calls
for
more
attention
being
given
consequences
failing
intervene.
While
it
is
important
plan
risks
any
intervention,
just
mitigate
carrying
on
with
business
usual
in
face
increasingly
severe
threats.
To
counter
focus
we
hope
that
catchphrase
"Intended
Consequences"
will
help
keep
intended
benefits
nature
front-of-mind
during
a
responsible
planning
process
through
various
stages
intervention
monitoring.
goal
goes
beyond
identifying
objectives
evaluating
success
(sensu
Brooks,
Wright,
&
Sheil,
2009).
Our
rebalancing
risk–benefit
equation
give
additional
consideration
inaction
intervention.
Although
often
initially
controversial,
early
stakeholder
engagement,
other
best
practices
result
generate
nature.
For
example,
Scottish
Natural
Heritage
began
consider
reintroducing
beavers,
people
raised
would
negatively
impact
farming,
forestry,
fisheries,
particularly
salmonids
(Gaywood,
2017).
Frustrating
delays
motivated
unauthorized
beaver
releases
prior
formal
reintroduction.
A
complicated
aftermath
resulted
many
ecosystem
but
also
some
land
management
conflict.
This
experience
strongly
influenced
Code
Conservation
Translocations
(National
Species
Reintroduction
Forum,
2014)
promotes
practice
via
maximizing
biological
socio-economic
(intended
consequences)
minimizing
mitigating
(unintended
consequences).
wide
code
underscores
value
translocation
restoration
well
importance
research
engagement
alleviate
concerns
about
In
another
US
National
Park
Service
Island
proposed
eradicate
rats
from
Anacapa
order
restore
seabird
habitat.
Stakeholders
protested
rodenticide
kill
taxa
(Howald
et
al.,
2005).
After
much
debate,
disruption
by
activists,
court
ruling
favor
project,
proceeded,
were
successfully
eradicated.
Ten
years
later,
multiple
species
had
recolonized
monitoring
efforts
documented
only
minimal
impacts
non-target
(Newton
2016).
addition,
stakeholders
practitioners
collaborated
outline
principles
future
wildlife
control
(Dubois
project
ongoing
paved
way
exploring
genetic
interventions,
may
introduce
new
level
complexity
controversy
could
offer
humane
method
remove
rodents.
These
examples
others
demonstrate
Intended
Consequences
achieved
addressing
while
keeping
an
eye
desired
benefits.
Revive
Restore
virtually
convened
Workshop
June
2020
discuss
hypothesis
that,
receive
lot
media
coverage,
successful
achievement
"intended
consequences"
underplayed,
even
scientific
literature.
Organizers
identified
over-emphasis
pose
barrier
innovation.
At
workshop,
57
participants
shared
data
demonstrating
past
routinely
yielded
Leading
dissected
lessons
learned
case
studies.
group
integrated
diverse
disciplines,
discussed
strategies
be
inclusive,
drafted
initial
guidelines
agreed
now
time
integrate
development
next-generation
into
practice.
papers
this
special
issue
Science
Practice
report
syntheses
rates
real-world
regarding
versus
consequences.
Authors
explore
gleaned
on-going
along
cultural
ethical
issues
require
greater
consideration.
Novak,
Phelan,
Weber
(2021)
reviewed
140
translocations
United
States.
Over
last
four
decades,
1,711
different
gains.
Both
reintroduction
(Smith
Peterson,
2021)
intentional
introgression
(Newhouse
Powell,
2020)
part
spectrum
have
historically
succeeded
facilitate
restoration.
Two
question
prominent
historical
conventions
within
field
conservation:
maintenance
integrity
(Rohwer
Marris,
aversion
hybridization
name
maintaining
purity
(Hirashiki,
Kareiva,
Marvier,
2021).
Brister,
Holbrook,
Palmer
diagnose
causes
"ethos
restraint."
Responsible
protocols
(Barnhill-Dilling
Delborne,
2021),
intersections
between
governance,
constituencies,
risk
(Burgiel
careful
forecasting
models
(Mozelewski
Scheller,
areas
essential
Post-workshop,
46
statement
guide
scientists,
they
safely
harness
power
innovation
(Phelan
One
primary
emerged
at
workshop
inclusivity.
Responses
rooted
values
worldviews,
yet
conservationists
still
surprised
what
improved
outcomes
appropriate
human
has
failed
inclusive
must
(Taitingfong,
2020;
Tallis
Lubchenco,
2014).
knowledge
indigenous
peoples
particular
proves
crucial
initiatives,
especially
ecosystems
managed
millennia.
As
New
Zealand
begins
regulate
technologies
applied
challenges,
Maori
perspectives
decision-making
(Hudson
example
should
remind
regulators
embraces
wider
diversity
technologies,
embrace
their
own
visions
interacting
Second,
although
IUCN
(2013)
established
documents
exist
categories
came
conclusion
there
great
establishing
Genetic
Intervention.
projects
leverage
underway,
researchers
reported
uncertainty.
fields,
agriculture,
generalized
streamlined
reduced
inconsistency.
We
expect
Intervention
confidently
apply
tools.
third
point
was
policymakers
always
need
weigh
action
window
opportunity
save
our
closes,
use
all
available
tools
achieve
Consequences.
realizations,
together
Statement
included
here,
position
responsibly
conduct
interventions.
look
forward
when
conservationists,
regulators,
cultures
feel
confident
not
lead
harm,
forge
desirable
people.
supported
Restore,
University
Wisconsin-Madison,
Nature
Conservancy
California,
Gerry
Ohrstrom,
Amy
Mark
Tercek.
like
thank
Stewart
Brand,
Bridget
Baumgartner,
Ben
Martin
Gaywood,
Gregg
Howald,
Heath
Packard,
editor,
anonymous
reviewer
who
read
versions
gave
constructive
feedback
manuscript.
authors
no
conflict
interest
declare.
All
contributed
final
approval
version
published.
No
collected
article.
Язык: Английский
Wishful Thinking vs. Hopeful Action: Response to Diehm on American Chestnut Restoration
Ethics Policy & Environment,
Год журнала:
2023,
Номер
26(2), С. 354 - 358
Опубликована: Апрель 3, 2023
ABSTRACTABSTRACTChristian
Diehm
has
argued
against
using
a
genetically
modified
American
chestnut
variety
in
forest
restoration.
He
is
concerned
that
GM
sets
bad
precedent
and
disrespectful
toward
nature.
also
not
enough
been
done
to
consult
with
Native
tribes.
We
give
evidence
consultation
tribes,
environmental
organizations,
the
public
valuable
necessary
–
there
support
for
chestnut.
Genetic
modification
saves
species
from
functional
extinction
shows
respect
its
ecological
relationships.
Hopeful,
wise,
coordinated
action
needed
save
ecosystems.KEYWORDS:
chestnutgenetic
modificationrestorationendangered
speciesforests
Disclosure
StatementNo
potential
conflict
of
interest
was
reported
by
authors.
Язык: Английский