Public views about editing genes in wildlife for conservation

Developments in CRISPR-based gene-editing technologies have generated a growing number of proposals to edit genes in wildlife to meet conservation goals. As these proposals have attracted greater attention, controversies have emerged among scientists and stakeholder groups over potential consequences and ethical implications of gene editing. Responsible governance cannot occur without consulting broader publics, yet little effort has been made to systematically assess public understandings and beliefs in relation to this new area of applied genetic engineering. We analyzed data from a survey of U.S. adults (n = 1600), collected by YouGov, and that examined respondents’ concerns about gene editing in animal and plant wildlife and how those concerns are shaped by cultural dispositions toward science and beliefs about the appropriateness of intervening in nature at the genetic level. On average, respondents perceived more risk than benefit in using these tools. Over 70% agreed that gene editing in wildlife could be “easily used for the wrong purposes.” When evaluating the moral acceptability of gene editing in wildlife, respondents evaluated applications to improve survival in endangered wildlife as more morally acceptable than applications to decrease abundance in a population or eliminate a population. Belief in the authority of scientific knowledge was positively related to favorable views of the benefits, risks, and moral acceptability of editing genes in wildlife. The belief that editing genes in wildlife inappropriately intervenes in nature predicted relatively more concern about risks and moral acceptability and skepticism about benefits. Given high levels of concern and skepticism about gene editing in wildlife for conservation among the U.S. public, a take-it-slow approach to making decisions about when or whether to use these tools is advisable. Early opinions, including those uncovered in this study, are likely to be provisional. Thus, consulting the public should be an ongoing process.     

Rapid,recurring, structured survey versus bioblitz for generating biodiversity data and analysis with a multispecies abundance model

A bioblitz inexpensively and quickly generates biodiversity data, but bioblitzes are often conducted with haphazard, unreplicated sampling. Results tend to be taxonomically, geographically, or temporally biased, lack metadata, and consist of lists of observed taxa that do not enable further analyses or correction for imperfect detection. A rapid, recurring, structured survey (RRSS) uses a structured sampling design and temporal and spatial replication to survey randomly selected sites on a conservation property. We participated in a loosely structured bioblitz and a subsequent RRSS at Big Canoe Creek Nature Preserve in Springville (St. Clair County), Alabama (USA) to compare observed richness derived from the 2 survey approaches. The RRSS data structure enabled us to fit models that accounted for imperfect detection to estimate abundances, occupancy probabilities, and habitat associations. The loosely structured bioblitz data could not be used in such models. We present a new integrated multispecies abundance model that we applied to avian RRSS data. Our model extension enables estimation for the community, employs data augmentation to estimate the number of undetected species, and incorporates covariates. The RRSS generated a more comprehensive and less biased list of observed taxonomic richness than the loosely structured bioblitz (e.g., 73 vs. 45 bird species and 104 vs. 63 insect families from the RRSS vs. loosely structured bioblitz, respectively). Models fit to the RRSS data identified seasonal patterns in avian community composition and allowed for estimation of habitat–occupancy relationships for insect taxa. The RRSS protocol has potential for broad transferability as a standardized, quick, and inexpensive way to inventory biodiversity and estimate ecological parameters while providing an outreach opportunity.     

Wrestling with the complexity of evaluation for organizations at the boundary of science,policy, and practice

Boundary organizations are situated between science, policy, and practice and have a goal of supporting communication and collaboration among these sectors. They have been promoted as a way to improve the effectiveness of conservation efforts by building stronger relationships between scientists, policy makers, industry, and practitioners (Cook et al. 2013). Although their promise has been discussed in theory, the work of and expectations for boundary organizations are less defined in practice. Biodiversity conservation is characterized by complexity, uncertainty, dissent, and tight budgets, so boundary organizations face the challenging task of demonstrating their value to diverse stakeholders. We examined the challenges boundary organizations face when seeking to evaluate their work and thus aimed to encourage more productive conversations about evaluation of boundary organizations and their projects. Although no off‐the‐shelf solution is available for a given boundary organization, we identified 4 principles that will support effective evaluation for boundary organizations: engage diverse stakeholders, support learning and reflection, assess contribution to change, and align evaluation with assumption and values.     

Influence of habitat quality, population size, patch size, and connectivity on patch-occupancy dynamics of the middle spotted woodpecker

Despite extensive research on the effects of habitat fragmentation, the ecological mechanisms underlying colonization and extinction processes are poorly known, but knowledge of these mechanisms is essential to understanding the distribution and persistence of populations in fragmented habitats. We examined these mechanisms through multiseason occupancy models that elucidated patch-occupancy dynamics of Middle Spotted Woodpeckers (Dendrocopos medius) in northwestern Spain. The number of occupied patches was relatively stable from 2000 to 2010 (15-24% of 101 patches occupied every year) because extinction was balanced by recolonization. Larger and higher quality patches (i.e., higher density of oaks >37 cm dbh [diameter at breast height]) were more likely to be occupied. Habitat quality (i.e., density of large oaks) explained more variation in patch colonization and extinction than did patch size and connectivity, which were both weakly associated with probabilities of turnover. Patches of higher quality were more likely to be colonized than patches of lower quality. Populations in high-quality patches were less likely to become extinct. In addition, extinction in a patch was strongly associated with local population size but not with patch size, which means the latter may not be a good surrogate of population size in assessments of extinction probability. Our results suggest that habitat quality may be a primary driver of patch-occupancy dynamics and may increase the accuracy of models of population survival. We encourage comparisons of competing models that assess occupancy, colonization, and extinction probabilities in a single analytical framework (e.g., dynamic occupancy models) so as to shed light on the association of habitat quality and patch geometry with colonization and extinction processes in different settings and species.     

Exploring the emergence of a tipping point for conservation with increased recognition of social considerations

Despite a common understanding of the harmful impacts of Western conservation models that separate people from nature, widespread progress toward incorporating socioeconomic, political, cultural, and spiritual considerations in conservation practice is lacking. For some, the concept of nature-based solutions (NbS) is seen as an interdisciplinary and holistic pathway to better integrate human well-being in conservation. We examined how conservation practitioners in the United States view NbS and how social considerations are or are not incorporated in conservation adaptation projects. We interviewed 28 individuals working on 15 different such projects associated with the Wildlife Conservation Society's Climate Adaptation Fund. We completed 2 rounds of iterative coding in NVivo 12.6.1 to identify in the full text of all interview responses an a priori set of themes related to our research questions and emergent themes. Many respondents saw this moment as a tipping point for the field (one in which the perceived values of social considerations are increasing in conservation practice) (76%) and that social justice concerns and the need to overcome racist and colonial roots of Western conservation have risen to the forefront. Respondents also tentatively agreed that NbS in conservation could support social and ecological outcomes for conservation, but that it was far from guaranteed. Despite individual intention and awareness among practitioners to incorporate social considerations in conservation practice, structural barriers, including limited funding and inflexible grant structures, continue to constrain systemic change. Ultimately, systemic changes that address power and justice in policy and practice are required to leverage this moment to more fully address social considerations in conservation.     

Obstruction of biodiversity conservation by minimum patch size criteria

Minimum patch size criteria for habitat protection reflect the conservation principle that a single large (SL) patch of habitat has higher biodiversity than several small (SS) patches of the same total area (SL > SS). Nonetheless, this principle is often incorrect, and biodiversity conservation requires placing more emphasis on protection of large numbers of small patches (SS > SL). We used a global database reporting the abundances of species across hundreds of patches to assess the SL > SS principle in systems where small patches are much smaller than the typical minimum patch size criteria applied for biodiversity conservation (i.e., ∼85% of patches <100 ha). The 76 metacommunities we examined included 4401 species in 1190 patches. From each metacommunity, we resampled species–area accumulation curves to evaluate how biodiversity responded to habitat existing as a few large patches or as many small patches. Counter to the SL > SS principle and consistent with previous syntheses, species richness accumulated more rapidly when adding several small patches (45.2% SS > SL vs. 19.9% SL > SS) to reach the same cumulative area, even for the very small patches in our data set. Responses of taxa to habitat fragmentation differed, which suggests that when a given total area of habitat is to be protected, overall biodiversity conservation will be most effective if that habitat is composed of as many small patches as possible, plus a few large ones. Because minimum patch size criteria often require larger patches than the small patches we examined, our results suggest that such criteria hinder efforts to protect biodiversity.     

Importance of timely metadata curation to the global surveillance of genetic diversity

Genetic diversity within species represents a fundamental yet underappreciated level of biodiversity. Because genetic diversity can indicate species resilience to changing climate, its measurement is relevant to many national and global conservation policy targets. Many studies produce large amounts of genome-scale genetic diversity data for wild populations, but most (87%) do not include the associated spatial and temporal metadata necessary for them to be reused in monitoring programs or for acknowledging the sovereignty of nations or Indigenous peoples. We undertook a distributed datathon to quantify the availability of these missing metadata and to test the hypothesis that their availability decays with time. We also worked to remediate missing metadata by extracting them from associated published papers, online repositories, and direct communication with authors. Starting with 848 candidate genomic data sets (reduced representation and whole genome) from the International Nucleotide Sequence Database Collaboration, we determined that 561 contained mostly samples from wild populations. We successfully restored spatiotemporal metadata for 78% of these 561 data sets (n = 440 data sets with data on 45,105 individuals from 762 species in 17 phyla). Examining papers and online repositories was much more fruitful than contacting 351 authors, who replied to our email requests 45% of the time. Overall, 23% of our email queries to authors unearthed useful metadata. The probability of retrieving spatiotemporal metadata declined significantly as age of the data set increased. There was a 13.5% yearly decrease in metadata associated with published papers or online repositories and up to a 22% yearly decrease in metadata that were only available from authors. This rapid decay in metadata availability, mirrored in studies of other types of biological data, should motivate swift updates to data-sharing policies and researcher practices to ensure that the valuable context provided by metadata is not lost to conservation science forever.     

Effects of interactions between anthropogenic stressors and recurring perturbations on ecosystem resilience and collapse

Insights into declines in ecosystem resilience and their causes and effects can inform preemptive action to avoid ecosystem collapse and loss of biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human well-being. Empirical studies of ecosystem collapse are rare and hampered by ecosystem complexity, nonlinear and lagged responses, and interactions across scales. We investigated how an anthropogenic stressor could diminish ecosystem resilience to a recurring perturbation by altering a critical ecosystem driver. We studied groundwater-dependent, peat-accumulating, fire-prone wetlands known as upland swamps in southeastern Australia. We hypothesized that underground mining (stressor) reduces resilience of these wetlands to landscape fires (perturbation) by diminishing groundwater, a key ecosystem driver. We monitored soil moisture as an indicator of ecosystem resilience during and after underground mining. After landscape fire, we compared responses of multiple state variables representing ecosystem structure, composition, and function in swamps within the mining footprint with unmined reference swamps. Soil moisture declined without recovery in swamps with mine subsidence (i.e., undermined), but was maintained in reference swamps over 8 years (effect size 1.8). Relative to burned reference swamps, burned undermined swamps showed greater loss of peat via substrate combustion; reduced cover, height, and biomass of regenerating vegetation; reduced postfire plant species richness and abundance; altered plant species composition; increased mortality rates of woody plants; reduced postfire seedling recruitment; and extirpation of a hydrophilic animal. Undermined swamps therefore showed strong symptoms of postfire ecosystem collapse, whereas reference swamps regenerated vigorously. We found that an anthropogenic stressor diminished the resilience of an ecosystem to recurring perturbations, predisposing it to collapse. Avoidance of ecosystem collapse hinges on early diagnosis of mechanisms and preventative risk reduction. It may be possible to delay or ameliorate symptoms of collapse or to restore resilience, but the latter appears unlikely in our study system due to fundamental alteration of a critical ecosystem driver. Efectos de las interacciones entre los estresantes antropogénicos y las perturbaciones recurrentes sobre la resiliencia y el colapso de los ecosistemas     

Threatened Species and the Potential Loss of Phylogenetic Diversity: Conservation Scenarios Based on Estimated Extinction Probabilities and Phylogenetic Risk Analysis

Abstract: New species conservation strategies, including the EDGE of Existence (EDGE) program, have expanded threatened species assessments by integrating information about species' phylogenetic distinctiveness. Distinctiveness has been measured through simple scores that assign shared credit among species for evolutionary heritage represented by the deeper phylogenetic branches. A species with a high score combined with a high extinction probability receives high priority for conservation efforts. Simple hypothetical scenarios for phylogenetic trees and extinction probabilities demonstrate how such scoring approaches can provide inefficient priorities for conservation. An existing probabilistic framework derived from the phylogenetic diversity measure (PD) properly captures the idea of shared responsibility for the persistence of evolutionary history. It avoids static scores, takes into account the status of close relatives through their extinction probabilities, and allows for the necessary updating of priorities in light of changes in species threat status. A hypothetical phylogenetic tree illustrates how changes in extinction probabilities of one or more species translate into changes in expected PD. The probabilistic PD framework provided a range of strategies that moved beyond expected PD to better consider worst‐case PD losses. In another example, risk aversion gave higher priority to a conservation program that provided a smaller, but less risky, gain in expected PD. The EDGE program could continue to promote a list of top species conservation priorities through application of probabilistic PD and simple estimates of current extinction probability. The list might be a dynamic one, with all the priority scores updated as extinction probabilities change. Results of recent studies suggest that estimation of extinction probabilities derived from the red list criteria linked to changes in species range sizes may provide estimated probabilities for many different species. Probabilistic PD provides a framework for single‐species assessment that is well‐integrated with a broader measurement of impacts on PD owing to climate change and other factors.     

Should We Protect the Strong or the Weak? Risk,Resilience, and the Selection of Marine Protected Areas

Abstract: It is thought that recovery of marine habitats from uncontrollable disturbance may be faster in marine reserves than in unprotected habitats. But which marine habitats should be protected, those areas at greatest risk or those at least risk? We first defined this problem mathematically for 2 alternate conservation objectives. We then analytically solved this problem for both objectives and determined under which conditions each of the different protection strategies was optimal. If the conservation objective was to maximize the chance of having at least 1 healthy site, then the best strategy was protection of the site at lowest risk. On the other hand, if the goal was to maximize the expected number of healthy sites, the optimal strategy was more complex. If protected sites were likely to spend a significant amount of time in a degraded state, then it was best to protect low‐risk sites. Alternatively, if most areas were generally healthy then, counterintuitively, it was best to protect sites at higher risk. We applied these strategies to a situation of cyclone disturbance of coral reefs on Australia's Great Barrier Reef. With regard to the risk of cyclone disturbance, the optimal reef to protect differed dramatically, depending on the expected speed of reef recovery of both protected and unprotected reefs. An adequate consideration of risk is fundamental to all conservation actions and can indicate surprising routes to conservation success.