Importance of health assessments for conservation in noncaptive wildlife

Wildlife health assessments help identify populations at risk of starvation, disease, and decline from anthropogenic impacts on natural habitats. We conducted an overview of available health assessment studies in noncaptive vertebrates and devised a framework to strategically integrate health assessments in population monitoring. Using a systematic approach, we performed a thorough assessment of studies examining multiple health parameters of noncaptive vertebrate species from 1982 to 2020 (n = 261 studies). We quantified trends in study design and diagnostic methods across taxa with generalized linear models, bibliometric analyses, and visual representations of study location versus biodiversity hotspots. Only 35% of studies involved international or cross-border collaboration. Countries with both high and threatened biodiversity were greatly underrepresented. Species that were not listed as threatened on the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List represented 49% of assessed species, a trend likely associated with the regional focus of most studies. We strongly suggest following wildlife health assessment protocols when planning a study and using statistically adequate sample sizes for studies establishing reference ranges. Across all taxa blood analysis (89%), body composition assessments (81%), physical examination (72%), and fecal analyses (24% of studies) were the most common methods. A conceptual framework to improve design and standardize wildlife health assessments includes guidelines on the experimental design, data acquisition and analysis, and species conservation planning and management implications. Integrating a physiological and ecological understanding of species resilience toward threatening processes will enable informed decision making regarding the conservation of threatened species.     

Closing the knowledge-action gap in conservation with open science

The knowledge-action gap in conservation science and practice occurs when research outputs do not result in actions to protect or restore biodiversity. Among the diverse and complex reasons for this gap, three barriers are fundamental: knowledge is often unavailable to practitioners and challenging to interpret or difficult to use or both. Problems of availability, interpretability, and useability are solvable with open science practices. We considered the benefits and challenges of three open science practices for use by conservation scientists and practitioners. First, open access publishing makes the scientific literature available to all. Second, open materials (detailed methods, data, code, and software) increase the transparency and use of research findings. Third, open education resources allow conservation scientists and practitioners to acquire the skills needed to use research outputs. The long-term adoption of open science practices would help researchers and practitioners achieve conservation goals more quickly and efficiently and reduce inequities in information sharing. However, short-term costs for individual researchers (insufficient institutional incentives to engage in open science and knowledge mobilization) remain a challenge. We caution against a passive approach to sharing that simply involves making information available. We advocate a proactive stance toward transparency, communication, collaboration, and capacity building that involves seeking out and engaging with potential users to maximize the environmental and societal impact of conservation science.     

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.     

Using Citizen Science Programs to Identify Host Resistance in Pest‐Invaded Forests

Abstract: Threats to native forests from non‐native insects and pathogens (pests) are generally addressed with methods such as quarantine, eradication, biological control, and development of resistant stock through hybridization and breeding. In conjunction with such efforts, it may be useful to have citizen scientists locate rare surviving trees that may be naturally pest resistant or tolerant. The degree of resistance of individual trees identified in this way can be tested under controlled conditions, and the most resistant individuals can be integrated into plant breeding programs aimed at developing pest‐resistant native stock. Involving citizen scientists in programs aimed at identifying rare trees that survive colonization by pests provides a low‐cost means of maximizing search efforts across wide geographic regions and may provide an effective supplement to existing management approaches.     

A Conceptual Analysis of the Application of Tradable Permits to Biodiversity Conservation

Abstract: Tradable permits have been applied in many areas of environmental policy and may be a response to increasing calls for flexible conservation instruments that successfully conserve biodiversity while allowing for economic development. The idea behind applying tradable permits to conservation is that developers wishing to turn land to economic purposes, thereby destroying valuable habitat, may only do so if they submit a permit to the conservation agency showing that habitat of at least the equivalent ecological value is restored elsewhere. The developer himself does not need to carry out the restoration, but may buy a permit from a third party, thus allowing a market to emerge. Nevertheless, the application of tradable permits to biodiversity conservation is a complex issue because destroyed and restored habitats are likely to differ. There may be various trade‐offs between the ecological requirements that destroyed and restored habitats be as similar as possible, and the need for a certain level of market activity to have a functioning trading system. The success of tradable permits as an instrument for reconciling the conflicts between economic development and conservation depends on the existence of certain economic, institutional, and ecological preconditions, for example, a functioning institutional framework, sufficient expert knowledge, and adequate monitoring and enforcement mechanisms.     

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.     

Long-term demographic and genetic effects of releasing captive-born individuals into the wild

Because of continued habitat destruction and species extirpations, the need to use captive breeding for conservation purposes has been increasing steadily. However, the long-term demographic and genetic effects associated with releasing captive-born individuals with varied life histories into the wild remain largely unknown. To address this question, we developed forward-time, agent-based models for 4 species with long-running captive-breeding and release programs: coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch), golden lion tamarin (Leontopithecus rosalia), western toad (Anaxyrus boreas), and Whooping Crane (Grus americana). We measured the effects of supplementation by comparing population size and neutral genetic diversity in supplemented populations to the same characteristics in unaltered populations 100 years after supplementation ended. Releasing even slightly less fit captive-born individuals to supplement wild populations typically resulted in reductions in population sizes and genetic diversity over the long term when the fitness reductions were heritable (i.e., due to genetic adaptation to captivity) and populations continued to be regulated by density-dependent mechanisms over time. Negative effects for species with longer life spans and lower rates of population replacement were smaller than for species with shorter life spans and higher rates of population replacement. Programs that released captive-born individuals over fewer years or that avoided breeding individuals with captive ancestry had smaller reductions in population size and genetic diversity over the long term. Relying on selection in the wild to remove individuals with reduced fitness mitigated some negative demographic effects, but at a substantial cost to neutral genetic diversity. Our results suggest that conservation-focused captive-breeding programs should take measures to prevent even small amounts of genetic adaptation to captivity, quantitatively determine the minimum number of captive-born individuals to release each year, and fully account for the interactions among genetic adaptation to captivity, population regulation, and life-history variation.     

Contribution of Systematic Reviews to Management Decisions

Systematic reviews comprehensively summarize evidence about the effectiveness of conservation interventions. We investigated the contribution to management decisions made by this growing body of literature. We identified 43 systematic reviews of conservation evidence, 23 of which drew some concrete conclusions relevant to management. Most reviews addressed conservation interventions relevant to policy decisions; only 35% considered practical on‐the‐ground management interventions. The majority of reviews covered only a small fraction of the geographic and taxonomic breadth they aimed to address (median = 13% of relevant countries and 16% of relevant taxa). The likelihood that reviews contained at least some implications for management tended to increase as geographic coverage increased and to decline as taxonomic breadth increased. These results suggest the breadth of a systematic review requires careful consideration. Reviews identified a mean of 312 relevant primary studies but excluded 88% of these because of deficiencies in design or a failure to meet other inclusion criteria. Reviews summarized on average 284 data sets and 112 years of research activity, yet the likelihood that their results had at least some implications for management did not increase as the amount of primary research summarized increased. In some cases, conclusions were elusive despite the inclusion of hundreds of data sets and years of cumulative research activity. Systematic reviews are an important part of the conservation decision making tool kit, although we believe the benefits of systematic reviews could be significantly enhanced by increasing the number of reviews focused on questions of direct relevance to on‐the‐ground managers; defining a more focused geographic and taxonomic breadth that better reflects available data; including a broader range of evidence types; and appraising the cost‐effectiveness of interventions. Contribuciones de las Revisiones Sistemáticas a las Decisiones de Manejo     

Use of environmental DNA in assessment of fish functional and phylogenetic diversity

Assessing the impact of global changes and protection effectiveness is a key step in monitoring marine fishes. Most traditional census methods are demanding or destructive. Nondisturbing and nonlethal approaches based on video and environmental DNA are alternatives to underwater visual census or fishing. However, their ability to detect multiple biodiversity factors beyond traditional taxonomic diversity is still unknown. For bony fishes and elasmobranchs, we compared the performance of eDNA metabarcoding and long-term remote video to assess species’ phylogenetic and functional diversity. We used 10 eDNA samples from 30 L of water each and 25 hr of underwater videos over 4 days on Malpelo Island (pacific coast of Colombia), a remote marine protected area. Metabarcoding of eDNA detected 66% more molecular operational taxonomic units (MOTUs) than species on video. We found 66 and 43 functional entities with a single eDNA marker and videos, respectively, and higher functional richness for eDNA than videos. Despite gaps in genetic reference databases, eDNA also detected a higher fish phylogenetic diversity than videos; accumulation curves showed how 1 eDNA transect detected as much phylogenetic diversity as 25 hr of video. Environmental DNA metabarcoding can be used to affordably, efficiently, and accurately census biodiversity factors in marine systems. Although taxonomic assignments are still limited by species coverage in genetic reference databases, use of MOTUs highlights the potential of eDNA metabarcoding once reference databases have expanded.     

An Australian perspective on rewilding

Rewilding is increasingly recognized as a conservation tool but is often context specific, which inhibits broad application. Rewilding in Australia seeks to enhance ecosystem function and promote self-sustaining ecosystems. An absence of large-bodied native herbivores means trophic rewilding in mainland Australia has focused on the restoration of functions provided by apex predators and small mammals. Because of the pervasive influence of introduced mesopredators, predator-proof fences, and establishment of populations on predator-free islands are common rewilding approaches. This sets Australian rewilding apart from most jurisdictions and provides globally relevant insights but presents challenges to restoring function to broader landscapes. Passive rewilding is of limited utility in arid zones. Although increasing habitat extent and quality in mesic coastal areas may work, it will likely be necessary to undertake active management. Because much of Australia's population is in urban areas, rewilding efforts must include urban areas to maximize effectiveness. Thus rewilding is not synonymous with wilderness and can occur over multiple scales. Rewilding efforts must recognize human effects on other species and benefit both nature and humans. Rewilding in Australia requires development of a shared vision and strategy and proof-of-concept projects to demonstrate the benefits. The repackaging of existing conservation activities as rewilding may confuse and undermine the success of rewilding programs and should be avoided. As elsewhere, rewilding in Australia should be viewed as an important conservation tool.