Global distribution of two fungal pathogens threatening endangered sea turtles

This work was supported by grants of Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación, Spain (CGL2009-10032, CGL2012-32934). J.M.S.R was supported by PhD fellowship of the CSIC (JAEPre 0901804). The Natural Environment Research Council and the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council supported P.V.W. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Thanks Machalilla National Park in Ecuador, Pacuare Nature Reserve in Costa Rica, Foundations Natura 2000 in Cape Verde and Equilibrio Azul in Ecuador, Dr. Jesus Muñoz, Dr. Ian Bell, Dr. Juan Patiño for help and technical support during samplingPeer reviewedPublisher PD

Are we working towards global research priorities for management and conservation of sea turtles?

This is the final version. Available from Inter Research via the DOI in this recordThere is another ORE record for this publication: http://hdl.handle.net/10871/24817In 2010, an international group of 35 sea turtle researchers refined an initial list of more than 200 research questions into 20 metaquestions that were considered key for management and conservation of sea turtles. These were classified under 5 categories: reproductive biology, biogeography, population ecology, threats and conservation strategies. To obtain a picture of how research is being focused towards these key questions, we undertook a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature (2014 and 2015) attributing papers to the original 20 questions. In total, we reviewed 605 articles in full and from these 355 (59%) were judged to substantively address the 20 key questions, with others focusing on basic science and monitoring that may lead to innovations or inform subsequent interpretation of effectiveness of conservation interventions and/or severity of threats. Progress to answering the 20 questions was not uniform and there were biases regarding focal turtle species, geographic scope and publication outlet. Whilst it offers some meaningful indications as to effort, quantifying peer-reviewed literature output is obviously not the only, and possibly not the best, metric for understanding research progress towards informing key conservation and management goals. Along with the literature review, an international group based on the original project consortium, with additional members, were assigned in groups of two or three (based on core expertise) to critically summarise recent progress towards answering each of the 20 questions. We found that significant research is being expended towards global priorities for management and conservation of sea turtles. Although highly variable, there has been significant progress in all the key questions identified in 2010. Undertaking this critical review has highlighted that it may be timely to undertake one or more new prioritizing exercises. For this to have maximal benefit we make a range of recommendations for its execution. These include a far greater engagement with social sciences, widening the pool of contributors and focussing the questions, perhaps disaggregating ecology and conservation.K.R.W-S is supported by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship under Grant No. DGE-125252

Training future generations to deliver evidence-based conservation and ecosystem management

Data availability statement: No data was used in this study.Peer review: The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1002/2688-8319.12032.Supporting Information: eso312032-sup-0001-SuppMat.docx (21.1 KB) available at: https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/action/downloadSupplement?doi=10.1002%2F2688-8319.12032&file=eso312032-sup-0001-SuppMat.docx. Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.Copyright © 2021 The Authors. 1. To be effective, the next generation of conservation practitioners and managers need to be critical thinkers with a deep understanding of how to make evidence-based decisions and of the value of evidence synthesis. 2. If, as educators, we do not make these priorities a core part of what we teach, we are failing to prepare our students to make an effective contribution to conservation practice. 3. To help overcome this problem we have created open access online teaching materials in multiple languages that are stored in Applied Ecology Resources. So far, 117 educators from 23 countries have acknowledged the importance of this and are already teaching or about to teach skills in appraising or using evidence in conservation decision-making. This includes 145 undergraduate, postgraduate or professional development courses. 4. We call for wider teaching of the tools and skills that facilitate evidence-based conservation and also suggest that providing online teaching materials in multiple languages could be beneficial for improving global understanding of other subject areas. Making informed conservation and ecosystem management choices is based upon a sound understanding of the relevant evidence. There is an increasing wealth of conservation science available, and access to this is becoming easier. But, are conservation practitioners being trained to utilize this information? In conservation, decision-making is often based upon past experience or expert knowledge, as opposed to the full body of scientific literature (e.g., Pullin, Knight, Stone, & Charman, 2004; Rafidimanantsoa, Poudyal, Ramamonjisoa, & Jones, 2018). The failure to include scientific evidence in decision-making has the potential to reduce the effectiveness of management, or even lead to detrimental actions being undertaken (Walsh, Dicks, & Sutherland, 2015). Evidence-based conservation (EBC) seeks to avoid this by providing tools to facilitate and inform decision-making. To do this, scientific evidence is collated and critically appraised for its quality and relevance, and integrated with other knowledge, experience, values and costs (Sutherland, Pullin, Dolman, & Knight, 2004). Wider adoption of EBC requires conservation professionals to be trained in its principles and taught how to use it to inform conservation decision-making.MAVA Foundation; Arcadia Fund

Assessing the evidence of 'infertile' sea turtle eggs

© 2020, Inter-Research. There is increasing concern about feminization of sea turtle populations resulting from female-biased production of hatchlings due to climate change and selective loss of males from other anthropogenic drivers. Extreme female-biased breeding populations would reduce the likelihood of successful mating and potentially result in high rates of infertile eggs. Infertile eggs are those in which none of the events between sperm penetration of the ovum and syngamy have occurred. Distinguishing between fertile and infertile eggs is challenging, especially in field conditions, and researchers often have relied on physical evidence gathered from unhatched eggs at the end of the incubation period, which likely have experienced tissue decomposition. We argue that infertility in sea turtle eggs can be demonstrated only by the absence of holes caused by sperm penetration of the inner perivitelline membrane; sperm bound between the inner and outer perivitelline membranes; nuclei in the blastodisc; embryonic tissue or membranes in egg contents; and/or the characteristic white spot on the egg exterior. Unhatched eggs can be examined at the end of the incubation period, but we recommend that studies specifically investigating infertility examine at least 20 oviposited eggs each from clutches laid by at least 20 different turtles at the peak of the nesting season

Assessing the evidence of ‘infertile’ sea turtle eggs

There is increasing concern about feminization of sea turtle populations resulting from female-biased production of hatchlings due to climate change and selective loss of males from other anthropogenic drivers. Extreme female-biased breeding populations would reduce the likelihood of successful mating and potentially result in high rates of infertile eggs. Infertile eggs are those in which none of the events between sperm penetration of the ovum and syngamy have occurred. Distinguishing between fertile and infertile eggs is challenging, especially in field conditions, and researchers often have relied on physical evidence gathered from unhatched eggs at the end of the incubation period, which likely have experienced tissue decomposition. We argue that infertility in sea turtle eggs can be demonstrated only by the absence of holes caused by sperm penetration of the inner perivitelline membrane; sperm bound between the inner and outer perivitelline membranes; nuclei in the blastodisc; embryonic tissue or membranes in egg contents; and/or the characteristic white spot on the egg exterior. Unhatched eggs can be examined at the end of the incubation period, but we recommend that studies specifically investigating infertility examine at least 20 oviposited eggs each from clutches laid by at least 20 different turtles at the peak of the nesting season.</jats:p

Relative effectiveness of trapping and hand-capture for controlling invasive cane toads ( Rhinella marina

Management of invasive vertebrates is a crucial component of conservation. Management strategies should increase the chance of removal of every individual, by exploiting behavioural characteristics, and by increasing the period over which removal occurs. For example, traps can operate automatically over long periods, and often include attractants to increase captures. Management strategies for the invasive cane toad (Rhinella marina) in Australia include hand capture and trapping adult individuals (toads are attracted to an acoustic lure, and to insects attracted to a light, also on the lure). We used capture-mark-recapture analysis to compare the efficacy of trapping and hand capturing cane toads over 10 weeks, in Townsville, Australia. We trapped 7.1%–22.4% of the estimated population per week, and hand captured 1.7%–6% of the estimated population per week. Trapping was more efficient than hand capture in our regime; overall, more toads were caught per trapping man-hour than per hand-capture hour. Traps attract toads and maximise the period over which removal occurs; thus, the probability of removal for each toad was higher than by hand capture. Because hand capture and trapping seemed to remove different toads, a combination of these methods may work well

Diagnostic assays and sampling protocols for the detection of Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis

Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis is a fungus belonging to the Phylum Chytridiomycota, Class Chytridiomycetes, Order Chytridiales, and is the highly infectious aetiological agent responsible for a potentially fatal disease, chytridiomycosis, which is currently decimating many of the world's amphibian populations. The fungus infects 2 amphibian orders (Anura and Caudata), 14 families and at least 200 species and is responsible for at least 1 species extinction. Whilst the origin of the agent and routes of transmission are being debated, it has been recognised that successful management of the disease will require effective sampling regimes and detection assays. We have developed a range of unique sampling protocols together with diagnostic assays for the detection of B. dendrobatidis in both living and deceased tadpoles and adults. Here, we formally present our data and discuss them in respect to assay sensitivity, specificity, repeatability and reproducibility. We suggest that compliance with the recommended protocols will avoid the generation of spurious results, thereby providing the international scientific and regulatory community with a set of validated procedures which will assist in the successful management of chytridiomycosis in the future. © Inter-Research 2007