Finding bridges between biodiversity research and ecosystem–based management

Today, it appears safe to say that in principle we know enough to improve management actions, but that existing and new knowledge is not applied to the extent needed. Adaptive policy and ecosystem-based management are considered ways forward for the future. To put things simple: this will require including more of what we know in policy and management and continuously reviewing and updating practices. The BONUS programme with projects bringing into contact integrative teams spanning broad areas of expertise from fundamental science to modellers and policy experts, but also ICES with its integrative working groups, foster a much needed basis for such adaptive management. They point the way towards a more generalised integration of the scientific, conservation, resource management and policy domains. These efforts are much needed and, if continued and expanded, will take us closer to a sustainable future for the Baltic Sea. In this article we give concrete examples based on research by three BONUS projects on how scientific information is integrated into adaptive fisheries management

Baltic Sea genetic biodiversity: Current knowledge relating to conservation management

1. The Baltic Sea has a rare type of brackish water environment which harbours unique genetic lineages of many species. The area is highly influenced by anthropogenic activities and is affected by eutrophication, climate change, habitat modifications, fishing and stocking. Effective genetic management of species in the Baltic Sea is highly warranted in order to maximize their potential for survival, but shortcomings in this respect have been documented. Lack of knowledge is one reason managers give for why they do not regard genetic diversity in management. 2. Here, the current knowledge of population genetic patterns of species in the Baltic Sea is reviewed and summarized with special focus on how the information can be used in management. The extent to which marine protected areas (MPAs) protect genetic diversity is also investigated in a case study of four key species. 3. Sixty‐one species have been studied genetically in the Baltic Sea, but comprehensive genetic information exists for only seven of them. Genetic monitoring shows genetic stability in some species but fluctuations and genetic changes in others. About half of the scientific studies published during the last 6 years provide conservation advice, indicating a high interest in the scientific community for relating results to practical management. 4. Populations in MPAs do not differ genetically from populations outside MPAs, indicating that MPAs in the Baltic Sea do not protect genetic diversity specifically, but that populations in MPAs are a representative subset of populations in the Baltic Sea. 5. Recommendations are provided for cases where genetic information is available but not used in management, particularly for non‐commercial species with important ecosystem function. 6. Improved channels for effective communication between academia and practical management on Baltic Sea genetic biodiversity are needed. A web page that can be used for knowledge transfer is highlighted here.publishedVersio

Monitoring genetic diversity with new indicators applied to an alpine freshwater top predator

Genetic diversity is the basis for population adaptation and long-term survival, yet rarely considered in biodiversity monitoring. One key issue is the need for useful and straightforward indicators of genetic diversity. We monitored genetic diversity over 40 years (1970–2010) in metapopulations of brown trout (Salmo trutta) inhabiting 27 small mountain lakes representing 10 lake systems in central Sweden using >1200 fish per time point. We tested six newly proposed indicators; three were designed for broad, international use in the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and are currently applied in several countries. The other three were recently elaborated for national use by a Swedish science- management effort and applied for the first time here. The Swedish indicators use molecular genetic data to monitor genetic diversity within and between populations (indicators ΔH and ΔFST, respectively) and assess the effective population size (Ne- indicator). We identified 29 genetically distinct popula-tions, all retained over time. Twelve of the 27 lakes harboured more than one popula-tion indicating that brown trout biodiversity hidden as cryptic, sympatric populations are more common than recognized. The Ne indicator showed values below the thresh-old (Ne ≤ 500) in 20 populations with five showing Ne< 100. Statistically significant ge-netic diversity reductions occurred in several populations. Metapopulation structure appears to buffer against diversity loss; applying the indicators to metapopulations suggest mostly acceptable rates of change in all but one system. The CBD indicators agreed with the Swedish ones but provided less detail. All these indicators are appro-priate for managers to initiate monitoring of genetic biodiversitypublishedVersio

Practical application of indicators for genetic diversity in CBD post-2020 global biodiversity framework implementation

Genetic diversity is a key aspect of biological variation for the adaptability and survival of populations of species and must be monitored to assure maintenance. We used data from the Swedish Red List 2020 and from published reviews to apply three indicators for genetic diversity proposed for the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). We studied a wide range of taxonomic groups, and made more detailed indicator assessments for mammals and herptiles.For indicator 1, the proportion of populations with effective population size Ne > 500, 33% of 22,557 investigated species had a population size estimate that could be used as a proxy for Ne. For herptiles and mammals, 70% and 49% of populations of species, respectively, likely had Ne > 500.Data for evaluation of indicator 2, the proportion of remaining populations or historical range, was available for 20% of all species evaluated for the Red List. Meanwhile, 32% of the herptile and 84% of the mammal populations are maintaining their populations and range.For indicator 3, the number of species or populations in which genetic diversity is monitored using DNA-based methods, there are genetic studies on 3% of all species, and 0.3% are beeing monitored genetically. In contrast, 68% of mammals and 29% of herptiles are studied using DNA, and 8% of mammals and 24% of herptiles are genetically monitored.We conclude that the Red List provides data that are suitable for evaluating the genetic indicators, but the data quality can be improved. We also show that the genetic indicators capture conservation issues of genetic erosion that the Red List misses. There is a synergy in estimating the genetic indicators in parallel with the Red Listing process. We propose that indicator values could be included in national Red Listing as a new category "genetically threatened", based on the genetic indicators

Complex genetic diversity patterns of cryptic, sympatric brown trout (Salmo trutta) populations in tiny mountain lakes

publishedVersio

Charting a course for genetic diversity in the UN Decade of Ocean Science

The health of the world's oceans is intrinsically linked to the biodiversity of the ecosystems they sustain. The importance of protecting and maintaining ocean biodiversity has been affirmed through the setting of the UN Sustainable Development Goal 14 to conserve and sustainably use the ocean for society's continuing needs. The decade beginning 2021-2030 has additionally been declared as the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development. This program aims to maximize the benefits of ocean science to the management, conservation, and sustainable development of the marine environment by facilitating communication and cooperation at the science-policy interface. A central principle of the program is the conservation of species and ecosystem components of biodiversity. However, a significant omission from the draft version of the Decade of Ocean Science Implementation Plan is the acknowledgment of the importance of monitoring and maintaining genetic biodiversity within species. In this paper, we emphasize the importance of genetic diversity to adaptive capacity, evolutionary potential, community function, and resilience within populations, as well as highlighting some of the major threats to genetic diversity in the marine environment from direct human impacts and the effects of global climate change. We then highlight the significance of ocean genetic diversity to a diverse range of socioeconomic factors in the marine environment, including marine industries, welfare and leisure pursuits, coastal communities, and wider society. Genetic biodiversity in the ocean, and its monitoring and maintenance, is then discussed with respect to its integral role in the successful realization of the 2030 vision for the Decade of Ocean Science. Finally, we suggest how ocean genetic diversity might be better integrated into biodiversity management practices through the continued interaction between environmental managers and scientists, as well as through key leverage points in industry requirements for Blue Capital financing and social responsibility.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

The coalition for conservation genetics: working across organizations to build capacity and achieve change in policy and practice

The Coalition for Conservation Genetics (CCG) brings together four eminentorganizations with the shared goal of improving the integration of geneticinformation into conservation policy and practice. We provide a historicalcontext of conservation genetics as a field and reflect on current barriers toconserving genetic diversity, highlighting the need for collaboration acrosstraditional divides, international partnerships, and coordinated advocacy. Wethen introduce the CCG and illustrate through examples how a coalitionapproach can leverage complementary expertise and improve the organiza-tional impact at multiple levels. The CCG has proven particularly successfulat implementing large synthesis-type projects, training early-career scientists,and advising policy makers. Achievements to date highlight the potential forthe CCG to make effective contributions to practical conservation policy andmanagement that no one“parent”organization could achieve on its own.Finally, we reflect on the lessons learned through forming the CCG, and ourvision for the futur

Bringing together approaches to reporting on within species genetic diversity

1. Genetic diversity is one of the three main levels of biodiversity recognised in the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Fundamental for species adaptation to environmental change, genetic diversity is nonetheless under-reported within global and national indicators. When it is reported, the focus is often narrow and confined to domesticated or other commercial species. 2. Several approaches have recently been developed to address this shortfall in reporting on genetic diversity of wild species. While multiplicity of approaches is helpful in any development process, it can also lead to confusion among policy makers and heighten a perception that conservation genetics is too abstract to be of use to organisations and governments. 3. As the developers of five of the different approaches, we have come together to explain how various approaches relate to each other and propose a scorecard, as a unifying reporting mechanism for genetic diversity. 4. Policy implications. We believe the proposed combined approach captures the strengths of its components and is practical for all nations and subnational governments. It is scalable and can be used to evaluate species conservation projects as well as genetic conservation projects.ISSN:0021-8901ISSN:1365-266