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

Marine turtle regional management units 2.0: an updated framework for conservation and research of wide-ranging megafauna species

Delineating spatial boundaries that accurately encompass complex, often cryptic, life histories of highly migratory marine megafauna can be a significant conservation challenge. For example, marine turtles range across vast ocean basins and coastal areas, thus complicating the evaluation of relative impacts of multiple overlapping threats and the creation of coherent conservation strategies. To address these challenges, spatially explicit ‘regional management units’ (RMUs) were developed in 2010 for all marine turtle species, globally. RMUs were intended to provide a consistent framework that organizes conspecific assemblages into units above the level of nesting rookeries and genetic stocks, but below the species level, within regional entities that may share demographic trajectories because they experience similar environmental conditions and other factors. From their initial conception, RMUs were intended to be periodically revised using new information about marine turtle distributions, life history, habitat use patterns, and population structure. Here, we describe the process used to update the 2010 RMU framework by incorporating newly published information and inputs from global marine turtle experts who are members of the IUCN Marine Turtle Specialist Group. A total of 48 RMUs for 6 of 7 marine turtle species and 166 distinct genetic stocks for all 7 species are presented herein. The updated RMU framework reflects a significant advance in knowledge of marine turtle biology and biogeography, and it provides improved clarity about the RMU concept and its potential applications. All RMU products have been made open access to support research and conservation initiatives worldwide