Genomics and conservation: Guidance from training to analyses and applications · SciRah

article Open access

Genomics and conservation: Guidance from training to analyses and applications

Lauren M. Schiebelhut^{a b}✉, Annie S. Guillaume^c, Arianna Kuhn^{d e f g}, Rena M. Schweizer^{h i}, Ellie E. Armstrong^{j k}, Mark Beaumont^{l m}, Margaret Mary Byrne^{n o}, Ted Cosart^{p q}, Brian K. Hand^{r s}, Leif Howard^{p q}, Steven M. Mussmann^{t u v},

Molecular Ecology Resources Wiley2023-11-15 19 citations214 references

Looking for the full paper…

Export

Papers open inside SciRah from the original publisher or repository; SciRah never hosts them.

Abstract

Environmental change is intensifying the biodiversity crisis and threatening species across the tree of life. Conservation genomics can help inform conservation actions and slow biodiversity loss. However, more training, appropriate use of novel genomic methods and communication with managers are needed. Here, we review practical guidance to improve applied conservation genomics. We share insights aimed at ensuring effectiveness of conservation actions around three themes: (1) improving pedagogy and training in conservation genomics including for online global audiences, (2) conducting rigorous population genomic analyses properly considering theory, marker types and data interpretation and (3) facilitating communication and collaboration between managers and researchers. We aim to update students and professionals and expand their conservation toolkit with genomic principles and recent approaches for conserving and managing biodiversity. The biodiversity crisis is a global problem and, as such, requires international involvement, training, collaboration and frequent reviews of the literature and workshops as we do here.

TL;DRPractical guidance to improve applied conservation genomics is reviewed and insights aimed at ensuring effectiveness of conservation actions are shared around three themes: improving pedagogy and training in Conservation genomics, conducting rigorous population genomic analyses properly considering theory, marker types and data interpretation and facilitating communication and collaboration between managers and researchers. (Semantic Scholar)

Plain-language summary

AI illustration of the topic of “Genomics and conservation: Guidance from training to analyses and applications”

Discussion

^aLife and Environmental Sciences University of California Merced California USA
^bLife and Environmental Sciences, University of California, Merced, California, USA
^cGeospatial Molecular Epidemiology group (GEOME), Laboratory for Biological Geochemistry (LGB) École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne Lausanne Switzerland
^dDepartment of Biological Sciences University of Lethbridge Lethbridge Alberta Canada
^eVirginia Museum of Natural History Martinsville Virginia USA
^fDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada
^gVirginia Museum of Natural History, Martinsville, Virginia, USA
^hDivision of Biological Sciences University of Montana Missoula Montana USA
ⁱDivision of Biological Sciences, University of Montana, Missoula, Montana, USA
^jWashington State University Pullman Washington USA
^kWashington State University, Pullman, Washington, USA
^lSchool of Biological Sciences University of Bristol Bristol UK
^mSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
ⁿDepartment of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions Biodiversity and Conservation Science Perth Western Australia Australia
^oDepartment of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, Biodiversity and Conservation Science, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
^pFlathead Lake Biology Station University of Montana Missoula Montana USA
^qFlathead Lake Biology Station, University of Montana, Missoula, Montana, USA
^rFlathead Lake Biological Station University of Montana Polson Montana USA
^sFlathead Lake Biological Station, University of Montana, Polson, Montana, USA
^tSouthwestern Native Aquatic Resources and Recovery Center U.S. Fish &amp
^uWildlife Service Dexter New Mexico USA
^vSouthwestern Native Aquatic Resources and Recovery Center, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Dexter, New Mexico, USA
^wHagerman Genetics Lab University of Idaho Hagerman Idaho USA
^xHagerman Genetics Lab, University of Idaho, Hagerman, Idaho, USA
^yMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit University of Bristol Bristol UK
^zMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
^aaDepartment of Evolution, Ecology, and Behavior University of Illinois at Urbana‐Champaign Champaign Illinois USA
^abDepartment of Evolution, Ecology, and Behavior, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, Illinois, USA
^acDepartment of Biology and Ecology Center Utah State University Logan Utah USA
^adDepartment of Biology and Ecology Center, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, USA
^aeDepartment of Biology San Diego State University San Diego California USA
^afDepartment of Biology, San Diego State University, San Diego, California, USA
^agRoyal Zoological Society of Scotland Edinburgh Scotland
^ahRoyal Zoological Society of Scotland, Edinburgh, Scotland
^aiInformatics Group Harvard University Cambridge Massachusetts USA
^ajInformatics Group, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
^akPlant and Food Research Nelson New Zealand
^alUniversity of Auckland Auckland New Zealand
^amPlant and Food Research, Nelson, New Zealand
^anUniversity of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
✉Corresponding author