Cargando…

Conservation through the lens of (mal)adaptation: Concepts and meta‐analysis

Evolutionary approaches are gaining popularity in conservation science, with diverse strategies applied in efforts to support adaptive population outcomes. Yet conservation strategies differ in the type of adaptive outcomes they promote as conservation goals. For instance, strategies based on geneti...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Derry, Alison Margaret, Fraser, Dylan J., Brady, Steven P., Astorg, Louis, Lawrence, Elizabeth R., Martin, Gillian K., Matte, Jean‐Michel, Negrín Dastis, Jorge Octavio, Paccard, Antoine, Barrett, Rowan D. H., Chapman, Lauren J., Lane, Jeffrey E., Ballas, Chase G., Close, Marissa, Crispo, Erika
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6691223/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31417615
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/eva.12791
_version_ 1783443322687193088
author Derry, Alison Margaret
Fraser, Dylan J.
Brady, Steven P.
Astorg, Louis
Lawrence, Elizabeth R.
Martin, Gillian K.
Matte, Jean‐Michel
Negrín Dastis, Jorge Octavio
Paccard, Antoine
Barrett, Rowan D. H.
Chapman, Lauren J.
Lane, Jeffrey E.
Ballas, Chase G.
Close, Marissa
Crispo, Erika
author_facet Derry, Alison Margaret
Fraser, Dylan J.
Brady, Steven P.
Astorg, Louis
Lawrence, Elizabeth R.
Martin, Gillian K.
Matte, Jean‐Michel
Negrín Dastis, Jorge Octavio
Paccard, Antoine
Barrett, Rowan D. H.
Chapman, Lauren J.
Lane, Jeffrey E.
Ballas, Chase G.
Close, Marissa
Crispo, Erika
author_sort Derry, Alison Margaret
collection PubMed
description Evolutionary approaches are gaining popularity in conservation science, with diverse strategies applied in efforts to support adaptive population outcomes. Yet conservation strategies differ in the type of adaptive outcomes they promote as conservation goals. For instance, strategies based on genetic or demographic rescue implicitly target adaptive population states whereas strategies utilizing transgenerational plasticity or evolutionary rescue implicitly target adaptive processes. These two goals are somewhat polar: adaptive state strategies optimize current population fitness, which should reduce phenotypic and/or genetic variance, reducing adaptability in changing or uncertain environments; adaptive process strategies increase genetic variance, causing maladaptation in the short term, but increase adaptability over the long term. Maladaptation refers to suboptimal population fitness, adaptation refers to optimal population fitness, and (mal)adaptation refers to the continuum of fitness variation from maladaptation to adaptation. Here, we present a conceptual classification for conservation that implicitly considers (mal)adaptation in the short‐term and long‐term outcomes of conservation strategies. We describe cases of how (mal)adaptation is implicated in traditional conservation strategies, as well as strategies that have potential as a conservation tool but are relatively underutilized. We use a meta‐analysis of a small number of available studies to evaluate whether the different conservation strategies employed are better suited toward increasing population fitness across multiple generations. We found weakly increasing adaptation over time for transgenerational plasticity, genetic rescue, and evolutionary rescue. Demographic rescue was generally maladaptive, both immediately after conservation intervention and after several generations. Interspecific hybridization was adaptive only in the F(1) generation, but then rapidly leads to maladaptation. Management decisions that are made to support the process of adaptation must adequately account for (mal)adaptation as a potential outcome and even as a tool to bolster adaptive capacity to changing conditions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6691223
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66912232019-08-15 Conservation through the lens of (mal)adaptation: Concepts and meta‐analysis Derry, Alison Margaret Fraser, Dylan J. Brady, Steven P. Astorg, Louis Lawrence, Elizabeth R. Martin, Gillian K. Matte, Jean‐Michel Negrín Dastis, Jorge Octavio Paccard, Antoine Barrett, Rowan D. H. Chapman, Lauren J. Lane, Jeffrey E. Ballas, Chase G. Close, Marissa Crispo, Erika Evol Appl Special Issue Perspective Evolutionary approaches are gaining popularity in conservation science, with diverse strategies applied in efforts to support adaptive population outcomes. Yet conservation strategies differ in the type of adaptive outcomes they promote as conservation goals. For instance, strategies based on genetic or demographic rescue implicitly target adaptive population states whereas strategies utilizing transgenerational plasticity or evolutionary rescue implicitly target adaptive processes. These two goals are somewhat polar: adaptive state strategies optimize current population fitness, which should reduce phenotypic and/or genetic variance, reducing adaptability in changing or uncertain environments; adaptive process strategies increase genetic variance, causing maladaptation in the short term, but increase adaptability over the long term. Maladaptation refers to suboptimal population fitness, adaptation refers to optimal population fitness, and (mal)adaptation refers to the continuum of fitness variation from maladaptation to adaptation. Here, we present a conceptual classification for conservation that implicitly considers (mal)adaptation in the short‐term and long‐term outcomes of conservation strategies. We describe cases of how (mal)adaptation is implicated in traditional conservation strategies, as well as strategies that have potential as a conservation tool but are relatively underutilized. We use a meta‐analysis of a small number of available studies to evaluate whether the different conservation strategies employed are better suited toward increasing population fitness across multiple generations. We found weakly increasing adaptation over time for transgenerational plasticity, genetic rescue, and evolutionary rescue. Demographic rescue was generally maladaptive, both immediately after conservation intervention and after several generations. Interspecific hybridization was adaptive only in the F(1) generation, but then rapidly leads to maladaptation. Management decisions that are made to support the process of adaptation must adequately account for (mal)adaptation as a potential outcome and even as a tool to bolster adaptive capacity to changing conditions. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-04-06 /pmc/articles/PMC6691223/ /pubmed/31417615 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/eva.12791 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Evolutionary Applications published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Special Issue Perspective
Derry, Alison Margaret
Fraser, Dylan J.
Brady, Steven P.
Astorg, Louis
Lawrence, Elizabeth R.
Martin, Gillian K.
Matte, Jean‐Michel
Negrín Dastis, Jorge Octavio
Paccard, Antoine
Barrett, Rowan D. H.
Chapman, Lauren J.
Lane, Jeffrey E.
Ballas, Chase G.
Close, Marissa
Crispo, Erika
Conservation through the lens of (mal)adaptation: Concepts and meta‐analysis
title Conservation through the lens of (mal)adaptation: Concepts and meta‐analysis
title_full Conservation through the lens of (mal)adaptation: Concepts and meta‐analysis
title_fullStr Conservation through the lens of (mal)adaptation: Concepts and meta‐analysis
title_full_unstemmed Conservation through the lens of (mal)adaptation: Concepts and meta‐analysis
title_short Conservation through the lens of (mal)adaptation: Concepts and meta‐analysis
title_sort conservation through the lens of (mal)adaptation: concepts and meta‐analysis
topic Special Issue Perspective
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6691223/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31417615
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/eva.12791
work_keys_str_mv AT derryalisonmargaret conservationthroughthelensofmaladaptationconceptsandmetaanalysis
AT fraserdylanj conservationthroughthelensofmaladaptationconceptsandmetaanalysis
AT bradystevenp conservationthroughthelensofmaladaptationconceptsandmetaanalysis
AT astorglouis conservationthroughthelensofmaladaptationconceptsandmetaanalysis
AT lawrenceelizabethr conservationthroughthelensofmaladaptationconceptsandmetaanalysis
AT martingilliank conservationthroughthelensofmaladaptationconceptsandmetaanalysis
AT mattejeanmichel conservationthroughthelensofmaladaptationconceptsandmetaanalysis
AT negrindastisjorgeoctavio conservationthroughthelensofmaladaptationconceptsandmetaanalysis
AT paccardantoine conservationthroughthelensofmaladaptationconceptsandmetaanalysis
AT barrettrowandh conservationthroughthelensofmaladaptationconceptsandmetaanalysis
AT chapmanlaurenj conservationthroughthelensofmaladaptationconceptsandmetaanalysis
AT lanejeffreye conservationthroughthelensofmaladaptationconceptsandmetaanalysis
AT ballaschaseg conservationthroughthelensofmaladaptationconceptsandmetaanalysis
AT closemarissa conservationthroughthelensofmaladaptationconceptsandmetaanalysis
AT crispoerika conservationthroughthelensofmaladaptationconceptsandmetaanalysis