4.8 Article

The inflated significance of neutral genetic diversity in conservation genetics

Publisher

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2015096118

Keywords

conservation genetics; adaptive potential; inbreeding depression; genetic load; species extinction

Funding

  1. Australian Research Council [IN180100017, DP190103606]
  2. Australian Research Council Discovery Early Career Researcher Award Fellowship [DE180100883]
  3. Australian Research Council [DE180100883, IN180100017] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Conservation genetics aims to evaluate population health and extinction risk based on genetic diversity levels, but neutral genetic diversity is not the only factor affecting species extinction risk. A deeper understanding of functional genetic diversity, demographic history, and ecological relationships is necessary for developing effective conservation genetic strategies.
The current rate of species extinction is rapidly approaching unprecedented highs, and life on Earth presently faces a sixth mass extinction event driven by anthropogenic activity, climate change, and ecological collapse. The field of conservation genetics aims at preserving species by using their levels of genetic diversity, usually measured as neutral genome-wide diversity, as a barometer for evaluating population health and extinction risk. A fundamental assumption is that higher levels of genetic diversity lead to an increase in fitness and long-term survival of a species. Here, we argue against the perceived importance of neutral genetic diversity for the conservation of wild populations and species. We demonstrate that no simple general relationship exists between neutral genetic diversity and the risk of species extinction. Instead, a better understanding of the properties of functional genetic diversity, demographic history, and ecological relationships is necessary for developing and implementing effective conservation genetic strategies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available