Jove
Visualize
Contact Us

Related Experiment Videos

Considering evolutionary processes in conservation biology.

Crandall, Bininda-Emonds, Mace

    Trends in Ecology & Evolution
    |June 17, 2000
    PubMed
    Summary

    Conservation biologists should use ecological and genetic data to classify evolutionarily significant units (ESUs). A broader categorization of population distinctiveness is needed for effective conservation management.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Intraspecific gene genealogies: trees grafting into networks.

    Trends in ecology & evolution·2001
    Same author

    Cataract surgical problem: response #8

    Journal of cataract and refractive surgery·2001
    Same author

    The calculus of biodiversity: integrating phylogeny and conservation.

    Trends in ecology & evolution·2000
    Same author

    Evolutionary ecology of human life history.

    Animal behaviour·2000
    Same author

    Mitochondrial DNA phylogeography and population history of the grey wolf canis lupus

    Molecular ecology·2000
    Same author

    Conserving biological resources.

    Trends in ecology & evolution·1999
    JoVE
    x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
    ABOUT JoVE
    OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
    AUTHORS
    Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
    LIBRARIANS
    TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
    RESEARCH
    JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
    EDUCATION
    JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
    Terms & Conditions of Use
    Privacy Policy
    Policies

    Area of Science:

    • Conservation Biology
    • Population Genetics
    • Evolutionary Biology

    Background:

    • Evolutionarily Significant Units (ESUs) are key to conservation biology for classifying population distinctiveness.
    • Historically, ESU classification integrated ecological and genetic data.
    • Recent criteria increasingly rely solely on molecular phylogenies of neutral genetic variation.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To argue for the relevance of earlier ESU definitions incorporating ecological and adaptive genetic data.
    • To critique the adequacy of dichotomous ESU classifications for management decisions.
    • To advocate for a broader framework of population distinctiveness based on ecological and genetic exchangeability.

    Main Methods:

    • Review of historical and contemporary ESU concepts in conservation biology.
    • Analysis of the utility of ecological versus neutral genetic data in ESU definition.
    • Conceptual framework development for population distinctiveness based on exchangeability.

    Main Results:

    • Earlier ESU definitions integrating ecological and adaptive genetic data are more relevant for conservation.
    • Current ESU criteria based exclusively on neutral genetic variation may be insufficient.
    • A dichotomous ESU classification oversimplifies population differentiation.

    Conclusions:

    • Conservation efforts benefit from ESU definitions that include ecological factors and adaptive genetic variation.
    • A continuum of population differentiation requires nuanced management strategies beyond simple ESU designation.
    • Ecological and genetic exchangeability offer a more comprehensive approach to assessing population distinctiveness for conservation.

    Related Experiment Videos