Literature DB >> 25567798

How well can captive breeding programs conserve biodiversity? A review of salmonids.

Dylan J Fraser1.   

Abstract

Captive breeding programs are increasingly being initiated to prevent the imminent extinction of endangered species and/or populations. But how well can they conserve genetic diversity and fitness, or re-establish self-sustaining populations in the wild? A review of these complex questions and related issues in salmonid fishes reveals several insights and uncertainties. Most programs can maintain genetic diversity within populations over several generations, but available research suggests the loss of fitness in captivity can be rapid, its magnitude probably increasing with the duration in captivity. Over the long-term, there is likely tremendous variation between (i) programs in their capacity to maintain genetic diversity and fitness, and (ii) species or even intraspecific life-history types in both the severity and manner of fitness-costs accrued. Encouragingly, many new theoretical and methodological approaches now exist for current and future programs to potentially reduce these effects. Nevertheless, an unavoidable trade-off exists between conserving genetic diversity and fitness in certain instances, such as when captive-bred individuals are temporarily released into the wild. Owing to several confounding factors, there is also currently little evidence that captive-bred lines of salmonids can or cannot be reintroduced as self-sustaining populations. Most notably, the root causes of salmonid declines have not been mitigated where captive breeding programs exist. Little research has also addressed under what conditions an increase in population abundance due to captive-rearing might offset fitness reductions induced in captivity. Finally, more empirical investigation is needed to evaluate the genetic/fitness benefits and risks associated with (i) maintaining captive broodstocks as either single or multiple populations within one or more facilities, (ii) utilizing cryopreservation or surrogate broodstock technologies, and (iii) adopting other alternatives to captive-rearing such as translocations to new habitats. Management recommendations surrounding these issues are proposed, with the aim of facilitating meta-analyses and more general principles or guidelines for captive-breeding. These include the need for the following: (i) captive monitoring to involve, a priori, greater application of hypothesis testing through the use of well-designed experiments and (ii) improved documentation of procedures adopted by specific programs for reducing the loss of genetic diversity and fitness.

Entities:  

Keywords:  captive breeding; conservation; domestication selection; genetic diversity; reintroduction; salmon

Year:  2008        PMID: 25567798      PMCID: PMC3352391          DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-4571.2008.00036.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Evol Appl        ISSN: 1752-4571            Impact factor:   5.183


  76 in total

1.  Considering evolutionary processes in conservation biology.

Authors: 
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 17.712

2.  Selection against late emergence and small offspring in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar).

Authors:  S Einum; I A Fleming
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 3.694

3.  Fixed contributions designs vs. minimization of global coancestry to control inbreeding in small populations.

Authors:  J Fernández; M A Toro; A Caballero
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 4.562

4.  Effective size of fluctuating salmon populations.

Authors:  Robin S Waples
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 4.562

5.  Ecosystem recovery after climatic extremes enhanced by genotypic diversity.

Authors:  Thorsten B H Reusch; Anneli Ehlers; August Hämmerli; Boris Worm
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2005-02-14       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Maternal genetic effects on adaptive divergence between anadromous and resident brook charr during early life history.

Authors:  G M L Perry; C Audet; L Bernatchez
Journal:  J Evol Biol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 2.411

Review 7.  Paradox lost: genetic diversity and the success of aquatic invasions.

Authors:  Joe Roman; John A Darling
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2007-07-27       Impact factor: 17.712

8.  Genetic effects of captive breeding cause a rapid, cumulative fitness decline in the wild.

Authors:  Hitoshi Araki; Becky Cooper; Michael S Blouin
Journal:  Science       Date:  2007-10-05       Impact factor: 47.728

9.  The impact of supplementation in winter-run chinook salmon on effective population size.

Authors:  P W Hedrick; D Hedgecock; S Hamelberg; S J Croci
Journal:  J Hered       Date:  2000 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.645

10.  Ex situ population management in the absence of pedigree information.

Authors:  M A Russello; G Amato
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 6.185

View more
  62 in total

1.  Potential effects of dams on migratory fish in the Mekong River: lessons from salmon in the Fraser and Columbia Rivers.

Authors:  John W Ferguson; Michael Healey; Patrick Dugan; Chris Barlow
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 3.266

2.  Genetic adaptation to captivity can occur in a single generation.

Authors:  Mark R Christie; Melanie L Marine; Rod A French; Michael S Blouin
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-12-19       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Carry-over effect of captive breeding reduces reproductive fitness of wild-born descendants in the wild.

Authors:  Hitoshi Araki; Becky Cooper; Michael S Blouin
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2009-06-10       Impact factor: 3.703

4.  Multigenerational outbreeding effects in Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha).

Authors:  Sarah J Lehnert; Oliver P Love; Trevor E Pitcher; Dennis M Higgs; Daniel D Heath
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  2014-06-22       Impact factor: 1.082

Review 5.  Extent and scale of local adaptation in salmonid fishes: review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  D J Fraser; L K Weir; L Bernatchez; M M Hansen; E B Taylor
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2011-01-12       Impact factor: 3.821

6.  Genetic analysis of captive spawning strategies for the endangered Rio Grande Silvery Minnow.

Authors:  Megan J Osborne; Terina L Perez; Chris S Altenbach; Thomas F Turner
Journal:  J Hered       Date:  2013-03-21       Impact factor: 2.645

7.  Evaluating the Ryman-Laikre effect for marine stock enhancement and aquaculture.

Authors:  Robin S Waples; Kjetil Hindar; Sten Karlsson; Jeffrey J Hard
Journal:  Curr Zool       Date:  2016-05-10       Impact factor: 2.624

8.  Parallel epigenetic modifications induced by hatchery rearing in a Pacific salmon.

Authors:  Jérémy Le Luyer; Martin Laporte; Terry D Beacham; Karia H Kaukinen; Ruth E Withler; Jong S Leong; Eric B Rondeau; Ben F Koop; Louis Bernatchez
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-11-21       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  Rearing environment affects the genetic architecture and plasticity of DNA methylation in Chinook salmon.

Authors:  Clare J Venney; Kyle W Wellband; Daniel D Heath
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2020-07-22       Impact factor: 3.821

10.  Cryobanking of aquatic species.

Authors:  Sonia Martínez-Páramo; Ákos Horváth; Catherine Labbé; Tiantian Zhang; Vanesa Robles; Paz Herráez; Marc Suquet; Serean Adams; Ana Viveiros; Terrence R Tiersch; Elsa Cabrita
Journal:  Aquaculture       Date:  2016-06-01       Impact factor: 4.242

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.