Biodiversity & Conservation

, Volume 14, Issue 2, pp 493–504 | Cite as

Consequences of harvesting for genetic diversity in American ginseng (Panax quinquefolius L.): a simulation study

  • Jennifer M. Cruse-Sanders
  • J.L. Hamrick
  • Jorge A. Ahumada


American ginseng, Panax quinquefolius L., is one of the most heavily traded medicinal plants in North America. The effect of harvest on genetic diversity in ginseng was measured with a single generation culling simulation program. Culling scenarios included random harvest at varying levels, legal limit random harvest and legal limit mature plant harvest. The legal limit was determined by the proportion of legally harvestable plants per population (% mature plants per population). Random harvest at varying levels resulted in significant loss of genetic diversity, especially allelic richness. Relative to initial levels, average within-population genetic diversity (H e) was significantly lower when plants were culled randomly at the legal limit (Mann–Whitney U = 430, p < 0.001) or when only mature plants were culled (Mann–Whitney U = 394, p < 0.01). Within-population genetic diversity was significantly higher with legal limit mature plant harvest (H e = 0.068) than when plants were culled randomly at the legal limit (H e = 0.064; U = 202, p < 0.01). Based on these simulations of harvest over one generation, we recommend that harvesting fewer than the proportion of mature plants could reduce the negative genetic effects of harvest on ginseng populations.

Allozymes Araliaceae Conservation Genetic diversity Ginseng Harvest Management Medicinal plant Non-timber forest products Panax Population genetic structure Simulation Sustainable use 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Anderson R.C., Fralish J.S., Armstrong J.E. and Benjamin P.K. 1993. The ecology and biology of Panax quinquefolium L. (Araliaceae) in Illinois. American Midland Naturalist 129: 357–372.Google Scholar
  2. Allendorf F.W. 1986. Genetic drift and the loss of alleles versus heterozygosity. Zoo Biology 5: 181–190.Google Scholar
  3. Allison G.W., Lubchenco J. and Carr M.H. 1998. Marine Reserves are necessary but not sufficient for marine conservation. Ecological Applications 8(1): 579–592 (Suppl. S).Google Scholar
  4. Briggs D. and Walters S.M. 1997. Plant Variation and Evolution. 3rd edn. Cambridge University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  5. Charron D. and Gagnon D. 1991. The demography of northern populations of Panax quinquefolium (American ginseng). Journal of Ecology 79: 431–445.Google Scholar
  6. Cruse-Sanders J.M. and Hamrick J.L. 2004. Genetic diversity in harvested and protected populations of wild American ginseng, Panax quinquefolius L. (Araliaceae). American Journal of Botany 91: 540–548.Google Scholar
  7. Gagnon D. 1999. An analysis of the sustainability of American ginseng harvesting from the wild: the problem and possible solutions. Report to the Office of Scientific Authority of the US Fish and Wildlife Service.Google Scholar
  8. Gilpen M.E. and Soulé M.E. 1986. Minimum viable populations: processes of species extinction. In: Soulé M.E. (ed.) Conservation Biology: The Science of Scarcity and Diversity. Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts, pp. 19–34.Google Scholar
  9. Heywood V.H. 1993. Flowering Plants of the World. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  10. Lewis W.H. 1988. Regrowth of a decimated population of Panax quinquefolium in a Missouri climax forest. Rhodora 90: 1–5.Google Scholar
  11. Lewis W.H. and Zenger V.E. 1982. Population dynamics of the American ginseng Panax quinquefolium (Arailiaceae). American Journal of Botany 69: 1483–1490.Google Scholar
  12. Ludwig D. and Walters C.J. 1985. Are age structured models appropriate for catch-effort data? Canadian Journal of Fishery and Aquatic Science 42: 1066–1072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Luikart G. and Cornuet J.M. 1998. Empirical evaluation of a test for identifying recently bottlenecked populations from allele frequency data. Conservation Biology 12: 228–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mangel M. 1998. Evolutionary games and population dynamics. Nature 395: 32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Milner-Gulland E.J., Shea K., Possingham H., Coulson T. and Wilcox C. 2001. Competing harvesting strategies in a simulated population under uncertainty. Animal Conservation 4: 157–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Menges E.S. 1991. The application of minimum viable population theory to plants. In: Faulk D.A. and Holsinger K.E. (eds) Genetics and Conservation of Rare Plants. Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 45–61.Google Scholar
  17. Nei M., Maruyama T. and Chakraborty R. 1975. The bottleneck effect and genetic variability in populations. Evolution 29: 1–10.Google Scholar
  18. Nantel P., Gagnon D. and Nault A. 1996. Population viability analysis of American ginseng and wild leek harvested in stochastic environments. Conservation Biology 10: 608–621.Google Scholar
  19. Primack R.B. 1993. Essentials of Conservation Biology. Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  20. Robbins C.S. 1998. American Ginseng: The Root of North America’s Medicinal Herb Trade. TRAFFIC North America Report #B347.Google Scholar
  21. Robbins C.S. 2000. Comparative analysis of management regimes and medicinal plant trade monitoring mechanisms for American ginseng and goldenseal. Conservation Biology 14: 1422–1434.Google Scholar
  22. Roberts C.M. 1997. Ecological advice for the global fisheries crisis. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 12: 35–38.Google Scholar
  23. Rock J., Hornbeck H., Teitjen J. and Choberka E. 1999. Habitat modeling and protection of American ginseng (Panax quinquefolius L.) in Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Report for the U.S. National Park Service, Gatlinburg, Tennessee.Google Scholar
  24. SAS Institute, Inc. 2000. SAS/STAT User’s Guide, Version 8. Vol. 1–3. SAS, Cary, North Carolina.Google Scholar
  25. Schoen D.J. and Brown A.H.D. 1991. Intraspecific variation in population gene diversity and effective population size correlates with the mating system in plants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 88: 4494–4497.Google Scholar
  26. Shaffer M.L. 1981. Minimum population sizes for species conservation. Bioscience 31: 131–134.Google Scholar
  27. Sheldon J.W., Balick M.J. and Laird S. 1997. Medicinal Plants: Can Utilization and Conservation Coexist? New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, New York.Google Scholar
  28. Vance N.C. 2002. Ecological considerations in sustainable use of wild plants. In: Jones E.T., McLain R.J. and Weigand J. (eds) Nontimber Forest Products in the United States. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, pp. 151–162.Google Scholar
  29. Weir B.S. and Cockerham C.C. 1984. Estimating F-statistics for the analysis of population structure. Evolution 38: 1358–1370.Google Scholar
  30. Wen J. and Zimmer E.A. 1996. Phylogeny and biogeography of Panax L. (the ginseng genus, Arailiaceae): inferences from ITS sequences of nuclear ribosomal DNA. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 6: 167–177.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Wendel J.F. and Parks C.R. 1982. Genetic control of isozyme variation in Camellia japonica L. Journal of Heredity 73: 197–204.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jennifer M. Cruse-Sanders
    • 1
    • 3
    • 1
  • J.L. Hamrick
    • 1
  • Jorge A. Ahumada
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Plant Biology, 2502 Plant Sciences BuildingUniversity of GeorgiaAthensUSA
  2. 2.USGS/National Wildlife Health CenterMadisonUSA
  3. 3.Rancho Santa Ana Botanical GardenClaremontUSA

Personalised recommendations