Conservation Biology pp 345-363 | Cite as
When do Genetic Considerations Require Special Approaches to Ecological Restoration?
Abstract
Conservation biology cannot be concerned solely with preserving what remains. With many habitat types reduced to as little as 1% (e.g., tallgrass prairie east of the Mississippi River, USA) or even 0.1% (e.g., Central Valley riparian forest, California, USA) of their original area (see references in Noss et al. 1995), protecting what is left often represents “too little, too late.” Even habitat types that remain relatively common often occur in isolated patches that are too small for long-term conservation of viable populations of all organisms, particularly those of large carnivores and ungulates (Schonewald-Cox 1983). For these reasons, effective preservation of biodiversity may require investment in ecological restoration to increase the size as well as the connectivity of available habitat (Jordan et al. 1988). Restoration will be especially vital for restoring native diversity to many of the world’s most fertile and productive communities, where habitat destruction resulting from human activities has been concentrated (Janzen 1988).
Keywords
Ecological Restoration Habitat Degradation Vernal Pool Restoration Site Outbreeding DepressionPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Literature Cited
- Antonovics, J. and A.D. Bradshaw. 1970. Evolution in closely adjacent plant populations VIII. Clinal patterns at a mine boundary. Heredity 25:349–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Barrett, J. A. 1981. The evolutionary consequences of monoculture. In Genetic consequences of man-made change, eds. J.A. Bishop and L.M. Cook, 209–248. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Barrett, S.C.H. and J.R. Kohn. 1991. Genetic and evolutionary consequences of small population size in plants: implications for conservation. In Genetics and conservation of rare plants, eds. D.A. Falk and K.E. Holsinger, 3–30. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Bartley, D.M. and G.A. Gall. 1990. Genetic structure and gene flow in chinook salmon populations of California. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 119:55–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Bradshaw, A.D. 1959. Population differentiation in Agrostis tenuis Sibth. I. Morphological differentiation. New Phytologist 58:208–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Bradshaw, A.D. 1983. The reconstruction of ecosystems. Journal of Applied Ecology 20:1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Bradshaw, A.D. 1984. Ecological significance of genetic variation between populations. In Perspectives on plant population biology, eds. R. Dirzo and J. Sarukhan, 213–228. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
- Clary, W.P. 1975. Ecotypic adaptation in Sitanion hystrix. Ecology 56:1407–1415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Clausen, J., D.D. Keck, and W.M. Heisey. 1940. Experimental studies on the nature of species. I. Effect of varied environments on western North American plants. Carnegie Institute of Washington Publication 520.Google Scholar
- Ellstrand, N.C., B. Devlin, and D.L. Marshall. 1989. Gene flow by pollen into small populations: Data from experimental and natural stands of wild radish. Proceedings of the National Acadamy of Sciences 86:9044–9047.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ennos, R.A. 1983. Maintenance of genetic variation in plant populations. Evolutionary Biology 16:129–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Fenster, C.B. and M.R. Dudash. 1994. Genetic considerations for plant population restoration and conservation, in Restoration of endangered species, eds. M.L. Bowles and C.J. Whelan, 34–62. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Futuyma, D. J. 1983. Interspecific interactions and the maintenance of genetic diversity, in Genetics and conservation, eds. C.M. Schonewald-Cox, S.M. Chambers, B. MacBryde, and W.L. Thomas, 364–373. Menlo Park: Benjamin/Cummings.Google Scholar
- Gill, D.S. and P. L. Marks. 1991. Tree and shrub seedling colonization of old fields in central New York. Ecological Monographs 61:183–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Guerrant, E.O., Jr. 1992. Genetic and demographic considerations in the sampling and reintroduction of rare plants. In Conservation biology: The theory and practice of nature conservation, preservation, and management, eds. P.L. Fiedler, and S.K. Jain, 321–344. New York: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
- Handel, S.N., G.R. Robinson, and A.J. Beattie. 1994. Biodiversity resources for restoration ecology. Restoration Ecology 2:230–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Harlan, H.V. and M.L. Martini. 1938. The effect of natural selection in a mixture of barley varieties. Journal of Agricultural Research 57:189–199.Google Scholar
- Hedrick, P.W. 1995. Gene flow and genetic restoration: The Florida panther as a case study. Conservation Biology 9:996–1007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hoskinson, P.E. and CO. Qualset. 1967. Geographic variation in ‘Balbo’ rye. Tennessee Farm and Home Science Progress Report 62:8–9.Google Scholar
- Huenneke, L.F. 1991. Ecological implications of genetic variation in plant populations. In Genetics and conservation of rare plants, eds. D.A. Falk and K.E. Holsinger, 31–44. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Janzen, D.H. 1988. Tropical ecological and biocultural restoration. Science 239:243–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Jordan, W.R., R.L. Peters, and E.B. Allen. 1988. Ecological restoration as a strategy for conserving biological diversity. Environmental Management 12:55–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kilcher, M.R. and L. Looman. 1983. ComChapautive performance of some native and introduced grasses in southern Saskatchewan, Canada. Journal of Range Management 36:654–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Knapp, E.E. and K.J. Rice. 1994. Starting from seed: Genetic issues in using native grasses for restoration. Restoration and Management Notes 12:40–45.Google Scholar
- Knapp, E.E. and K.J. Rice. 1996. Genetic structure and gene flow in Elymus glaucus (blue wildrye): Implications for native grassland restoration. Restoration Ecology 4:1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Leberg, P.L. 1993. Strategies for population reintroduction: Effects of genetic variability on population growth and size. Conservation Biology 7:194–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ledig, F.T. 1992. Human impacts on genetic diversity in forest ecosystems. Oikos 63:87–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Leong, J.M. 1994. Pollination of a patchily-distributed plant, Blennosperma nanum, in natural and artificially created vernal pool habitats. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Davis.Google Scholar
- Linhart, Y.B. 1974. Intra-population differentiation in annual plants. I. Veronica peregrina raised under non-competitive conditions. Evolution 28:232–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Linhart, Y.B. 1995. Restoration, revegetation, and the importance of genetic and evolutionary perspectives. In Proceedings: Wildland shrub and arid land restoration symposium, Oct. 19–21, 1993. Las Vegas, NV, eds. B.A. Roundy, E.D. McArthur, J.S. Haley, and D.K. Mann, 271–288. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station General Technical Report 315.Google Scholar
- Loveless, M.D. and J.L. Hamrick. 1984. Ecological determinants of genetic structure in plant populations. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 15:65–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Maehr, D.S. and G.B. Caddick. 1995. Demographics and genetic introgression in the Florida panther. Conservation Biology 9:1295–1298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Martins, P.S. and S.K. Jain. 1979. Role of genetic variation in the colonizing ability of rose clover (Trifolium hirtum). American Naturalist 114:591–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- McGranahan, G.H., J. Hansen, and D.V. Shaw. 1988. Inter- and intraspecific variation in California black walnuts. Journal of the American Society of Horticultural Science 113:760–765.Google Scholar
- McMillan, C. 1959. The role of ecotypic variation in the distribution of the central grassland of North America. Ecological Monographs 29:385–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Millar, C.I. and W.J. Libby. 1989. Disneyland or native ecosystem: Genetics and the restorationist. Restoration and Management Notes 7:18–24.Google Scholar
- Millar, C.I. and W.J. Libby. 1991. Strategies for conserving clinal, ecotypic, and disjunct population diversity in widespread species. In Genetics and conservation of rare plants, eds. D.A. Falk and K.E. Holsinger, 149–17. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Naeem, S., L.J. Thompson, S.P. Lawler, J.A. Lawton, and R.M. Woodfin. 1994. Declining biodiversity can alter the performance of ecosystems. Nature 368:734–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Noss, R.F., E.T. LaRoe III, and J.M. Scott. 1995. Endangered ecosystems of the United States: a preliminary assessment of loss and degradation. Biological Report 28. Washington D.C.: U.S. Dept. of the Interior, National Biological Service.Google Scholar
- Padgett, D.J. and G.E. Crow. 1994. Foreign plant stock: Concerns for wetland mitigation. Restoration and Management Notes 12:168–171.Google Scholar
- Parker, M.A. 1985. Local population differentiation for compatibility in an annual legume and its host-specific fungal pathogen. Evolution 39:713–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Rapson, G.L. and J.B. Wilson. 1988. Non-adaptation in Agrostis capillaris L. (Poaceae). Functional Ecology 2:479–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Rice, K.J. and R.N. Mack. 1991. Ecological genetics of Bromus tectorum III. The demography of reciprocally sown populations. Oecologia 88:91–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Schonewald-Cox, C.M. 1983, Guidelines to management: A beginning attempt. In Genetics and conservation, eds. C.M. Schonewald-Cox, S.M. Chambers, B. MacBryde, and W.L. Thomas, 14–445. Menlo Park: Benjamin/Cummings.Google Scholar
- Snaydon, R.W. and T.M. Davies. 1982. Rapid divergence of plant populations in response to recent changes in soil conditions. Evolution 36:289–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Soil Conservation Service. 1986. ‘Lassen’ antelope bitterbrush. Washington, D.C: United States Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar
- Sorensen, F.C 1983. Geographic variation in seedling Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) from the western Siskiyou mountains of Oregon. Ecology 64:696–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Strauss, S.H., J. Bosquet, V.D. Hipkins, and Y.P. Hong. 1992. Biochemical and molecular genetic markers in biosystematic studies of forest trees. New Forests 6:125–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sultan, S.E. 1987. Evolutionary implications of phenotypic plasticity in plants. Evolutionary Biology 21:127–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Templeton, A.R. 1986. Coadaptation and outbreeding depression. In Conservation biology: The science of scarcity and diversity, ed. M.E. Soulé, 105–116. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
- Thorp, R.W. 1976. Insect pollination of vernal pool flowers. In Vernal pools, their ecology and conservation, ed. S.K. Jain, 36–40. Davis, CA: University California, Institute of Ecology.Google Scholar
- Thorp, R.W. and J.M. Leong. 1995. Native bee pollinators of vernal pool plants. Fremontia 23:3–7.Google Scholar
- Tilman, D. and J.A. Downing. 1994. Biodiversity and stability in grasslands. Nature 367:363–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Turkington, R. and J.L. Harper. 1979. The growth, distribution, and neighbour relationships of Trifolium repens in a permanent pasture. Journal of Ecology 67:245–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Waser, N.M. and M.V. Price. 1994. Crossing-distance effects in Delphinium nelsonii: Outbreeding and inbreeding depression in progeny fitness. Evolution 48:842–852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wayne, R.K., N. Lehman, M.C. Allard, and R.L. Honeycutt. 1992. Mitochondrial DNA variability of the gray wolf: Genetic consequences of population decline and habitat fragmentation. Conservation Biology 6:559–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar