Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Conservation Status and Threat Assessments for North American Crop Wild Relatives

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
North American Crop Wild Relatives, Volume 1

Abstract

Conservation status and threat assessments evaluate species’ relative risks of extinction globally, regionally, nationally, or locally and estimate the degree to which populations of species are already safeguarded in existing conservation systems, with the aim of exposing the critical gaps in current conservation. Results of the assessments can therefore aid in directing limited conservation resources to the species and populations that are most at-risk. This chapter introduces the roles of conservation status and threat assessments in informing conservation priorities for crop wild relatives in North America and provides an overview of the current results for US taxa. Methods to assess the conservation status and to perform threat assessments for North American crop wild relatives are well developed via NatureServe and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List, and the essential infrastructure to perform these analyses is present, at least in Canada and the US. Current conservation assessments for North American wild relatives need updating but already reveal a landscape of multiple complex threats and major gaps in the ex situ and in situ conservation of prioritized species. Further resources and concerted efforts are needed to update conservation assessments and then to use the results to inform efforts to fill the critical gaps in conservation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Araújo MB, Guisan A (2006) Five (or so) challenges for species distribution modelling. J Biogeogr 33(10):1677–1688

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BGCI (Comp.) (2016). North American Botanic Garden Strategy for Plant Conservation, 2016-2020. Botanic Gardens Conservation International U.S. Illinois. http://northamericanplants.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/NAGSPC.pdf

  • Budiharta S, Widyatmoko W, Irawati, Wiriadinata H, Rugayah et al (2011) The processes that threaten Indonesian plants. Oryx 45:172–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgman MA, Keith D, Hopper SD, Widyatmoko D, Drill C (2007) Threat syndromes and conservation of the Australian flora. Biol Conserv 134:73–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castañeda-Álvarez NP, de Haan S, Juarez H, Khoury CK, Achicanoy HA, Sosa CC, Bernau V, Salas A, Heider B, Simon R, Maxted N, Spooner DM (2015) Ex situ conservation priorities for the wild relatives of potato (Solanum L. section Petota). PLoS One 10(4):e0122599

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castañeda-Álvarez NP, Khoury CK, Achicanoy H, Bernau V, Dempewolf H, Eastwood RJ, Guarino L, Harker RH, Jarvis A, Maxted N, Mueller JV, Ramírez-Villegas J, Sosa CC, Struik PC, Vincent H, Toll J (2016) Global conservation priorities for crop wild relatives. Nat Plants 2(4):16022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collen B, Dulvy NK, Gaston KJ, Gärdenfors U, Keith DA, Punt AE et al (2016) Clarifying misconceptions of extinction risk assessment with the IUCN Red List. Biol Lett 12(4):20150843

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Convention on Biological Diversity (2011) Conference of the Parties Decision X/2: Strategic plan for biodiversity 2011–2020. www.cbd.int/decision/cop/?id=12268

  • Convention on Biological Diversity (2012) Global strategy for plant conservation: 2011-2020. Botanic Gardens Conservation International, Richmond, UK http://www.plants2020.net/files/Plants2020/GSPCbrochure/gspc_english.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Costa GC, Nogueira C, Machado RB, Colli GR (2010) Sampling bias and the use of ecological niche modeling in conservation planning: a field evaluation in a biodiversity hotspot. Biodivers Conserv 19:883–899

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dempewolf H, Eastwood RJ, Guarino L, Khoury CK, Müller JV, Toll J (2014) Adapting agriculture to climate change: a global initiative to collect, conserve, and use crop wild relatives. Agroecol Sust Food 38:369–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Estill JC, Cruzen MB (2001) Phytogeography of rare plant species endemic to the Southeastern United States. Castanea 66:3–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans DM, Che-Castaldo JP, Crouse D, Davis FW, Epanchin-Niell E, Flather CH, et al. 2016. Species recovery in the United States: increasing the effectiveness of the endangered species act. Issues in Ecology. http://www.esa.org/esa/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Issue20.pdf

  • Faber-Langendoen D, Nichols J, Master L, Snow K, Tomaino A, Bittman R, Hammerson G, Heidel B, Ramsay L, Teucher A, Young B (2012) NatureServe conservation status assessments: methodology for assigning ranks. NatureServe, Arlington, VA

    Google Scholar 

  • Fick SE, Hijmans RJ (2017) WorldClim 2: new 1-km spatial resolution climate surfaces for global land areas. Int J Climatol 37(12):4302–4315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fielder H, Brotherton P, Hosking J, Hopkins JJ, Ford-Lloyd B, Maxted N (2015) Enhancing the conservation of crop wild relatives in England. PLoS One 10(6):e0130804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaiji S, Chavan V, Ariño AH, Otegui J, Hobern D, Sood R et al (2013) Content assessment of the primary biodiversity data published through GBIF network: status, challenges and potentials. Biodivers Inform 8:94–172

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham C, Elith J, Hijmans RJ, Guisan A, Peterson AT, Loiselle BA et al (2008) The influence of spatial errors in species occurrence data used in distribution models. J Appl Ecol 45:239–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harlan JR (1976) Genetic resources in wild relatives of crops. Crop Sci 16:329–333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hengl T, de Jesus JM, Heuvelink GB, Gonzalez MR, Kilibarda M, Blagotić A et al (2017) SoilGrids250m: global gridded soil information based on machine learning. PLoS One 12(2):e0169748

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernández-Yáñez H, Kos JT, Bast MD, Griggs JL, Hage PA, Killian A, Whitmore MB, Loza ML, Smith AB (2016) A systematic assessment of threats affecting the rare plants of the United States. Biol Conserv 203:260–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hijmans RJ (2012) Cross-validation of species distribution models: removing spatial sorting bias and calibration with a null model. Ecology 93:679–688

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hijmans RJ, Graham C (2006) The ability of climate envelope models to predict the effect of climate change on species distributions. Glob Change Biol 12:2272–2281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hijmans RJ, Spooner D (2001) Geographic distribution of wild potato species. Am J Bot 88:2101–2112

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hijmans RJ, Guarino L, Cruz M, Rojas E (2001) Computer tools for spatial analysis of plant genetic resources data: 1. DIVA-GIS Plant Genet Res Newsl 127:15–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Hijmans RJ, Cameron SE, Parra JL, Jones PG, Jarvis A (2005) Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. Int J Climatol 25:1965–1978

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IUCN (2012) IUCN Red List categories and criteria: version 3.1. Second edition. Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK: IUCN. iv + 32pp. http://s3.amazonaws.com/iucnredlist-newcms/staging/public/attachments/3097/redlist_cats_crit_en.pdf

  • IUCN (2017a) Plants for people. https://www.iucn.org/theme/species/our-work/plants/plants-people [Verified 6 November 2017]

  • IUCN (2017b) Safeguarding Mesoamerican crop wild relatives. http://www.psmesoamerica.org/en/ [Verified 6 November 2017]

  • IUCN Standards and Petitions Subcommittee (2017) Guidelines for using the IUCN Red List categories and criteria. Version 13. Prepared by the Standards and Petitions Subcommittee http://www.iucnredlist.org/documents/RedListGuidelines.pdf

  • Jarvis A, Ferguson M, Williams D, Guarino L, Jones P, Stalker H et al (2003) Biogeography of wild Arachis: assessing conservation status and setting future priorities. Crop Sci 43:1100–1108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jennings DE, Rohr JR (2011) A review of conservation threats to carnivorous plants. Biol Conserv 144:1356–1363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jimenez-Valverde A, Lobo JM, Hortal J (2008) Not as good as they seem: the importance of concepts in species distribution modelling. Divers Distrib 14:885–890

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kantar MB, Sosa CC, Khoury CK, Castañeda-Álvarez NP, Achicanoy HA, Bernau V, Kane N, Marek L, Sieler G, Rieseberg LH (2015) Ecogeography and utility to plant breeding of the crop wild relatives of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). Front Plant Sci 6:841

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khoury CK, Greene S, Wiersema J, Maxted N, Jarvis A, Struik PC (2013) An inventory of crop wild relatives of the United States. Crop Sci 53(4):1496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khoury CK, Castañeda Álvarez NP, Achicanoy H, Sosa CC, Bernau V, Kassa MT et al (2015) Crop wild relatives of pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.]: distributions, ex situ conservation status, and potential genetic resources for abiotic stress tolerance. Biol Conserv 184:259–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khoury CK, Heider B, Castañeda-Álvarez NP, Achicanoy HA, Sosa CC, Miller RE, Scotland RW, Wood JRI, Rossel G, Eserman LA, Jarret RL, Yencho GC, Bernau V, Juarez H, Sotelo S, de Haan S, Struik PC (2015a) Distributions, ex situ conservation priorities, and genetic resource potential of crop wild relatives of sweetpotato [Ipomoea batatas (L.) Lam., I. series Batatas]. Front Plant Sci 6:251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramer A, Hird A, Shaw K, Dosmann M, Mims R (2011) Conserving North America’s threatened plants: progress report on target 8 of the global strategy for plant conservation. Botanic Gardens Conservation International U.S., Glencoe, IL

    Google Scholar 

  • Lobo JM, Jimenez-Valverde A, Hortal J (2010) The uncertain nature of absences and their importance in species distribution modeling. Ecography 33:103–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loiselle BA, Jorgensen PM, Consiglio T, Jimenez I, Blake JG, Lohmann LG et al (2008) Predicting species distributions from herbarium collections, does climate bias in collection sampling influence model outcomes? J. Biogeographica 35(1):105–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Master LL (1991) Assessing threats and setting priorities for conservation. Conserv Biol 5(4):559–563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Master L, Faber-Langendoen D, Bittman R, Hammerson GA, Heidel B, Ramsay L, Snow K, Teucher A, Tomaino A (2012) NatureServe conservation status assessments: factors for evaluating species and ecosystem risk. NatureServe, Arlington, VA

    Google Scholar 

  • McCouch S, Baute G, Bradeen J, Bramel P, Bretting PK, Buckler E et al (2013) Agriculture: feeding the future. Nature 499:23–24

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Meilleur BA, Hodgkin T (2004) In situ conservation of crop wild relatives: status and trends. Biodivers Conserv 13(4):663–684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moray C, Game ET, Maxted N (2014) Prioritising in situ conservation of crop resources: a case study of African cowpea (Vigna unguiculata). Sci Rep 4:5247

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Murray KA, Verde LD, Arregoitia V, Davidson A, Di Marco M, Do Fonzo MMD (2014) Threat to the point: improving the value of comparative extinction risk for conservation analysis. Glob Chang Biol 20:483–494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nabhan GP (1990) Wild phaseolus ecogeography in the Sierra Madre occidental, Mexico: areographic techniques for targeting and conserving species diversity. Systematic and ecogeographic studies on crop genepools 5. International Board of Plant Genetic Resources, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Negrón-Ortiz V (2014) Pattern of expenditures for plant conservation under the endangered species act. Biol Conserv 171:36–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson DM, Dinerstein E, Wikramanayake ED, Burgess ND, Powell GVN, Underwood EC et al (2001) Terrestrial ecoregions of the world: a new map of life on earth. Bioscience 51:933–938

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parra-Quijano M, Iriondo JM, Torres E (2012) Improving representativeness of Genebank collections through species distribution models, gap analysis and ecogeographical maps. Biodivers Conserv 21(1):79–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips SJ, Anderson RP, Schapire RE (2006) Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecol Model 190:231–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prescott OL, Stewart GB (2014) Assessing the impact of human trampling on vegetation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental evidence. PeerJ 2:e360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramírez-Villegas J, Khoury C, Jarvis A, Debouck DG, Guarino L (2010) A gap analysis methodology for collecting crop genepools: a case study with Phaseolus beans. PLoS One 5:e13497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regan TJ, Burgman MA, McCarthy MA, Master LL, Keith DA, Mace GM, Andelman SJ (2005) The consistency of extinction risk classification protocols. Conserv Biol 19:1969–1977

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salafsky N, Salzer D, Stattersfield AJ, Hilton-Taylor C, Neugarten R, Butchart SHM et al (2008) A standard lexicon for biodiversity conservation: unified classifications of threats and actions. Conserv Biol 22:897–911

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seiler GJ, Qi LL, Marek LF (2017) Utilization of sunflower crop wild relatives for cultivated sunflower improvement. Crop Sci 57:1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stein BA, Gravuer K (2008) Hidden in plain sight: the role of plants in state wildlife action plans. NatureServe, Arlington, VA

    Google Scholar 

  • Tapia C, Torres E, Parra-Quijano M (2014) Searching for adaptation to abiotic stress: ecogeographical analysis of highland Ecuadorian maize. Crop Sci 55(1):262–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USDA Forest Service. 2016. Chiltepine or Bird Pepper (Capsicum annuum var. galbriusculum). http://www.fs.fed.us/wildflowers/beauty/Sky_Islands/plants/Capsicum_annuum/index.shtml [Verified 10 October 2017]

  • USDA Forest Service and Agricultural Research Service (2014) USDA Forest Service and Agricultural Research Service Strategy for the Complementary Conservation of Wild Cranberry (Vaccinium macrocarpon Ait. and V. oxycoccos) Genetic Resources and Protocols for Collecting Genetic Material, Germplasm, and Herbarium Vouchers

    Google Scholar 

  • Volk GM, Chao CT, Norelli J, Brown SK, Fazio G, Peace C, McFerson J, Zhong G-Y, Bretting P (2015) The vulnerability of US apple (Malus) genetic resources. Genet Resour Crop Evol 62(5):765–794

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace TP, Bowman D, Campbell BT, Chee P, Gutierrez OA, Kohel RJ, McCarty J et al (2009) Status of the USA cotton germplasm collection and crop vulnerability. Genet Resour Crop Evol 56(4):507–532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westwood M, Frances A, Man G, Pivorunas D, Potter KM (2017) Coordinating the IUCN Red List of North American tree species: A special session at the USFS gene conservation of tree species workshop. In: Sniezko RA, Man G, Hipkins V, Woeste K, Gwaze D, Kliejunas JT, McTeague BA, tech. cords (eds). 2017Gene conservation of tree species—banking on the future. Proceedings of a workshop. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-963. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR, pp 12–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkes G (2007) Urgent notice to all maize researchers: disappearance and extinction of the last wild teosinte population is more than half completed. A modest proposal for teosinte evolution and conservation in situ: the Balsas, Guerrero, Mexico. Maydica 52:49–58

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. NatureServe, Arlington, VA, USA

    Anne L. Frances

  2. Missouri Botanical Garden, St. Louis, MO, USA

    Adam B. Smith

  3. USDA, Agricultural Research Service, Center for Agricultural Resources Research, National Laboratory for Genetic Resources Preservation, Fort Collins, CO, USA

    Colin K. Khoury

  4. International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), Cali, Colombia

    Colin K. Khoury

Authors
  1. Anne L. Frances
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Adam B. Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Colin K. Khoury
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anne L. Frances .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. USDA, Agricultural Research Service Center for Agricultural Resources, Research, National Laboratory for Genetic Resources Preservation, Fort Collins, CO, USA

    Stephanie L. Greene

  2. USDA, Agricultural Research Service Beltsville Agricultural Research, Center, National Germplasm Resources Laboratory, Beltsville, MD, USA

    Karen A. Williams

  3. USDA, Agricultural Research Service Center for Agricultural Resources, Research, National Laboratory for Genetic Resources Preservation, Fort Collins, CO, USA

    Colin K. Khoury

  4. Tropical Plant and Soil Science, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, HI, USA

    Michael B. Kantar

  5. Department of Agronomy/North Central Regional Plant Introduction Station, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA

    Laura F. Marek

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 This is a U.S. government work and not under copyright protection in the U.S.; foreign copyright protection may apply

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Frances, A.L., Smith, A.B., Khoury, C.K. (2018). Conservation Status and Threat Assessments for North American Crop Wild Relatives. In: Greene, S., Williams, K., Khoury, C., Kantar, M., Marek, L. (eds) North American Crop Wild Relatives, Volume 1. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95101-0_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation