References and other resources
Main publications on the genetic diversity indicators
Mastretta-Yanes, A., da Silva, J., Grueber, C.E., Castillo-Reina, L., Köppä, V., Forester, B., Funk, W.C., Heuertz, M., Ishihama, F., Jordan, R., Mergeay, J., et al. 2023. Multinational evaluation of genetic diversity indicators for the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Monitoring framework.
This paper reports findings of the first large-scale deployment of genetic indicators in nine countries around the world: Australia, Belgium, France, Mexico, South Africa, Sweden, Colombia, USA, and Japan. The indicators were applied to more than 900 species and more than 5000 individual populations. The findings show that the Ne 500 indicator is very low for most species assessed, pointing to a likely strong genetic loss occurring in significant numbers of species around the world. Most species still retain most populations, but if genetic diversity continues to decline, those populations will also likely be lost. This study shows genetic indicators are feasible for practical use in a fairly rapid and inclusive manner
Hoban, S., da Silva, J.M., Hughes, A., Hunter, M.E., Kalamujić Stroil, B., Laikre, L., Mastretta-Yanes, A., Millette, K., Paz-Vinas, I., Bustos, L.R., Shaw, R.E., Vernesi, C. 2024. Too simple, too complex, or just right? Advantages, challenges, and guidance for indicators of genetic diversity. BioScience, p.biae006. (open access).
This paper discusses how the genetic indicators can estimate genetic diversity status of hundreds of species quickly, affordably, and inclusively. The paper presents the advantages, perceived disadvantages, and practical solutions for this approach, known as “genetic indicators.” The paper is timely and important because genetic indicators are formally part of the CBD Global Biodiversity Framework. This paper will help non-experts better understand the approach and decide whether to use it in practice for reporting on and managing biodiversity at national scales.
Hoban, S., Da Silva, J., Mastretta-Yanes, A., et al., 2022. Monitoring status and trends in genetic diversity for the Convention on Biological Diversity: an ongoing assessment of genetic indicators in nine countries. Conservation Letters. Open Access.
This paper describes the workplan of a project underway to apply indicators of genetic diversity in nine countries around the world. We address concerns of policy makers and implementation challenges, and describe a roadmap for further development and deployment of genetic indicators, incorporating feedback from a broad community. We provide several practical considerations for calculation and demonstrate that countries can successfully and cost-effectively report the status of species’ genetic diversity and adaptive capacity with existing biodiversity observation data, and, in doing so, better conserve the Earth’s biodiversity.
Hoban, S., Bruford, M., Jackson, J.D.U., Lopes-Fernandes, M., Heuertz, M., Hohenlohe, P.A., Paz-Vinas, I., Sjögren-Gulve, P., Segelbacher, G., Vernesi, C., Aitken, S., et al. 2020. Genetic diversity targets and indicators in the CBD post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework must be improved. Biological Conservation, 248, p.108654.
This paper defines the concept of the three indicators in detail, including the fundamental conservation principles that they build upon. It explains how the indicators fit into and support the zero draft of the GBF and offers improved wording for the GBF to better conserve genetic diversity.
Hoban, S., Campbell, C.D., da Silva, J.M., Ekblom, R., Funk, W.C., Garner, B.A., Godoy, J.A., Kershaw, F., MacDonald, A.J., Mergeay, J., Minter, M., et al. 2021. Genetic diversity is considered important but interpreted narrowly in country reports to the Convention on Biological Diversity: Current actions and indicators are insufficient ** Biological Conservation, 261, p.109233.
This paper examines how genetic diversity was reported in the CBD National Reports from 2014 and 2018 for 57 countries. It assesses what indicators were used, and what actions countries were reporting as taken to achieve genetic conservation, and for what kinds of species. It highlights that countries had previously focused on genetic diversity in socioeconomically important species and that indicators were lacking in the past to assess genetic diversity in wild species. It points to the new genetic indicators as a solution to some of these past limitations of National Reports
Hoban, S., Paz-Vinas, I., Aitken, S., Bertola, L.D., Breed, M.F., Bruford, M.W., Funk, W.C., Grueber, C.E., Heuertz, M., Hohenlohe, P., Hunter, M.E., et al. 2021. Effective population size remains a suitable, pragmatic indicator of genetic diversity for all species, including forest trees Biological Conservation, 253.
A short note which highlights some of the challenges to using genetic diversity indicators in widespread, common, abundant species like common trees. It points out that there are solutions to such problems, and shows that indicators can be used for these species. It also shows the range of Ne/Nc values observed in plants and animals and further supports the Ne/Nc ratio of about 0.1.
Other resources
For additional resources please refer to the Coalition for Conservation Genetics Capacity Building Resource Page to gain access to Policy briefs, the latest headline indicator metadata, webinars and other Capacity Building Resources and additional scientific publications.