Are Genomic Updates of Well-Studied Species Worth the Investment for Conservation? A Case Study of the Critically Endangered Magdalena River Turtle.

Abstract

As genomic-scale data sets become economically feasible for most organisms, a key question for conservation biology is whether the increased resolution offered by new genomic approaches justifies repeating earlier studies based on traditional markers, rather than investing those same time and monetary resources in less-known species. Genomic studies offer clear advantages when the objective is to identify adaptive loci that may be critical to conservation policy-makers. However, the answer is far less certain for the population and landscape studies based on neutral loci that dominate the conservation genetics research agenda. We used Restriction-site Associated DNA sequencing (RADseq) to revisit earlier molecular studies of the IUCN Critically Endangered Magdalena River turtle (Podocnemis lewyana), documenting the conservation insights gained by increasing the number of neutral markers by several orders of magnitude. Earlier research indicated that P. lewyana has the lowest genetic diversity known for any chelonian, and little or no population differentiation among independent rivers. In contrast, the RADseq data revealed discrete population structure with isolation-by-distance within river segments and identified precise population breaks clearly delineating management units. It also confirmed that the species does not have extremely low heterozygosity and that effective population sizes are probably sufficient to maintain long-term evolutionary potential. Contrary to earlier inferences from more limited population genetic markers, our genomic data suggest that management strategies should shift from active genetic rescue to more passive protection without extreme interventions. We conclude with a list of examples of conservation studies in other vertebrates indicating that for many systems a genomic update is worth the investment.