Designatable Units Research Articles

When the shoe doesn’t fit: applying conservation unit concepts to western painted turtles at their northern periphery

As biodiversity continues to be lost at an alarming rate, strategies for prioritizing populations for conservation have become increasingly important. Maintaining intraspecific genetic diversity is of particular importance for preserving evolutionary history and the potential for future adaptation. In order to effectively protect this diversity, units below the species level need to be defined. However, delineation of such units is subject to many challenges, with no one strategy applying universally across taxa. In this study we carried out the first genetic assessment of the western painted turtle (Chrysemys picta bellii) at its northern periphery in British Columbia (BC), Canada, using mitochondrial DNA haplotypic and microsatellite genotypic data to examine population structure and demographic history. We compared the application of evolutionarily significant unit and management unit criteria with Canadian designatable unit guidelines to determine appropriate conservation units. Our results show that BC western painted turtles form a single evolutionarily significant unit, with each occupied site constituting a separate management unit. In contrast, there is evidence for six discrete designatable units. Patterns of genetic variation in BC western painted turtles indicate that the conservation of each region is important to maintaining regional diversity and evolutionary novelty in this widespread species.

Recovery Potential Assessment for Lake Sturgeon in Canadian Designatable Units

AbstractSignificant declines in the abundance of lake sturgeon Acipenser fulvescens across most of its North American range have led to abundances less than 10% of estimated minimum sustainable population sizes and, in some locations, less than 1% of historic abundances. These precipitous declines in abundance have resulted in most lake sturgeon populations being considered a conservation concern and have prompted management actions toward recovery. Here we present modeling in support of a recovery potential assessment, using stage‐structured matrix models and population viability analysis to quantitatively assess allowable harm, recovery efforts, probabilities of recovery, and recovery time frames. From this assessment, we conclude that lake sturgeon populations are most sensitive to harm on adult survival and that some designatable units are highly sensitive to any level of harm. However, the scope for recovering lake sturgeon by improving adult survival is limited; instead, larger proportional increases in population growth rates can be achieved by focusing recovery efforts on age‐0 and juvenile survival. Finally, based on a recovery target of 1,188 spawning females/year for each discrete population and current abundances from 1% to 10% of this target, long‐term projections indicate recovery time frames ranging from 20 to over 100 years, depending on the recovery actions implemented.

Polar bear Ursus maritimus conservation in Canada: an ecological basis for identifying designatable units

Polar bears Ursus maritimus have a circumpolar distribution that is directly tied to the Arctic sea ice. Although they are wide-ranging, polar bears do not belong to a single population but rather are comprised of 19 largely discrete subpopulations, 13 of which are fully or partly under Canadian jurisdiction. These subpopulations are used to manage the sustainable harvest of polar bears in Canada but for conservation purposes the species is currently considered a single biological unit. Long-term climate warming has reduced the availability of sea ice that polar bears require for feeding, movement and reproduction, and continued declines in ice extent and duration are forecast to have significant negative effects on polar bears in some areas. Under the Canadian Species at Risk Act separate legal protection may be given to intraspecific groups (so called designatable units, DUs) that are genetically, geographically and/or biogeographically distinct. We examined the conservation status of polar bears across their Canadian range and compared large-scale ecosystem properties across subpopulations. We found that threats to the conservation of polar bears are not spatially uniform and we identified five DUs that captured broad patterns of polar bear biodiversity. We conclude that the use of DUs provides a biologically-sound framework for the conservation of polar bears.

Designatable Units for Status Assessment of Endangered Species

Abstract: Species status assessment and the conservation of biological diversity may require defining units below the species level to portray probabilities of extinction accurately and to help set priorities for conservation efforts. What those units should be has been debated in the scientific literature largely in terms of evolutionarily significant units (ESUs), but this discourse has had little impact on government policy with regard to status assessment. As with species concepts, the variously proposed ESU concepts have not been resolvable into a single approach. The need for a practicable procedure to identify infraspecific entities for status assignment is the motivation behind employing designatable units (DUs). In aid of a policy to prevent elements of biodiversity from becoming extinct or extirpated, DUs are determined during the process of resolving a species' conservation status according to broadly applicable guidelines. The procedure asks whether putative DUs are distinguishable based on a reliably established taxonomy or a well‐corroborated phylogeny, compelling evidence of genetic distinction, range disjunction, and/or biogeographic distinction as long as extinction probabilities also differ. The language of the DU approach avoids wording that implies value judgments concerning evolutionary importance or significance. Because species conservation status assessment is not science but, rather, the use of science to further policy, DUs contribute to a precautionary approach to listing whereby status may be assessed even though knowledge of systematic relationships below the species level may be lacking or unresolved. The pragmatic approach of using DUs has been adopted by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada for status assessment of species under the Canadian Species at Risk Act.