How can we deal with the complexity of effective population size in conservation practice?
Key messages
- Effective population size (Ne) is a key parameter for conservation, but current estimation methods often rely on assumptions that are rarely met in real-world populations.
- There is an urgent need to standardize protocols, tools, and resources to ensure reliable and consistent Ne estimates that can serve as indicators in conservation strategies.
- Further research is essential, including rigorous field validation, enhanced data analysis strategies, and targeted training programs, to bridge the gap between scientific advancements and practical conservation.
"Effective population size" (Ne) of species is a key genetic indicator critical for assessing long-term survival of populations. But how do scientists estimate it? Ne reflects how many individuals in a population contribute genetically to future generations, but calculating it is tricky. Real-world populations are often fragmented, connected by migration, or influenced by human activities—factors that violate the ideal assumptions of estimation methods. As highlighted by the outcomes of a recent workshop, different methods (e.g., using genetic markers vs. historical data) can give wildly different Ne estimates, confusing conservation efforts. For example, a population might show a small Ne if isolated but a much larger Ne if connected to others. To address this, researchers recommended combining genetic data with ecological insights, testing methods using real-world datasets, and creating clear guidelines for conservationists. These efforts are crucial because global biodiversity goals, like the UN’s Kunming-Montreal framework, use Ne to track genetic diversity. In conclusion, better tools and collaboration are needed to translate genetics into actionable conservation strategies, ensuring species can adapt to threats such as climate change.
