USGS Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70135741

Genetic tools for wildlife management

Emily Latch·Rachel S. Crowhurst·Sara J. Oyler-McCance·Stacie Robinson
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Granted interim status in November, 2013, The Wildlife Society’s (TWS) Molecular Ecology Working Group aims to promote scientific advancement by applying molecular techniques to wildlife ecology, management, and conservation. The working group—composed of sci - entists from diverse backgrounds—met for the first time in Pittsburgh at the TWS Annual Conference held in October. Our overarching goal is to enhance awareness of molecular ecology and genetic applica - tions to wildlife biology and act as an informational and networking resource. During the group’s interim status, which runs for three years, we intend to focus on a broad scope of molecular ecology that is applicable to wildlife including genetic and ge - nomic methods, conservation genetics, non-invasive genetic population monitoring, landscape genetics, evolutionary genetics, and molecular forensics

Explore related subjects

The Wildlife ProfessionalArticle

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Emily Latch, Rachel S. Crowhurst, Sara J. Oyler-McCance, Stacie Robinson. 2014. Genetic tools for wildlife management. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70135741

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2022

A RADical approach to conservation in Alaska: Rapid climate change requires a new perspective

In Alaska, conservation areas are managed to promote the persistence of wild species, habitats, cultural resources, visitor experiences, and ecosystem services. Many conservation areas are managed by federal or state agencies, and have specific boundaries, missions, and legislative mandates. Many are also the domains of Indigenous and local people who derive livelihoods and cultural identity from these lands. These areas vary considerably as to whether they are managed solely for conservation versus other additional values. Myriad threats challenge the sustainability of these values, and conservation areas often exist to mitigate such threats. But regardless of jurisdiction, legal contexts, or historical impacts, all these places face challenges, unprecedented during human habitation, from one globally pervasive threat: anthropogenic climate change. Yes, ecosystems, including people who depend on them, have adapted to constant change in Alaska over most of the Holocene if not before (at least the last 18kyr). And this experience has conferred upon its constituents learned adaptive capacity, capabilities, and knowledges among the most flexible on the planet. We discuss the implications of the Resist, Accept, Direct adaptation framework in the context of conservation management in Alaska.

Alaska↗
USGS2019

Restoring a forest icon: Could returning the American chestnut remodel our wildlife landscape?

Mother Nature was not making it easy. It was February 18, 2009, and winds were gusting, sleet was falling, and temperatures were hovering around 40° F. Our crew of 9 which consisted of personnel from the USDA Forest Service Southern Research Station, the Cherokee National Forest, and The University of Tennessee’s Tree Improvement Program, was attempting to establish the first test planting of American chestnuts ( Castanea dentata ) bred for resistance to an exotic fungal pathogen, the chestnut blight ( Cryphonectria parasitica ). With each hole dug and seedlings tamped into the ground, our hope was that we were one step closer to restoring an important wildlife food to eastern hardwood forests.

Alabama, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois,↗