Laserfiche WebLink
166 Conservation Genetlcs of Desert Fishcc <br />tionists," attempting to develop and implement a policy <br />that would restore a system to an approximation of its <br />former self. In a stream hierarchical system that has un- <br />dergone radical changes to the point that some natural <br />populations are extinct and others are artificially iso- <br />lated, we favor restoration of gene flow and diversity to <br />mimic the natural situation, rather than maintaining an <br />unnatural and zoogeographically perverse "status quo." <br />Estimates of effective migration rates from genetic struc- <br />ture statistics can give us a rough guideline for the ex- <br />tent of gene flow that should be considered. <br />3. Test the relative roles of genetic adaptation and <br />developmental plasticity in local phenotypic differert- <br />tiation, Desert fishes are notorious for phenotypic dif- <br />ferentiation among localities (Miller 1948; Minckley <br />1973). This differentiation may be the result of genetic <br />differences or plastic developmental processes influ- <br />enced by the local environment. Identification of the <br />causes of phenotypic differentiation is important to <br />management of individual populations. If differentiation <br />is genetic, it is critical to maintain the diversity repre- <br />sented by differences among colonies (D~). If differen- <br />tiation is simply a plastic response to local conditions, <br />then a particular phenotype may be induced from a <br />broad range of genotypes by creating the proper envi- <br />ronment. The latter may occur in a goodeid fish in Mex- <br />ico (Turner et al. 1983), a cichlid in Cuatro Cienegas, <br />Mexico (Kornfield et al. 1982; Liem and Kaufman <br />1984), several African cichlids (Greenwood 1965), and <br />Artic charr (Vrijenhoek, Marteinsdottir, and Schenck <br />1987). Thus, we need critical experiments that separate <br />true genetic differentiation (local evolutionary change) <br />from simple environmental induction of unique morphs. <br />A Final Question <br />We conclude by raising a question, one that we cannot <br />definitively answer but one that is critical to all conser- <br />vation programs. What are our objectives in conserva- <br />tion biology? Specifically, what should we conserve? <br />Species? Subspecies? Individual populations? Unique al- <br />leles? This is a difficult question, and perhaps the most <br />important philosophical issue facing us, for we cannot <br />design effective conservation programs until we identify <br />specific goals. <br />The answer may depend upon the organism of con- <br />cern, and economic constraints. For a tiger or rhinoc- <br />eros, we may have to settle for a representative type of <br />the species, for it may be difficult to do otherwise, since <br />natural and financial resources are limiting. It is also <br />unrealistic to expect to conduct experimental work on <br />the genetic structure of such taxa. However, we can do <br />much more with desert fishes. It is far less costly to <br />maintain regional, local, or even allelic diversity in these <br />fishes-they can be easily manipulated, local habitats <br />McBe and Vdje~iltcek <br />are available or can be made available, and fish can be <br />kept in small refugia such as hatcheries or even aquaria. <br />!n particular, the Sonoran topminnow is a model or- <br />ganism with which to develop a conservation program <br />with a sound genetic basis. The topminnow is more <br />abundant than many endangered species, and much is <br />known about its ecology, physiology, and genetics <br />(Constantz 1975; Minckley, Rinne, & Johnson 1977; <br />Schoenherr 1977; Bulger & Schultz 1982; Meffe 1984, <br />1985; Vrijenhcek, Douglas, &Meffe 1985). It is easy to <br />raise in captivity and hardy under field and experimen- <br />tal conditions. Concerted efforts in recovery of this spe- <br />cies, currently underway by several groups, could ben- <br />efit other endangered species programs by developing <br />sound management schemes, including application of <br />genetic principles and field and laboratory experimen- <br />tation of fitness responses to management prograns. <br />With this species at the forefront, we have an excellent <br />opportunity to restore an entire endangered fauna to <br />some semblance of its historical condition; as conserva- <br />tion biologists, this should be our goal. <br />Acknowledgments <br />We thank M. E. Douglas for his efforts in fieldwork and <br />analysis of original P. occidentalis samples and J. B. <br />Coleman and L. Orebaugh for assistance with figures. <br />Two anonymous reviewers raised important points for <br />clarification. GKM was supported by contract DE- <br />AC09-76SR00-819 between the U.S. Department of En- <br />ergy and the University of Georgia. RCV was supported <br />by National Science Foundation grant BSR86-00661. <br />Liter~ttrre Cited <br />Allendorf, F. W. 1983. Isolation, gene Ilow, and genetic differ- <br />entiation among populations. Pages 515 in C. M. Schone- <br />wald-Cox, S. M. Chambers, B- MacBryde, and L Thomas, edi- <br />tors. Genetics and Conservation: A Reference for Managing <br />Wild Animal and Plant Populations. Benjamin/Cummings, <br />Menlo Park, California. <br />Brooks, J. E. 1986. Status of natural and introduced Sonoran <br />topminnow (Poeciliopsls o occrdentalss) populations in Ari- <br />zona through 1985. Report to Offices of Endangered Species <br />and Fishery Resources, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Albuquer- <br />que, New Mexico. <br />Bulger, A. )., and R J. Schultz. 1.982. Origin of thermal adapta- <br />tions in northern versus southern populations of a unisexual <br />hybrid fish. Evolution 36:1041-1050. <br />Cokendolpher, J. C. 1980. Hybridization experiments with the <br />genus Cyprinodon (Teleostei: Cyprinodontidae). Copeia <br />1980:173-176. <br />Constantz, G. D. 1975. Behavioral ecology of mating in the <br />male Gila topminnow, Poeclliopsis occiderttalis (Cyprinodon- <br />tiformes: Pceciliidae). Ecology 56:966-973. <br />Conservation Biology <br />Volume 2, No. 2, June 1988 <br />