Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />is taken up in Chapter 8. It will be mentioned here only briefly. The fol- <br />lowing section is, in part, abstracted from a more comprehensive account <br />of conselvation genetics (Frankel and Soule, in press, Chapter 3). <br /> <br />SHORT-TERM FITNESS AND SURVIVAL <br /> <br />Many conservation programs are holding actions, particularly those <br />involving small numbers of individuals in captive or controlled environ- <br />ments. Intensive projects of this type are often necessary until permanent <br />survival programs can be established. Such programs, though, have a <br />built-in hazard-genetic drift (random genetic change and the fixation of <br />deleterious genes or gene combinations). Breeders of plants and animals <br />have learned through experience that vigor, fecundity and other aspects <br />of fitness decline at a rate proportional to the degree of random genetic <br />change, and that this in turn is inversely related to population size. <br />Therefore, the goals of such captive breeding programs must be to (1) <br />minimize genetic and phenotypic deterioration and change and (2) to <br />minimize the loss of genetic variation so that future adaptive options are <br />retained. The cost of ignoring these objectives is almost certain failure <br />( extinction). <br />The central problem of short-term conservation genetics is the rela- <br />tionship between population size and fitness. Two biological disciplines <br />converge on this problem and contribute to its solution; they are empiri- <br />cal population genetics and quantitative genetics. Quantitative genetics, <br />the oldest of the two, provides a wealth of data on the relationship be- <br />tween inbreeding and fitness in domesticated or laboratory lines. These <br />data permit us to generalize about the effect on fitness produced by dif- <br />ferent rates and amounts of inbreeding. AI> discussed below, the key to <br />our problem is found in this literature. To proceed on this basis alone, <br />however, and extrapolate from the inbreeding effects produced in the lab- <br />oratory or on the farm to the consequences of genetic drift and inbreeding <br />in organisms fresh from nature, is to be nagged by certain doubts. A more <br />satisfying approach, the one used here, is to demonstrate that the fitness <br />of individuals in both captive and natural populations is related to their <br />relative levels of heterozygosity (proportion of heterozygous loci). The <br />following section explores the qualitative evidence for a relationship be- <br />tween population size and fitness in nature. <br /> <br />Heterozygosity and Fitness in Natural Populations <br /> <br />Hundreds of electrophoretic studies and surveys have been performed, <br />but only a fraction are useful in addressing whether a decrease in heter- <br />ozygosity (or genetic variance) in a natural population will lead to a dimi- <br />nution of fitness. Nevertheless, there now exist several such studies, and <br />they provide us with a nearly unanimous answer (notwithstanding that <br /> <br />152 <br />