Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39080286›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Multi-generational benefits of genetic rescue.

Dave P Onorato, Mark W Cunningham, Mark Lotz, Marc Criffield, David Shindle, Annette Johnson, Bambi C F Clemons, Colin P Shea, Melody E Roelke-Parker, Warren E Johnson and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Genetic rescue of Florida panthers reduced homozygosity but did not swamp ancestral genotypes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Dave P OnoratoFish and Wildlife Research Institute, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, 298 Sabal Palm Rd, Naples, FL, 34114, USA. dave.onorato@myfwc.com.
Mark W CunninghamFish and Wildlife Research Institute, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Gainesville, FL, 32601, USA.
Mark LotzDivision of Habitat and Species Conservation, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Naples, FL, 34114, USA.
Marc CriffieldFish and Wildlife Research Institute, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, 298 Sabal Palm Rd, Naples, FL, 34114, USA.
David ShindleUS Fish and Wildlife Service, Florida Ecological Services Field Office, Immokalee, FL, 34142, USA.
Annette JohnsonBig Cypress National Preserve, National Park Service, Ochopee, FL, 34141, USA.
Bambi C F ClemonsFish and Wildlife Research Institute, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Gainesville, FL, 32601, USA.
Colin P SheaFish and Wildlife Research Institute, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, St. Petersburg, FL, 33701, USA.
Melody E Roelke-ParkerFrederick National Laboratory of Cancer Research, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA.
Warren E JohnsonDepartment of Biology, Loyola University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, 21210, USA.
Brett T McClintockMarine Mammal Laboratory, Alaska Fisheries Science Center, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, Seattle, WA, 98115, USA.
Kristine L PilgrimUSDA Forest Service, National Genomics Center for Wildlife and Fish Conservation, Missoula, MT, 59801, USA.
Michael K SchwartzUSDA Forest Service, National Genomics Center for Wildlife and Fish Conservation, Missoula, MT, 59801, USA.
Madan K OliDepartment of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, 32611, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genetic rescue-an increase in population fitness following the introduction of new alleles-has been proven to ameliorate inbreeding depression in small, isolated populations, yet is rarely applied as a conservation tool. A lingering question regarding genetic rescue in wildlife conservation is how long beneficial effects persist in admixed populations. Using data collected over 40 years from 1192 endangered Florida panthers (Puma concolor coryi) across nine generations, we show that the experimental genetic rescue implemented in 1995-via the release of eight female pumas from Texas-alleviated morphological, genetic, and demographic correlates of inbreeding depression, subsequently preventing extirpation of the population. We present unequivocal evidence, for the first time in any terrestrial vertebrate, that genetic and phenotypic benefits of genetic rescue remain in this population after five generations of admixture, which helped increase panther abundance (> fivefold) and genetic effective population size (> 20-fold). Additionally, even with extensive admixture, microsatellite allele frequencies in the population continue to support the distinctness of Florida panthers from other North American puma populations, including Texas. Although threats including habitat loss, human-wildlife conflict, and infectious diseases are challenges to many imperiled populations, our results suggest genetic rescue can serve as an effective, multi-generational tool for conservation of small, isolated populations facing extinction from inbreeding.

Indexed as

Endangered SpeciesPumaAnimalsConservation of Natural ResourcesFemaleFloridaGene FrequencyGenetic FitnessGenetics, PopulationInbreedingInbreeding DepressionMaleMicrosatellite RepeatsTexasEndangered species conservationFitnessFlorida pantherGenetic rescueInbreeding depressionPuma concolor

Identifiers

PMID39080286
PMCPMC11289468

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.