Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41272979›Full record

ArticleMolecular ecology2025

Boost or Bust? The Impact of Supplementation on Functional Genetic Diversity and Selective Processes in Tasmanian Devils.

Andrea L Schraven, Katherine A Farquharson, Kimberley C Batley, Samantha Fox, Andrew V Lee, Katherine Belov, Luke W Silver, Carolyn J Hogg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular ecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Andrea L SchravenSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0621-0039
Katherine A FarquharsonSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9009-7453
Kimberley C BatleySchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2084-0288
Samantha FoxSave the Tasmanian Devil Program, Department Natural Resources and Environment, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0371-3458
Andrew V LeeSave the Tasmanian Devil Program, Department Natural Resources and Environment, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Katherine BelovSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9762-5554
Luke W SilverSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1718-5756
Carolyn J HoggSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6328-398X

Funding

Australian Research Council CE20010001Australian Research Council LP180100244
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Translocating individuals into existing populations of conspecifics can support threatened species by increasing population size, maintaining genetic diversity and reducing the risk of inbreeding. However, for species whose adaptive potential is compromised due to ongoing threats, like disease, the outcome of such management interventions becomes more complex. The Tasmanian devil (Sarcophilus harrisii) is a prime example, where the emergence of Devil Facial Tumour Disease (DFTD) has led to significant population declines, raising concerns about their long-term survival. It is therefore critical to understand if the introduction of new functional genetic variants through supplementation actions enhances, or potentially hinders, their long-term persistence. We investigated changes in functional gene diversity at both the population- and individual-levels, pre- and post-supplementation, across multiple wild devil sites (four supplemented and four not supplemented). We found that functional diversity increased post-supplementation. Though the magnitude of change was varied among sites, a similar site-specific pattern was also evident in genome-wide diversity. Importantly, we saw no evidence of swamping of local alleles or those putatively associated with DFTD regressions. This is likely due to the source population representing the broad wild genetic diversity and supplementations facilitating gene flow across the current fragmented landscape. Continued and long-term monitoring at multiple wild sites will be necessary to determine whether future generations retain this introduced genetic variation.

Indexed as

Genetics, PopulationGenetic VariationMarsupialiaSelection, GeneticAnimalsConservation of Natural ResourcesEndangered SpeciesFacial NeoplasmsPopulation DensityTasmaniaaugmentationDFTDfunctional diversitygenetic managementimmunogenetic diversitymajor histocompatibility complexSarcophilus harrisii

Identifiers

PMID41272979
PMCPMC12717987

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.