ArticlePloS one2025
Barriers Broken: Genetic swamping in restored Brook Trout populations.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Conservation genomics of Pecos pupfish (Cyprinodon pecosensis).Journal of fish biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Scientists use reintroductions to restore native species to their historical ranges but sometimes overlook effects of dispersal on genetic structure of restored populations. Unidirectional or biased gene flow can result in genetic swamping, where unique variation in a recipient population is replaced by genotypes from the source population. In theory, this can result in loss of advantageous alleles and adaptive capacity. In Great Smoky Mountains National Park native Brook Trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) are being restored to streams from which they had been extirpated. Multiple source lineages are mixed in restoration sites to maximize genetic diversity. However, in our study system, translocated fish were released unevenly along a rugged mountain stream, resulting in an upstream population coming from only one source stock and a downstream population that was a mixture of three source stocks. A natural cascade allows downstream dispersal but prevents or constrains upstream movement. Theory predicts that such biased movement will lead to genetic swamping, i.e., reduction or loss of representation of ancestral lineages released only in the downstream population. However, the rate of gene flow and degree of asymmetry were unknown. Here, we used genetic and population density data to confirm the directionality of dispersal, estimate the rate of genetic swamping, and assess alternative mitigation strategies. Our results indicate that the downstream population has already become dominated by ancestry from the upstream source and translocation from within the restored stream will not achieve the intended genetic diversity. Instead, introducing additional fish from the original source stocks above the natural barrier would be necessary to equalize the contribution of all three source populations. Our results emphasize the importance of understanding the interplay between dispersal and genetic structure for conservation planning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.