Elsevier

Biological Conservation

Volume 144, Issue 1, January 2011, Pages 92-100
Biological Conservation

Review
Assisted colonization: Integrating conservation strategies in the face of climate change

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2010.11.016Get rights and content

Abstract

Global climate change poses an immense challenge for conservation biologists seeking to mitigate impacts to species and ecosystems. Species persistence will depend on geographic range shifts or adaptation in response to warming patterns as novel climates and community assemblages arise. Assisted colonization has been proposed as a method for addressing these challenges. This technique, which consists of transporting species to a new range that is predicted to be favorable for persistence under future climate scenarios, has become the subject of controversy and discussion in the conservation community due to its highly manipulative nature, questions about widespread feasibility, and uncertainty associated with the likelihood of translocated species becoming invasive. We reviewed the discussion and criticism associated with assisted colonization and sought to identify other conservation techniques that also display potential to promote the colonization and adaptation of species in response to climate change. We propose an integrated conservation strategy that includes management for habitat connectivity, conservation genetics, and when necessary, assisted colonization of species that are still unable to shift their ranges even given implementation of the above standard conservation approaches. We argue that this integrated approach will facilitate persistence for a larger proportion of species than is possible by solely using assisted colonization. Furthermore, a multi-faceted approach will likely reduce the uncertainty of conservation outcomes and will become increasingly necessary for conservation of biodiversity in a changing climate.

Introduction

The impacts of climate change on species and ecological systems have already become evident (Parmesan, 2006, Williams et al., 2007). Plant and animal range shifts are consistent with climate change predictions, and phenological events are changing in response to seasonal warming patterns (Parmesan and Yohe, 2003, Root et al., 2003). Similar range shifts have occurred in response to historical changes in climate over geological time scales (Petit et al., 2008), and previous climate change rates during glacial periods have occasionally matched or exceeded the current fluctuations; however, the current and predicted rates of human-induced climate change greatly exceed the vast majority of fluctuations observed in the past 420,000 years (Hoegh-Guldberg et al., 2007, Petit et al., 1999), and they are occurring during an inter-glacial period expected to be relatively stable (NRC, 2002, NRC, 2006). These changes pose a challenge to species persistence, occurring on temporal scales that require species to rapidly shift their ranges and/or adapt (McLachlan et al., 2005, Root and Schneider, 2006) as existing environmental conditions are replaced by novel climate regimes (Williams et al., 2007). Additional stressors, such as destruction of habitat, invasive species, diseases, and alteration of disturbance regimes, also pose major threats to biodiversity and may be intensified by a changing climate (Frelich and Reich, 2009, Parmesan and Yohe, 2003).

Conservation strategies that incorporate uncertainty associated with climate change impacts will be necessary to minimize biodiversity loss (Coenen et al., 2008, Lawler et al., 2010, Root and Schneider, 2006). Key components of these “climate change-integrated conservation strategies” (Hannah et al., 2002) include predictive models of species responses to climate change (Hannah et al., 2002, Pearson and Dawson, 2003), an adaptive rather than static approach to management (Lawler et al., 2010), and conservation planning for alternative future climate scenarios (Brooke, 2008). There is also increasing recognition that a dynamic view of community composition may need to be adopted, since differential responses of species to climate change will likely result in novel or “no-analog communities” (Williams and Jackson, 2007).

Assisted colonization – also referred to as assisted migration, assisted translocation, and managed relocation (hereafter, assisted colonization) – is a conservation strategy that has been proposed to mitigate the effects of climate change on biodiversity (Hoegh-Guldberg et al., 2008a, McLachlan et al., 2007). Assisted colonization refers to the physical relocation of a species to a location outside its existing or historical range that is predicted to be favorable for persistence under future climate projections. While much uncertainty exists about assisted colonization, the strategy is thought to be most applicable for species characterized by small populations, restricted dispersal ability and adaptive potential (Ozinga et al., 2009, Petit et al., 2008, Primack and Mao, 1992), and inhabiting low-connectivity landscapes (Trakhtenbrot et al., 2005).

Due to its highly manipulative nature, assisted colonization has been the subject of recent discussion and criticism within the conservation community (Fazey and Fischer, 2009, Ricciardi and Simberloff, 2009, Sax et al., 2009, Schwartz et al., 2009, Seddon et al., 2009, Vitt et al., 2009). Central to this discussion is the risk that a species will become invasive, causing adverse ecological or economic impacts when introduced to a new range. While much research has attempted to identify factors pre-disposing a species to be invasive, traits of invasiveness can remain difficult to predict (Kolar and Lodge, 2001, Ricciardi and Simberloff, 2009). Social and political resistance associated with this ecological uncertainty, as well as economic constraints related to implementation, are expected to complicate decision-making about when and to what extent assisted colonization should be implemented (Hoegh-Guldberg et al., 2008a, Hunter, 2007, McLachlan et al., 2007). Richardson et al. (2009) demonstrate how biologists can begin to incorporate these complex social and economic factors into assisted colonization risk assessment and decision-making. Nonetheless, there remains much controversy and uncertainty about the widespread applicability of assisted colonization as a tool for conserving biodiversity in response to climate change.

Given the uncertainty and criticism surrounding assisted colonization, we sought to identify management practices that have the potential to contribute to an integrated conservation strategy of climate change mitigation and include assisted colonization as one option. In addition to physical movement of species, other traditional conservation actions, such as management for increased habitat connectivity, have been proposed as alternatives for indirectly facilitating natural range shifts (Hunter, 2007, Vitt et al., 2009). We expand upon this idea to examine in detail the conservation strategies that have the potential to mitigate climate change impacts. In the remainder of this paper, we (1) provide a detailed summary of current discussion and criticism of assisted colonization, focusing on factors that influence whether this method is broadly applicable to a wide range of species, (2) examine whether the existing conservation practices of management for habitat connectivity and conservation genetics have the potential to assist the colonization and adaptation of species in response to climate change, and (3) outline an integrated strategy of conservation that has potential to address a larger range of climate change impacts than is possible by focusing solely on assisted colonization.

The primary focus of this paper is on ecological concerns. Although decision-makers should take account of the social, political, and economic contexts of assisted colonization and climate change (Richardson et al., 2009), an in-depth examination of these factors is beyond the scope of this paper.

Section snippets

Discussion surrounding assisted colonization

The recent increased attention to assisted colonization within the conservation community results from the perception that moving populations of a species from one region and introducing them outside the species’ native or historical range is highly manipulative (Hoegh-Guldberg et al., 2008a, Hoegh-Guldberg et al., 2008b, McLachlan et al., 2007), and therefore undesirable compared to less intrusive approaches. Nonetheless, the desired outcomes of assisted colonization efforts are aligned with

Improving habitat connectivity as part of an integrated conservation strategy

Habitat loss and fragmentation perforates the landscape, leaving small and discontinuous patches of habitat, thus limiting species range shifts in response to climate change. Fragmentation results in four landscape-scale effects that function as mechanisms for these limitations: (1) reduction in the amount of habitat, (2) dis-aggregation of habitat into an increasing number of disparate fragments or patches, (3) decrease in the size of fragments, and (4) increased isolation of habitat remnants (

Conservation genetics as part of an integrated conservation strategy

In addition to geographic range shifts, genetic plasticity and in situ adaptation also play important roles in persistence of species facing climate change (Bradshaw and Holzapfel, 2006, Davis and Shaw, 2001, Davis et al., 2005, Parmesan, 2006). Modeling studies highlight the importance of population genetic variation and the rate of adaptation for determining times to extinction and range shifts in response to climate change (Burger and Lynch, 1995, Pease et al., 1989), while numerous field

Discussion

We propose an integrated strategy of conservation in the face of climate change that includes management for habitat connectivity, understanding and using conservation genetics to aid adaptation, and when necessary, assisted colonization of species that still cannot shift their ranges and appear likely to go extinct. Implementing this integrated approach will be more effective than focusing solely on assisted colonization for conserving biodiversity in the face of current and future climate

Conclusions

Given the unprecedented rate of climate change and the degree to which plant and animal range shift or adaptation is required for species to persist, conservation biologists and ecologists seeking to conserve biodiversity face an immense challenge. A key component of this challenge is the need for decision-making that minimizes risk under future climate scenarios. The success of assisted colonization is unclear, due to the difficulty of predicting responses of individuals in colonizing and

Acknowledgements

We thank T.R. Fiutak, L.E. Frelich, N.R. Jordan, and J.A. Perry, for providing guidance, insights, and discussions that aided in the development of this paper. We also thank R.G. Shaw, K.S.G. Sundar, B. Breen, M. Dixon, J. Stucker, M. Wilson, and 2 anonymous reviewers for valuable suggestions and edits that improved the manuscript. S.R.L. was supported during work on the manuscript by a National Science Foundation IGERT Grant: Risk Analysis for Introduced Species and Genotypes (NSF DGE-0653827).

References (117)

  • C.S. Kolar et al.

    Progress in invasion biology: predicting invaders

    Trends Ecol. Environ.

    (2001)
  • W.F. Laurance

    Theory meets reality: how habitat fragmentation research has transcended island biogeographic theory

    Biol. Conserv.

    (2008)
  • T. Lenormand

    Gene flow and the limits to natural selection

    Trends. Ecol. Evol.

    (2002)
  • J.L. Lockwood et al.

    The role of propagule pressure in explaining invasion success

    Trends. Ecol. Evol.

    (2005)
  • P. Opdam et al.

    Climate change meets habitat fragmentation: linking landscape and biogeographical scale levels in research and conservation

    Biol. Conserv.

    (2004)
  • A. Rabinowitz et al.

    A range-wide model of landscape connectivity for the jaguar, Panthera onca

    Biol. Conserv.

    (2010)
  • A. Ricciardi et al.

    Assisted colonization is not a viable conservation strategy

    Trends Ecol. Evol.

    (2009)
  • D.F. Sax et al.

    Managed relocation: a nuanced evaluation is needed

    Trends Ecol. Evol.

    (2009)
  • M. Alleaume-Benharira et al.

    Geographical patterns of adaptation within a species range: interactions between drift and gene flow

    J. Evol. Biol.

    (2006)
  • D.J. Ayre et al.

    Climate change, genotypic diversity, and gene flow in reef-building corals

    Ecol. Lett.

    (2004)
  • P. Beier et al.

    Do habitat corridors provide connectivity?

    Conserv. Biol.

    (1998)
  • C. Both et al.

    The effect of climate change on the correlation between avian life history traits

    Glob. Change Biol.

    (2005)
  • W.E. Bradshaw et al.

    Evolutionary response to rapid climate change

    Science

    (2006)
  • C. Brooke

    Conservation and adaptation to climate change

    Conserv. Biol.

    (2008)
  • R. Burger et al.

    Evolution and extinction in a changing environment: a quantitative-genetic analysis

    Evolution

    (1995)
  • D. Coenen et al.

    Future directions in conservation and development: incorporating the reality of climate change

    Biodiversity

    (2008)
  • I. Davidson et al.

    Skeptical of assisted colonization

    Science

    (2008)
  • M.B. Davis et al.

    Range shifts and adaptive responses to Quaternary climate change

    Science

    (2001)
  • M.B. Davis et al.

    Evolutionary responses to climate change

    Ecology

    (2005)
  • D.M. Debinski et al.

    A survey and overview of habitat fragmentation experiments

    Conserv. Biol.

    (2000)
  • D. Dent

    Integrated Pest Management

    (1995)
  • A.A. Echelle et al.

    Genetic introgression of endemic taxa by non-natives: a case study with Leon Springs Pupfish and Sheapshead Minnow

    Conserv. Biol.

    (1997)
  • J.R. Etterson

    Evolutionary potential of Chamaecrista fasciculata in relation to climate change. I. Clinal patterns of selection along an environmental gradient in the Great Plains

    Evolution

    (2004)
  • J.R. Etterson

    Evolutionary potential of Chamaecrista fasciculuata in relation to climate change. II. Genetic architecture of three populations reciprocally planted along an environmental gradient in the Great Plains

    Evolution

    (2004)
  • J.R. Etterson

    Evolution in response to climate change

  • J.R. Etterson et al.

    Constraint to adaptive evolution in response to global warming

    Science

    (2001)
  • L. Fahrig

    Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity

    Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst.

    (2003)
  • J. Fischer et al.

    Making the matrix matter: challenges in Australian grazing landscapes

    Biodivers. Conserv.

    (2005)
  • R. Frankham

    Conservation genetics

    Annu. Rev. Gen.

    (1995)
  • R. Frankham

    A Primer of Conservation Genetics

    (2004)
  • L.E. Frelich et al.

    Will environmental changes reinforce the impact of global warming on the prairie-forest border of central North America?

    Front. Ecol. Environ.

    (2009)
  • G. Garcia-Ramos et al.

    Genetic models of adaptation and gene flow in peripheral populations

    Evolution

    (1997)
  • G. Grabbher et al.

    Climate effects on mountain plants

    Nature

    (1994)
  • N.M. Haddad et al.

    Corridor use by diverse taxa

    Ecology

    (2003)
  • A. Hampe et al.

    Conserving biodiversity under climate change: the rear edge matters

    Ecol. Lett.

    (2005)
  • L. Hannah

    Protected areas and climate change

    Ann. NY Acad. Sci.

    (2008)
  • L. Hannah et al.

    Conservation of biodiversity in a changing climate

    Conserv. Biol.

    (2002)
  • J.A. Harris et al.

    Ecological restoration and global climate change

    Restor. Ecol.

    (2006)
  • J. Harte et al.

    Climate change and extinction risk

    Nature

    (2004)
  • K.R. Hayes et al.

    Are there any consistent predictors of invasion success? Biol

    Invasions

    (2008)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text