Recoding BOTH Ne and Nc?

[cegr...@gmail.com]

Hi all,

In our last meeting, the question was raised: If we have Ne records, should we also expend additional effort looking for Nc estimates?

To summarise the discussion:

Both Ne and Nc may be useful for quantifying ratios downstream, but it’s ok to just put Ne if you have it, and if the Nc would be time consuming to collect. If it’s easy to include both, please do so.

Please comment if you have further ideas on this topic!

Catherine

[Jessica da Silva]

Thanks for the question. Yes, I think it would be valuable to have both sizes. Having data for both can help in refining the Ne:Nc ratios for particular groups. Or they might show different aspects to the species problem - e.g., sufficient Nc to warrant little management attention, but extremely low Ne likely highlighting the effects of inbreeding. These would be good examples to be aware of. 

  Jess

 

 

Jessica da Silva, PhD ▪  Senior Scientist, Evolutionary Genomics and Wildlife Management ▪ South African National Biodiversity Institute ▪ Office: 021-799-8860 ▪ Lab: 021-799-8749 ▪ Mobile: 079-045-1781 ▪ https://sites.google.com/site/jessicamdasilva/ ▪ ResearcherID: J-4290-2012 ▪ ORCID ID: 0000-0001-8385-1166

GEO BON - Genetic Composition Working Group ▪ Editor: African Journal of Herpetology ▪ World Congress of Herpetology - International Herpetological Committee ▪ IUCN, Species Survival Commission - Conservation Genetics Specialist Group, Chameleon Specialist Group

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Genetic indicators project" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to genetic-indicators-...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/genetic-indicators-project/9fe147f7-b757-4ab5-b05a-e1b8a41627b3n%40googlegroups.com.

[shoban]

I agree with Jess, if possible, please record both