The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Estimated six per cent loss of genetic variation in wild populations since the industrial revolution
Open accessAbstract
Genetic variation is fundamental to population fitness and adaptation to environmental change. Human activities are driving declines in many wild populations and could have similar effects on genetic variation. Despite the importance of estimating such declines, no global estimate of the magnitude of ongoing genetic variation loss has been conducted across species. By combining studies that quantified recent changes in genetic variation across a mean of 27 generations for 91 species, we conservatively estimate a 5.4%–6.5% decline in within‐population genetic diversity of wild organisms since the industrial revolution. This loss has been most severe for island species, which show a 27.6% average decline. We identified taxonomic and geographical gaps in temporal studies that must be urgently addressed. Our results are consistent with single time‐point meta‐analyses, which indicated that genetic variation is likely declining. However, our results represent the first confirmation of a global decline and provide an estimate of the magnitude of the genetic variation lost from wild populations.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v067.i01 · Cited by 86,835
Accelerated modern human–induced species losses: Entering the sixth mass extinction
Ceballos, G., Ehrlich, P. R., Barnosky, A. D., García, A., Pringle, R. M., & Palmer, T. M. (2015) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.1400253 · Cited by 4,220 · cited 1×
“Conservative estimates suggest extinction rates are now 100 times the historical baseline rate (Ceballos et al., 2015).”
BackgroundPredicting extinction risk in declining species
Purvis, A., Gittleman, J. L., Cowlishaw, G., & Mace, G. M. (2000) · Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2000.1234 · Cited by 1,768
Cited by
Crop genetic erosion: understanding and responding to loss of crop diversity
Khoury, C. K., Brush, S., Costich, D. E., Curry, H. A., de Haan, S., Engels, J. M. M., Guarino, L., Hoban, S., Mercer, K. L., Miller, A. J., et al. (2022) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/nph.17733 · Cited by 471
Genetic diversity loss in the Anthropocene
Exposito-Alonso, M., Booker, T. R., Czech, L., Gillespie, L., Hateley, S., Kyriazis, C. C., Lang, P. L. M., Leventhal, L., Nogues-Bravo, D., Pagowski, V., et al. (2022) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abn5642 · Cited by 288
Conserving intraspecific variation for nature’s contributions to people
Des Roches, S., Pendleton, L. H., Shapiro, B., & Palkovacs, E. P. (2021) · Nature Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1038/s41559-021-01403-5 · Cited by 253
Conservation and the Genomics of Populations
Allendorf, F. W., Funk, W. C., Aitken, S. N., Byrne, M., Luikart, G., & Antunes, A. (2022) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198856566.001.0001 · Cited by 207
Quest for Orthologs in the Era of Biodiversity Genomics
Langschied, F., Bordin, N., Cosentino, S., Fuentes-Palacios, D., Glover, N., Hiller, M., Hu, Y., Huerta-Cepas, J., Coelho, L. P., Iwasaki, W., et al. (2024) · Genome Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/gbe/evae224 · Cited by 26
Metadata
- Authors
- Leigh, D. M., Hendry, A. P., Vázquez‐Domínguez, E., & Friesen, V. L.
- Venue
- Evolutionary Applications
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2019-06-05
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1505-1512
- ISSN
- 1752-4563 (ISSN-L)
- 1752-4571
- OpenAlex
- W2944333890
- Cited by
- 306
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 18.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
