Auheke: He taonga ngā raraunga huinga ira mai i ngā koiora o Aotearoa na te mea he whakaahuatanga ēnei raraunga o te whakapapa o Aotearoa. Nā konā, he tapu ēnei raraunga huinga ira, ā, he tika kia Māori te rangahau o te mātai iranga. Ko te haepapa o ngā kairangahau e mahi ana ki ngā raraunga huinga ira ki te whakawhanaunga atu ki ngā mana whenua o te takiwā kia kaha ake ngā mahi rangahau. Nā konei, ka whaiwhakaaro mātou e pā ana ki tō mātou whakakotahitanga o ngā āhuatanga o te kaupapa Māori me ngā mahi rangahau mātai iranga ki roto i tētahi kaupapa matua mai i Ngā Wero Pūtaiao o Ngā Koiora Tuku Iho o Aotearoa, ā, ko te ingoa o tō mātou take ko 'Characterising adaptive variation in Aotearoa New Zealand's terrestrial and freshwater biota'. Kei te whakawhanake a tahi mātou ko ngā kaitiaki o Ngāi Tūāhuriri i tētahi kōrero e pā ana ki ngā piki me ngā heke o te whakaarotautanga o ngā urutaunga ira ki te awhi i ngā momo tata korehāhā, ngā momo mahinga kai hoki. Kia tutuki i ēnei wawata, i hangaia tētahi kaupapa e mātou. Ko te take o tēnei kaupapa ko te whakakotahitanga o te mātauranga Māori, ngā hangarau hou o te mātai iranga, me ngā āhuatanga o ngā pūnaha hauropi hoki, o te kōwaro (Neochanna burrowsius) rāua ko te kēkēwai (Paranephrops zealandicus). Ko te paparahi o tēnei kaupapa ko tētahi pou tarāwaho mō ngā tikanga o te kohinga pūtautau, te waihanga raraunga huinga ira, me te rāhuitanga o ngā raraunga. Ko te tumanako ka tūtaki i ngā wawata o Te Tiriti o Waitangi, atu i tērā, mai i te whakakotahitanga o te kaupapa Māori me te mātai iranga, ka pai ake te atawhai ki ngā koiora o Aotearoa, ā, ka whakamana hoki i ngā whanonga o ngā iwi Māori.

Conservation translocations—particularly those that weave diverse ways of knowing and seeing the world—promise to enhance species recovery and build ecosystem resilience. Yet, few studies to date have been led or co‐led by Indigenous peoples; or consider how centring Indigenous knowledge systems can lead to betterconservation translocation outcomes. In this Perspective, as Indigenous and non‐Indigenous researchers and practitioners working in partnership in Aotearoa New Zealand, we present a novel framework for co‐designing conservation translocations that centre Indigenous peoples and knowledge systems through Two‐Eyed Seeing. We apply this framework to Aotearoa New Zealand's threatened and underprioritized freshwater biodiversity. In particular, we highlight the co‐development of conservation translocations with Te Kōhaka o Tūhaitara and Te Nohoaka o Tukiauau that are weaving emerging genomic approaches into mātauraka Māori (Māori knowledge systems), including customary practices, processes and language. We envision the Two‐Eyed Seeing framework presented here will provide a critical point of reference for the co‐development of conservation translocations led or co‐led by Indigenous peoples elsewhere in the world to build more resilient biocultural heritage. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.

The biological changes that have occurred in Aotearoa New Zealand following human settlement are well documented with almost all ecosystems and taxa having been negatively impacted. Against this background of loss there have been remarkable advances in conservation management, particularly in the large-scale eradication and control of exotic mammalian pests. In 2016, the New Zealand Government announced Predator Free 2050, an ambitious project to eradicate introduced predators in Aotearoa New Zealand by 2050. Here, we discuss conservation translocations in the context of Predator Free 2050 aspirations. Our review draws together knowledge from Aotearoa New Zealand’s rich history of translocations and outlines a framework to support translocation decision making in the predator-free era. Predator Free 2050 aspirations encompass an ongoing question in conservation management; should we focus on maintaining small protected populations, because this seems generally easier and currently achievable, or on reversing declines in the large mainland areas that contain most of our biodiversity, a much harder challenge largely reliant on the continued use of aerially applied toxins? We focus on successfully establishing small translocated populations because they will provide the source populations for colonisation of a predator-free landscape. We define a successful translocation as one that meets a clear set of fundamental objectives defined a priori. If translocation objectives are clearly defined all subsequent decisions about factors that influence conservation translocation outcomes (e.g. the cultural and social setting, pest thresholds, habitat quality, genetic management) will be easier. Therefore, we encourage careful thinking in formulating conservation translocation objectives that align with aspirations for a predator-free Aotearoa NZ. We discourage a focus on any single element of planning and rather encourage all people involved in conservation translocations, particularly decision makers, to explicitly recognise the multiple values-based objectives associated with conservation translocations.

Relationships with place provide critical context for characterizing biocultural diversity. Yet, genetic and genomic studies are rarely informed by Indigenous or local knowledge, processes, and practices, including the movement of culturally significant species. Here, we show how place-based knowledge can better reveal the biocultural complexities of genetic or genomic data derived from culturally significant species.As a case study, we focus on culturally significant southern freshwater kōura (crayfish) in Aotearoa me Te Waipounamu (New Zealand, herein Aotearoa NZ). Our results, based on genotyping-by-sequencing markers, reveal strong population genetic structure along with signatures of population admixture in 19 genetically depauperate populations across the east coast of Te Waipounamu. Environment association and differentiation analyses for local adaptation also indicate a role for hydroclimatic variables-including temperature, precipitation, and water flow regimes-in shaping local adaptation in kōura. Through trusted partnerships between community and researchers, weaving genomic markers with place-based knowledge has both provided

No abstract

1.To achieve the vision outlined in the national strategy for biodiversity, Te Mana o te Taiao, we will need to unite diverse disciplines, including conservation genetics/genomics.2.As conservation genetic/genomic data generated for—and associated with—taonga (treasured) species is also taonga, we highlight the need for collaborative research partnerships that centre the needs, aspirations and expertise of mana whenua.3.As a team of predominantly early-career conservation genetics and genomics researchers working across institutions as Te Tiriti o Waitangi partners, each speaking to our own expertise, we review available and emerging tools in the conservation genetics/genomics toolbox.4.To support practitioners in identifying appropriate and affordable tools from the toolbox, we present a table that encompasses resource requirements (including finances, time, and skill) to assist conservation practitioners in assessing the associated costs and benefits of these tools for informing conservation management.5.To support researchers and practitioners in establishing long-lasting partnerships with mana whenua, we highlight key aspects of data management and data sovereignty for consideration.6.Intended as a platform to initiate discussion within and among conservation practitioners and researchers, mana whenua, and local communities, the development of government policies is beyond the scope of this contribution.7.To meet the vision of Te Mana o te Taiao, we conclude by calling for a transdisciplinary approach that includes conservation genetics/genomics.

Indigenous peoples around the world are leading discussion regarding genomic research of humans, and more recently, species of cultural significance, to ensure the ethical and equitable use of DNA. Within a Māori (indigenous people of Aotearoa New Zealand) worldview, genomic data obtained from taonga (culturally significant) species has whakapapa – generally defined as genealogy, whakapapa layers the contemporary, historical and mythological aspects of bioheritage – thus genomic data obtained from taonga species are taonga in their own right and are best studied using Māori principles. We contend it is the responsibility of researchers working with genomic data from taonga species to move beyond one-off Māori consultation toward building meaningful relationships with relevant Māori communities. Here, we reflect on our experience embedding Māori principles in genomics research as leaders of a BioHeritage National Science Challenge project entitled “Characterising adaptive variation in Aotearoa New Zealand’s terrestrial and freshwater biota”. We are co-developing a culturally-responsive evidence-based position statement regarding the benefits and risks of prioritising adaptive potential to build resilience in threatened taonga species, including species destined for customary or commercial harvest. To achieve this, we co-developed a research programme with the local subtribe, Ngāi Tūāhuriri, that integrates Māori knowledge with emerging genomic technologies and extensive ecological data for two taonga species, kōwaro (Canterbury mudfish; Neochanna burrowsius) and kēkēwai (freshwater crayfish; Paranephrops zealandicus). The foundation of our research programme is an iterative decision-making framework that includes tissue sampling as well as data generation, storage and access. Beyond upholding the promises made in The Treaty of Waitangi, we contend the integration of Māori principles in genomics research will enhance the recovery of taonga species and enable the realisation of Māori values.

No abstract