Recent years have seen a debate over various methods that could objectively prioritize conservation value below the species level. Most prominent among these has been the evolutionarily significant unit (ESU). We reviewed ESU concepts with the aim of proposing a more unified concept that would reconcile opposing views. Like species concepts, conflicting ESU concepts are all essentially aiming to define the same thing: segments of species whose divergence can be measured or evaluated by putting differential emphasis on the role of evolutionary forces at varied temporal scales. Thus, differences between ESU concepts lie more in the criteria used to define the ESUs themselves rather than in their fundamental essence. We provide a context-based framework for delineating ESUs which circumvents much of this situation. Rather than embroil in a befuddled debate over an optimal criterion, the key to a solution is accepting that differing criteria will work more dynamically than others and can be used alone or in combination depending on the situation. These assertions constitute the impetus behind adaptive evolutionary conservation.

Captive breeding programs are increasingly being initiated to prevent the imminent extinction of endangered species and/or populations. But how well can they conserve genetic diversity and fitness, or re-establish self-sustaining populations in the wild? A review of these complex questions and related issues in salmonid fishes reveals several insights and uncertainties. Most programs can maintain genetic diversity within populations over several generations, but available research suggests the loss of fitness in captivity can be rapid, its magnitude probably increasing with the duration in captivity. Over the long-term, there is likely tremendous variation between (i) programs in their capacity to maintain genetic diversity and fitness, and (ii) species or even intraspecific life-history types in both the severity and manner of fitness-costs accrued. Encouragingly, many new theoretical and methodological approaches now exist for current and future programs to potentially reduce these effects. Nevertheless, an unavoidable trade-off exists between conserving genetic diversity and fitness in certain instances, such as when captive-bred individuals are temporarily released into the wild. Owing to several confounding factors, there is also currently little evidence that captive-bred lines of salmonids can or cannot be reintroduced as self-sustaining populations. Most notably, the root causes of salmonid declines have not been mitigated where captive breeding programs exist. Little research has also addressed under what conditions an increase in population abundance due to captive-rearing might offset fitness reductions induced in captivity. Finally, more empirical investigation is needed to evaluate the genetic/fitness benefits and risks associated with (i) maintaining captive broodstocks as either single or multiple populations within one or more facilities, (ii) utilizing cryopreservation or surrogate broodstock technologies, and (iii) adopting other alternatives to captive-rearing such as translocations to new habitats. Management recommendations surrounding these issues are proposed, with the aim of facilitating meta-analyses and more general principles or guidelines for captive-breeding. These include the need for the following: (i) captive monitoring to involve, a priori, greater application of hypothesis testing through the use of well-designed experiments and (ii) improved documentation of procedures adopted by specific programs for reducing the loss of genetic diversity and fitness.

What is the extent and scale of local adaptation (LA)? How quickly does LA arise? And what is its underlying molecular basis? Our review and meta-analysis on salmonid fishes estimates the frequency of LA to be B55-70%, with local populations having a 1.2 times average fitness advantage relative to foreign populations or to their performance in new environments. Salmonid LA is evident at a variety of spatial scales (for example, few km to41000 km) and can manifest itself quickly (6-30 generations). As the geographic scale between populations increases, LA is generally more frequent and stronger. Yet the extent of LA in salmonids does not appear to differ from that in other assessed taxa. Moreover, the frequency with which foreign salmonid populations outperform local populations (B23-35%) suggests that drift, gene flow and plasticity often limit or mediate LA. The relatively few studies based on candidate gene and genomewide analyses have identified footprints of selection at both small and large geographical scales, likely reflecting the specific functional properties of loci and the associated selection regimes (for example, local niche partitioning, pathogens, parasites, photoperiodicity and seasonal timing). The molecular basis of LA in salmonids is still largely unknown, but differential expression at the same few genes is implicated in the convergent evolution of certain phenotypes. Collectively, future research will benefit from an integration of classical and molecular approaches to understand: (i) species differences and how they originate, (ii) variation in adaptation across scales, life stages, population sizes and environmental gradients, and (iii) evolutionary responses to human activities.

Humans have a penchant for unintentionally selecting against that which they desire most. In fishes, unprecedented reductions in abundance have been associated with unprecedented changes in harvesting and aquaculture technologies. Fishing, the predominant cause of fish-population collapses, is increasingly believed to generate evolutionary changes to characters of import to individual fitness, population persistence and levels of sustainable yield. Human-induced genetic change to wild populations can also result from interactions with their domesticated counterparts. Our examination of fisheries- and farming-induced evolution includes factors that may influence the magnitude, rate and reversibility of genetic responses, the potential for shifts in reaction norms and reduced plasticity, loss of genetic variability, outbreeding depression and their demographic consequences to wild fishes. We also suggest management initiatives to mitigate the effects of fisheries- and farming-induced evolution. Ultimately, the question of whether fishing or fish farming can cause evolutionary change is moot. The key issue is whether such change is likely to have negative conservation- or socio-economic consequences. Although the study of human-induced evolution on fishes should continue to include estimates of the magnitude and rate of selection, there is a critical need for research that addresses short- and long-term demographic consequences to population persistence, plasticity, recovery and productivity.

With an ecological-evolutionary perspective increasingly applied toward the conservation and management of endangered or exploited species, the genetic estimation of effective population size (Ne) has proliferated. Based on a comprehensive analysis of empirical literature from the past two decades, we asked: (i) how often do studies link Ne to the adult census population size (N)? (ii) To what extent is Ne correctly linked to N? (iii) How readily is uncertainty accounted for in both Ne and N when quantifying Ne/N ratios? and (iv) how frequently and to what degree might errors in the estimation of Ne or N affect inferences of Ne/N ratios? We found that only 20% of available Ne estimates (508 of 2617; 233 studies) explicitly attempted to link Ne and N; of these, only 31% (160 of 508) correctly linked Ne and N. Moreover, only 7% (41 of 508) of Ne/N ratios (correctly linked or not) reported confidence intervals for both Ne and N; for those cases where confidence intervals were reported for Ne only, 31% of Ne/N ratios overlapped with 1, of which more than half also reached below Ne/N = 0.01. Uncertainty in Ne/N ratios thus sometimes spanned at least two orders of magnitude. We conclude that the estimation of Ne/N ratios in natural populations could be significantly improved, discuss several options for doing so, and briefly outline some future research directions.

Recent years have seen a debate over various methods that could objectively prioritize conservation value below the species level. Most prominent among these has been the evolutionarily significant unit (ESU). We reviewed ESU concepts with the aim of proposing a more unified concept that would reconcile opposing views. Like species concepts, conflicting ESU concepts are all essentially aiming to define the same thing: segments of species whose divergence can be measured or evaluated by putting differential emphasis on the role of evolutionary forces at varied temporal scales. Thus, differences between ESU concepts lie more in the criteria used to define the ESUs themselves rather than in their fundamental essence. We provide a context‐based framework for delineating ESUs which circumvents much of this situation. Rather than embroil in a befuddled debate over an optimal criterion, the key to a solution is accepting that differing criteria will work more dynamically than others and can be used alone or in combination depending on the situation. These assertions constitute the impetus behind adaptive evolutionary conservation.

The use of eDNA to detect the presence/absence of rare or invasive species is well documented and its use in biodiversity monitoring is expanding. Preliminary laboratory research has also shown a positive correlation between the concentration of species‐specific eDNA particles and the density/biomass of a species in a given environment. However, the extent to which these results can be extended to natural environments has yet to be formally quantified. We collated data from experiments that examined the correlation between eDNA and two metrics of abundance (biomass and density) and, using mixed‐effects meta‐analysis, quantified the strength of that correlation across laboratory and natural environments. We found that eDNA particle concentration was more strongly correlated with abundance in laboratory environments compared to natural environments, accounting for approximately 82% and 57% of the observed variation in abundance, respectively. We found some evidence of potential publication bias that may have impacted the estimation of the correlation in natural environments; after smaller studies were removed from the dataset, eDNA particle concentration accounted for approximately 50% of the observed variation in abundance in natural environments. No effect of abundance metric was found on the strength of correlation between eDNA particle concentration and abundance. Despite a weaker general correlation in natural environments, eDNA concentration often still explained substantial variation in abundance. eDNA research is still an emergent field of study; with only moderate improvements in technology or technique, it could represent a powerful new tool for quantifying abundance.

Unravelling relationships between dispersal and population structure requires considering the impacts of assumption violations of indirect gene flow models in a given system. We combined temporal, individual and coalescent-based analyses of microsatellite DNA variation to explore the general hypothesis that unequal effective population size (Ne), asymmetric gene flow (m) and nonrandom (sex-biased) individual dispersal had an important effect on spatiotemporal population structuring in lake-dwelling brook charr (Salvelinus fontinalis). This integrative examination shed light on the dichotomous structuring observed between an outlet and three tributary-spawning populations and their potential for adaptive divergence. It revealed further that finer tributary population structuring incongruent with drainage structure has been shaped by asymmetric m from one population with a large Ne towards two populations of smaller Ne. Gene flow among the tributaries was also mediated mainly by male-biased dispersal. However, longer distance dispersal from tributaries to the outflow was female-biased. Spatially dependent sex-biased dispersal may have contributed therefore to gene flow at different levels of population structuring. Our results demonstrate how dispersal and population structure may interrelate to produce spatial variation in intraspecific diversity, and are therefore relevant for conservation programmes seeking to define conservation units or predict recolonization rates of extirpated populations.