Priority actions to improve provenance decision-making

Martin F. Breed, Peter A. Harrison, Armin Bischoff, Paula Durruty, Nick J.C. Gellie, Emily K. Gonzales, Kayri Havens, Marion Karmann, Francis F. Kilkenny, Siegfried L. Krauss, Andrew J. Lowe, Pedro Marques, Paul G. Nevill, Patricia L Vitt, Anna Bucharova

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

96 Scopus citations

Abstract

Selecting the geographic origin-the provenance-of seed is a key decision in restoration. The last decade has seen a vigorous debate on whether to use local or nonlocal seed. The use of local seed has been the preferred approach because it is expected to maintain local adaptation and avoid deleterious population effects (e.g., maladaptation and outbreeding depression). However, the impacts of habitat fragmentation and climate change on plant populations have driven the debate on whether the local-is-best standard needs changing. This debate has largely been theoretical in nature, which hampers provenance decision-making. Here, we detail cross-sector priority actions to improve provenance decision-making, including embedding provenance trials into restoration projects; developing dynamic, evidence-based provenance policies; and establishing stronger research-practitioner collaborations to facilitate the adoption of research outcomes. We discuss how to tackle these priority actions in order to help satisfy the restoration sector's requirement for appropriately provenanced seed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)510-516
Number of pages7
JournalBioScience
Volume68
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2018

Funding

This article was the output of a workshop at the Society for Ecological Restoration conference in Foz do Iguaçu, Brazil, held on 28 August 2017, titled “Using Non-Local Plants in Restoration: Fallacy or Fundamental?” This work was supported by the Australian Research Council (no. DE150100542 awarded to MFB, no. DP150103414 awarded to MFB and AJL; no. LP100100620 awarded to SLK; no. ICI150100041 awarded to SLK and supported PGN; no. LP120200380 supported PAH), the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility funding to MFB and AJL, and the Great Basin Native Plant Project to FFK. The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Keywords

  • assisted migration
  • ecological restoration
  • local adaptation
  • restoration genetics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Agricultural and Biological Sciences

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Priority actions to improve provenance decision-making'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this