*Subspecies diversification and its importance in conservation* Dear all, This is in reference to the issue I raised last week whether the subspecies should be considered as a conservation unit for the assessment under IUCN ¡Vred list. I emphasise this particularly for those species whose mulitple forms (subspecies) exists and they have not accorded separately instead lumped to a species complex under IUCN. The responses I received are overwhelming and some of you were also experiencing the same problem that I am facing here in India. I have seriously considered each of your response/reply to compile my view point for the species of my concern. thanking you so much for writing, sharing your experiences, views and suggesting me the possible way to look forward and convince the authorities. I greatly acknowledge those who shared articles in support of their views and had discussion with me. I am herewith sharing you the compilation report of responses. Thanking you so much. Regards Mukesh Thakur 1 # Ron Okimoto replied: Get some population geneticists involved. We are just starting to get a glimpse of what a genetic load is for a population. My take is that all endangered species should be classified and managed by sub species. The evolutionary facts of life are that nearly all the sub species are going to go extinct for one reason or another. We are just getting data on what the genetic load is for a population in terms mutations in the genome. It may be that some populations will survive their genetic load upon population reduction and most will not. The more populations the better the chance that one will survive. If you start mixing the populations artificially to increase current reproductive success you may be dooming the species to extinction by just making all the populations the same in terms of their chance at ultimate survival. Trying to maintain the largest effective population may be the simplest to manage, but it may not be the best solution in terms of ultimate survival of that lineage. We only see the survivors in the current biosphere and the survivors have been few and the failures have been many. Ron Okimoto 2 # Dr. Acacia Alcivar-Warren replied: Dear Mukesh, Thank you very much for raising this very important IUCN issue. On a separate but related concern related to marine shrimp populations in their natural range in the Pacific coast of Latin America, I have not succeeded in encouraging IUCN leaders to take action to review the penaeus taxon. The natural populations of the Pacific whiteleg shrimp, *Litopenaeus (Penaeus) vannamei,* from northern Peru to northern Mexico, may be at risk. The unregulated international trade threatens food safety, food security and national security. There are no international authorities, or concerned veterinarians, in charge of addressing the lack of supervision for the massive translocation of a subspecies from one continent to another -without quarantine!. Nobody seems to take responsibility for this. The severe *Vibrio* spp-causing disease (AHPND/EMS) of fast growing SPF *L. vannamei *from US, which first appeared in China in 2009 and quickly spread to other countries in Asia and then to Mexico in April 2013, is of concern to conserve healthy biodiversity in light of climate change. My requests to international agencies and governments to protect the natural populations of *L. vannamei* have received no replies, not from IUCN, FAO, World Bank, US authorities, or the authorities of the leading shrimp producing-countries (Ecuador, India and Indonesia), that claim to be EMS-free (unconfirmed - we are checking into these claims). My requests to AVMA leaders and US government's health officials in charge of protecting our food supply have gone nowhere. Nobody seems to care, in spite of my repeated calls for action at meetings of the World Aquaculture Society (https://www.was.org/meetingabstracts/ShowAbstract.aspx?Id=32080). A group in France, supported by IUCN, is actually working on an industry-sponsored project to 'address the safety and nutrition of current feeds used in shrimp aquaculture'. Can I do something to help you *bring together the basic researchers on population genetics and the leaders of IUCN?*, to address the issues of concern to both of us? Would you be interested in *organizing a Biodiversity Conservation meeting, *to invite the IUCN leaders to address our issues of concern?. Friends of the FUCOBI Foundation of Ecuador, of which I was the Founder and first President, would be very happy to support an international meeting like this, *if *you include collaborators from our 'ONE HEALTH Epigenomics Educational Initiative (OHEEI)' in India and Nigeria. Indeed, we just sent a message out to a 'ONE HEALTH' list, offering travel awards to pay for expenses of speakers and students to attend conservation meetings addressing the holistic concept of 'ONE HEALTH Epigenomics'. Let me know if interested in this offer at: fucobi@gmail.com. The release is copied below. Dr. Acacia Alcivar-Warren ONE HEALTH Practitioner 3 # Gary Thorgaard, Washington State University replied: Dear Mukesh, The situation you are interested in sounds similar to that for Pacific salmon types in the Pacific Northwesr and California, USA. The U.S. Government, through its organization NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), has listed a number of subgroups within the various salmon species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. The terminology that has been used for recognition is "evolutionarily significant unit" (ESU) and much of the justification for this was developed by Dr. Robin Waples of NOAA. I would encourage you to look up his papers and potentially to correspond with him. I am not sure about the IUCN's policy in regard to such listings. Gary 4 # K.A.Bindu replied Dear Mukesh, Houbara bustards (chlamydotis undulata )was recently got separated into two separate species,viz Chlamydotis undulata undulata (African houbara) and Chlamydotis undulata macqueenii (Asian houbara). The IUCN has listed them as vulnerable. But the African bustards comprise of two sub species, Chlamydotis undulata undulata and Chlamydotis undulata fuertaventurae (Canary bustards) and is there any clear mention about the status of Canary bustards in the IUCN list? Regards K.A.Bindu 5 # *Jonathan Mee replied:* Hello Mukesh. Perhaps you would be interested in this article (I¡¦ve provided the open-access link, below). It¡¦s about recognizing diversity below the species level in a widely-distributed fish species. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eva.12247/abstract Regards, jon 6 # *Nagarjun V replied:* Hi Mukesh, You are doing interesting work with wide reaching implications. Species de-limitation is a major issue, especially with regards to conservation. While a few years ago barcoding was used to de-limit species, now it is being realized that in some species, even use of whole genome sequencing data is not sufficient to identify species boundaries. One the other hand one could use ever increasing amount of data to delimit species based on population structure alone. The crux of the whole issue is species definition. Should species be defined based on morphology, reproductive isolation (biological species concept) or just genetic structure? Hence, conservation genomics is at a cross roads of sorts. Based on the discussions during a conference on conservation genomics, i was involved in writing a opinion piece about the subject (see attached). Hope it will provide you a new perspective at looking Regards, Nagarjun 7 # Dr. Axel Hochkirch replied hi Mukesh, The official IUCN policy is that a red list assessment has first to be done on the species level, before subspecies assessments will be published. I attach the current IUCN guidelines for using the Red List Categories and Criteria (see page 4). Other intraspecific ranks (formas, morphs, subvarieties, cultivars etc.) are not included on the IUCN Red List. So, if you are dealing with a widespread species that has been assessed at the species level, you are allowed to submit an assessment at the subspecies unit. Best regards, Axel 8 # Keith A. Crandall, PhD replied: Dear Mukesh, Great issue! Thanks for your email. I¡¦ve been involved in red listing of the freshwater crayfish and the subspecies issue has been problematic. Basically, IUCN doesn¡¦t care about subspecies. The US Endangered Species Act, likewise, does not care about subspecies for invertebrates, but it does for vertebrates! The ignoring of subspecies in the crayfish leads to issues of counting because most other lists count subspecies (formally recognized subspecies). They often become formal species after further investigation. Given that reality, my feeling is that IUCN should be treating formal subspecies as distinct OTUs deserving of their own conservation assessment. Well, that¡¦s my two cents anyway. Take care, Keith mukesh thakur