Phylogeography unplugged: comparative surveys in the genomic era

In March 2012, the authors met at the National Evolutionary Synthesis Center (NESCent) in Durham, North Carolina, USA, to discuss approaches and cooperative ventures in Indo-Pacific phylogeography. The group emerged with a series of findings: (1) Marine population structure is complex, but single locus mtDNA studies continue to provide powerful first assessment of phylogeographic patterns. (2) These patterns gain greater significance/power when resolved in a diversity of taxa. New analytical tools are emerging to address these analyses with multi-taxon approaches. (3) Genome-wide analyses are warranted if selection is indicated by surveys of standard markers. Such indicators can include discordance between genetic loci, or between genetic loci and morphology. Phylogeographic information provides a valuable context for studies of selection and adaptation. (4) Phylogeographic inferences are greatly enhanced by an understanding of the biology and ecology of study organisms. (5) Thorough, range-wide sampling of taxa is the foundation for robust phylogeographic inference. (6) Congruent geographic and taxonomic sampling by the Indo-Pacific community of scientists would facilitate better comparative analyses. The group concluded that at this stage of technology and software development, judicious rather than wholesale application of genomics appears to be the most robust course for marine phylogeographic studies. Therefore, our group intends to affirm the value of traditional (''unplugged'') approaches, such as those based on mtDNA sequencing and microsatellites, along with essential field studies, in an era with increasing emphasis on genomic approaches.

Advancing biodiversity research in developing countries: the need for changing paradigms

The world is in the midst of a biodiversity crisis, threatening essential goods and services on which humanity depends. While there is an urgent need globally for biodiversity research, growing obstacles are severely limiting biodiversity research throughout the developing world, particularly in Southeast Asia. Facilities, funding, and expertise are often limited throughout this region, reducing the capacity for local biodiversity research. Although western scientists generally have more expertise and capacity, international research has sometimes been exploitative ``parachute science,'' creating a culture of suspicion and mistrust. These issues, combined with misplaced fears of biopiracy, have resulted in severe roadblocks to biodiversity research in the very countries that need it the most. Here, we present an overview of challenges to biodiversity research and case studies that provide productive models for advancing biodiversity research in developing countries. Key to success is integration of research and education, a model that fosters sustained collaboration by focusing on the process of conducting biodiversity research as well as research results. This model simultaneously expands biodiversity research capacity while building trust across national borders. It is critical that developing countries enact policies that protect their biodiversity capital without shutting down international and local biodiversity research that is essential to achieve the long-term sustainability of biodiversity, promoting food security and economic development.

Why is the influence of soil macrofauna on soil structure only considered by soil ecologists?

These last twenty years have seen the development of an abundant literature on the influence of soil macrofauna on soil structure. Amongst these organisms, earthworms, termites and ants are considered to play a key role in regulating the physical, chemical and microbiological properties of soils. Due to these influential impacts, soil ecologists consider these soil macro-invertebrates as `soil engineers' and their diversity and abundance are nowadays considered as relevant bioindicators of soil quality by many scientists and policy makers. Despite this abundant literature, the soil engineering concept remains a `preach to the choir' and bioturbation only perceived as important for soil ecologists. We discussed in this article the main mechanisms by which soil engineers impact soil structure and proposed to classify soil engineers with respect to their capacity to produce biostructures and modify them. We underlined the lack of studies considering biostructure dynamics and presented recent techniques in this purpose. We discussed why soil engineering concept is mainly considered by soil ecologists and call for a better collaboration between soil ecologists and soil physicists. Finally, we summarized main challenges and questions that need to be answered to integrate soil engineers activities in soil structure studies. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Perceptions of priority issues in the conservation of biodiversity and ecosystems in India

We report on the results of a country-wide survey of people's perceptions of issues relating to the conservation of biodiversity and ecosystems in India. Our survey, mainly conducted online, yielded 572 respondents, mostly among educated, urban and sub-urban citizens interested in ecological and environmental issues. 3160 ``raw'' questions generated by the survey were iteratively processed by a group of ecologists, environmental and conservation scientists to produce the primary result of this study: a summarized list of 152 priority questions for the conservation of India's biodiversity and ecosystems, which range across 17 broad thematic classes. Of these, three thematic classes-''Policy and Governance'', ``Biodiversity and Endangered Species'' and ``Protection and Conservation''-accounted for the largest number of questions. A comparative analysis of the results of this study with those from similar studies in other regions brought out interesting regional differences in the thematic classes of questions that were emphasized and suggest that local context plays a large role in determining emergent themes. We believe that the ready list of priority issues generated by this study can be a useful guiding framework for conservation practitioners, researchers, citizens, policy makers and funders to focus their resources and efforts in India's conservation research, action and funding landscape. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Bioenergy and climate change mitigation: an assessment

Bioenergy deployment offers significant potential for climate change mitigation, but also carries considerable risks. In this review, we bring together perspectives of various communities involved in the research and regulation of bioenergy deployment in the context of climate change mitigation: Land-use and energy experts, land-use and integrated assessment modelers, human geographers, ecosystem researchers, climate scientists and two different strands of life-cycle assessment experts. We summarize technological options, outline the state-of-the-art knowledge on various climate effects, provide an update on estimates of technical resource potential and comprehensively identify sustainability effects. Cellulosic feedstocks, increased end-use efficiency, improved land carbon-stock management and residue use, and, when fully developed, BECCS appear as the most promising options, depending on development costs, implementation, learning, and risk management. Combined heat and power, efficient biomass cookstoves and small-scale power generation for rural areas can help to promote energy access and sustainable development, along with reduced emissions. We estimate the sustainable technical potential as up to 100EJ: high agreement; 100-300EJ: medium agreement; above 300EJ: low agreement. Stabilization scenarios indicate that bioenergy may supply from 10 to 245EJyr(-1) to global primary energy supply by 2050. Models indicate that, if technological and governance preconditions are met, large-scale deployment (>200EJ), together with BECCS, could help to keep global warming below 2 degrees degrees of preindustrial levels; but such high deployment of land-intensive bioenergy feedstocks could also lead to detrimental climate effects, negatively impact ecosystems, biodiversity and livelihoods. The integration of bioenergy systems into agriculture and forest landscapes can improve land and water use efficiency and help address concerns about environmental impacts. We conclude that the high variability in pathways, uncertainties in technological development and ambiguity in political decision render forecasts on deployment levels and climate effects very difficult. However, uncertainty about projections should not preclude pursuing beneficial bioenergy options.