ArticleMolecular ecology2025
Temporal Changes in Tasmanian Devil Genetic Diversity at Sites With and Without Supplementation.
Article in Molecular ecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Boost or Bust? The Impact of Supplementation on Functional Genetic Diversity and Selective Processes in Tasmanian Devils.Molecular ecology · 2025Article
- The Devil Is in the Details: Assessing Temporal Changes in Genetic Diversity Across Managed and Unmanaged Sites.Molecular ecology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Management interventions for threatened species are well documented with genetic data now playing a pivotal role in informing their outcomes. However, in situ actions like supplementations (releasing individuals into an existing population) are often restricted to a singular site. Considerable research and management effort have been dedicated to conserving the Tasmanian devil (Sarcophilus harrisii), offering a unique opportunity to investigate the temporal genetic consequences of supplementation at multiple sites, in comparison to outcomes observed in the absence of management interventions. Using 1,778 genome-wide SNPs across 1,546 individuals, we compared four wild-supplemented sites to four monitoring-only sites (not supplemented; control sites) over 9 years (2014-2022). At the study completion, genetic differentiation among supplemented sites had significantly decreased compared to among not-supplemented sites. We found statistically significant variation in genetic change over time between sites using linear mixed-effects modelling with random slopes. Investigating this among-site variation showed that three of the supplemented sites conformed to predictions that supplementations would have a positive impact on the genetic diversity of devils at these sites. We predicted no change over time at our fourth site due to the observed relatively high gene flow, however, this site did not align with predictions, instead showing decreased genetic diversity and increased relatedness. Amongst not supplemented sites, there was no consistent pattern of temporal genetic change, suggesting devil sites across Tasmania are highly heterogeneous, likely reflecting variation in site connectivity and genetic drift. Our study demonstrates that long-term concurrent monitoring of multiple sites, including controls, is necessary to contextualise the influence of management interventions on natural species fluctuations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.