Here's a list of papers we've read this semester. Some of these are definitely worthy of an ex post facto blog post.
Great descriptions of the species studied here: www.edwardsaquifer.net/species.html
What is phylogeography anyway?
Lucas, L. K., Gompert, Z., Gibson, J. R., Bell, K. L., Buerkle, C. A. and Nice, C. C. (2016), Pervasive gene flow across critical habitat for four narrowly endemic, sympatric taxa. Freshw Biol, 61: 933–946. doi:10.1111/fwb.12758
Happy new year - and with that, a new semester. My resolution this year is to write, to publish, to engage. And shouldn't we all resolve to communicate better this year?
This blog will review the weekly discussions held by the Spring 2017 Conservation Genomics seminar. At the moment, that mostly means my personal perspective and hopefully a fair representation of the discussion we had that morning. In general, these seminar groups are enormously beneficial for not only keeping up with literature, but also pushing it forward through critique and inspiration among colleagues.
In conservation genomics, I frequently hear and read an ongoing debate: Why do/should we invest in the high-throughput sequencing and associated bioinformatic techniques? How should land- and wildlife-managers best utilize the data and inferences afforded?
Before I entered the field (yeah, yeah - not long ago at all), microsatellites were a standard resource in determination of gene flow among populations of management concern. These days, some feel that it's difficult to even be published in top-tier journals without pursuing some fancy big genomic data - regardless of the question. In the coming weeks, this question will undoubtedly return, but I hope we'll also get to read papers forging the frontier in the utility of genomic data for systems of conservation concern.