Guidelines for Recognizing Designatable Units
|
1) |
named subspecies or varieties: |
|
published subspecies of animals according to the Code of Zoological Nomenclature or published subspecies or varieties of plants according to the Code of Botanical Nomenclature. |
||
Examples: |
||
Water Snake: Nerodia sipedon sipedon (Not at Risk), N. s. insularum (Endangered) |
||
Loggerhead Shrike: Lanius ludovicianus migrans (Endangered), L. l. excubitorides (Threatened) |
||
or, |
||
2) |
units identified as genetically distinct: |
|
evidence of genetic distinctiveness including, but not limited to, appropriate inherited traits (morphological, life history, behaviour) and/or genetic markers (e.g. allozymes, DNA microsatellites, DNA restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLPs), DNA sequences, etc.). |
||
Example: |
||
Coho salmon: Interior Fraser River (Endangered), as opposed to other populations |
||
or, |
||
3) |
units separated by major range disjunction: |
|
disjunction between substantial portions of the species’ global geographic range such that dispersal of individuals between separated regions has been severely limited for an extended period of time and is not likely in the foreseeable future. |
||
Examples: |
||
Boreal Felt Lichen: Atlantic (Endangered), Boreal (Special Concern) |
||
Blanding’s Turtle: Atlantic population (Threatened), as opposed to other populations |
||
or, |
||
4) |
units identifed as biogeographically distinct: | |
occupation of differing eco-geographic regions that are relevant to the species and reflect historical or genetic distinction, as may be depicted on an appropriate ecozone or biogeographic zone map (Figs. 1 - 3). |
||
Examples: |
||
Mormon Metalmark: Southern Mountain population (E), Prairie population (T). |
||
Woodland Caribou: an assortment of designations based on biogeographic zones. |
Appropriate caution in interpreting data should be exercised when identifying designatable units. The biological significance of phenotypic, genetic or geographic variation, must be considered in light of potential limitations in the data available. Inadequate information on temporal variability, insufficient sample sizes, or evidence from inappropriate traits (those which are either inordinately variable or overly conservative) will compromise the significance of available information.
Separate status designations should not be recognized for management units that are not based on biological criteria consistent with these guidelines.
When a COSEWIC assessment has been conducted using designatable units below the species level, and adjacent designatable units are classified as having the same status, on the basis of the same criteria, then COSEWIC may apply a single status assessment to those units if a single assessment better addresses the conservation status of the units that are combined.
Fig.1. Terrestrial ecozones of Canada
Fig.2. National Freshwater Ecological Areas.
Fig.3. Faunal provinces of terrestrial amphibians, reptiles, and molluscs in Canada.