Conservation management strategies for many highly threatened species include conservation breeding to prevent extinction and enhance recovery. Pairing decisions for these conservation breeding programmes can be informed by pedigree data to minimize relatedness between individuals in an effort to avoid inbreeding, maximize diversity and maintain evolutionary potential. However, conservation breeding programmes struggle to use this approach when pedigrees are shallow or incomplete. While genetic data (i.e., microsatellites) can be used to estimate relatedness to inform pairing decisions, emerging evidence indicates this approach may lack precision in genetically depauperate species, and more effective estimates will likely be obtained from genomic data (i.e., thousands of genome‐wide single nucleotide polymorphisms, or SNPs). Here, we compare relatedness estimates and subsequent pairing decisions using pedigrees, microsatellites and SNPs from whole‐genome resequencing approaches in two critically endangered birds endemic to New Zealand: kakī/black stilt (Himantopus novaezelandiae) and kākāriki karaka/orange‐fronted parakeet (Cyanoramphus malherbi). Our findings indicate that SNPs provide more precise estimates of relatedness than microsatellites when assessing empirical parent–offspring and full sibling relationships. Further, our results show that relatedness estimates and subsequent pairing recommendations using PMx are most similar between pedigree‐ and SNP‐based approaches. These combined results indicate that in lieu of robust pedigrees, SNPs are an effective tool for informing pairing decisions, which has important implications for many poorly pedigreed conservation breeding programmes worldwide.

Structural variants (SVs) are large rearrangements (>50 bp) within the genome that impact gene function and the content and structure of chromosomes. As a result, SVs are a significant source of functional genomic variation, that is, variation at genomic regions underpinning phenotype differences, that can have large effects on individual and population fitness. While there are increasing opportunities to investigate functional genomic variation in threatened species via single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) data sets, SVs remain understudied despite their potential influence on fitness traits of conservation interest. In this future‐focused Opinion, we contend that characterizing SVs offers the conservation genomics community an exciting opportunity to complement SNP‐based approaches to enhance species recovery. We also leverage the existing literature–predominantly in human health, agriculture and ecoevolutionary biology–to identify approaches for readily characterizing SVs and consider how integrating these into the conservation genomics toolbox may transform the way we manage some of the world's most threatened species.

Over the past 50 years conservation genetics has developed a substantive toolbox to inform species management. One of the most long‐standing tools available to manage genetics—the pedigree—has been widely used to characterize diversity and maximize evolutionary potential in threatened populations. Now, with the ability to use high throughput sequencing to estimate relatedness, inbreeding, and genome‐wide functional diversity, some have asked whether it is warranted for conservation biologists to continue collecting and collating pedigrees for species management. In this perspective, we argue that pedigrees remain a relevant tool, and when combined with genomic data, create an invaluable resource for conservation genomic management. Genomic data can address pedigree pitfalls (e.g., founder relatedness, missing data, uncertainty), and in return robust pedigrees allow for more nuanced research design, including well‐informed sampling strategies and quantitative analyses (e.g., heritability, linkage) to better inform genomic inquiry. We further contend that building and maintaining pedigrees provides an opportunity to strengthen trusted relationships among conservation researchers, practitioners, Indigenous Peoples, and Local Communities.