This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Genome Resources Banks (GRBs) represent vital repositories for the systematic collection, storage, and management of genetic material across various taxa, with a primary objective of safeguarding genetic diversity for research and practical applications. Alongside the development of assisted reproductive techniques (ART), GRBs have evolved into indispensable tools in conservation, offering opportunities for species preservation, mitigating inbreeding risks, and facilitating genetic management across fragmented populations. By preserving genetic information in a suspended state, GRBs serve as backups against population vulnerabilities, potentially aiding in the restoration of endangered species and extending their genetic lifespan. While evidence demonstrates the efficacy of GRBs, ethical considerations surrounding biobanking procedures for wildlife conservation remain largely unexplored. In this article, we will discuss possible ethical issues related to GRBs and the need to ethically monitor biobanking procedures in wildlife conservation. We will then propose a methodological tool, ETHAS, already in use for the ethical self-assessment of assisted reproduction techniques, to assess also biobanking procedures. ETHAS can make it possible to monitor a GRB from its design phase to its actual operation, helping to build biobanking procedures that meet high ethical standards.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Biasetti et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: