, 2012, Hansen et al., 2012 and Schwartz et al., 2007). While field trials continue to be expensive and time consuming, the costs of genetic marker studies are decreasing. With increasing ability to handle large amounts of data and combine available information from genetic studies Olaparib with other geographically based information, it now seems possible to suggest indicators of genetic diversity that are both relevant and not prohibitively costly. The purpose of this paper is to provide a framework and a typology for the application

of such indicators of tree genetic diversity commensurate with the current international scheme provided by the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020 and the BIP. To do so, we first describe the Strategic Plan and the work of BIP to identify indicators within the established framework that are relevant for tree genetic diversity (Section 2). Next, a review of past attempts to define

and report on possible tree genetic diversity indicators is provided, in order to reveal why they have not been widely applied (Section 3). We then move on to suggest see more what we consider meaningful and realistic indicators of genetic diversity of trees that can be embedded within the Strategic Plan and BIP, and constitute a framework and typology for management of trees within, as well as outside, forests (Section 4). Finally, conclusions

Reverse transcriptase (Section 5) are provided. According to Sparks et al. (2011) and UNEP/CBD/AHTEG, 2011a and UNEP/CBD/AHTEG, 2011b, indicators should ideally provide answers to, or shed light on, four basic questions (Table 1). In the case of tree genetic diversity, indicators should monitor the adaptive potential of tree species to help identify and prioritize actions, related to its use and conservation. The UN Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020 is made of five strategic goals and 20 specific targets to be achieved by 2020, referred to as the Aichi Targets (UNEP/CBD/COP, 2010 and UNEP/CBD/COP, 2011). To monitor progress, an elaborate indicator framework for assessing the Aichi Targets has been developed by the Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group (AHTEG) on indicators for the Strategic Plan (UNEP/CBD/AHTEG, 2011a and UNEP/CBD/AHTEG, 2011b). This indicator framework consists of 12 proposed headline indicators and 97 proposed operational indicators (see Table 2 for examples). A single indicator, used in isolation, is generally considered insufficient to assess overall progress towards a target, thus the necessity to link multiple indicators (Chenery et al., 2013). The global initiative BIP has been established to promote and coordinate development and delivery of biodiversity indicators in support of the CBD and other sectors.