At dawn in the wetlands of East Africa, cranes stand majestically against the backdrop of sunlight beaming through the mist. These kinds of landscapes are changing quickly as water regimes shift, grazing pressure increases, and we increasingly subdivide habitats that once seemed indefinite.

For the species that depend on wetlands across the continent, questions about their future increasingly focus on how these kinds of magical places will remain connected. Former Kartzinel Lab postdoc Mary Burak has just taken on a leadership role to connect science, strategy, and action in this domain—she has been appointed Chief Scientist of the International Crane Foundation in Africa.

Imagine a small group of endangered rhinos has just been reintroduced to a protected valley. The release plan looks perfect on paper: good grass cover, reliable water, minimal risk of poaching or other human disturbances. Then, within days, several animals begin showing classic gut-pain behaviors: repeatedly lying down and getting back up, pawing at the ground, rolling around. A field team notices profuse salivation in one animal and diarrhea in another.

Now the clock is running. In animals like rhinos, with large ‘hindgut fermenting’ digestive systems, the effects of plant toxins can move from subtle to catastrophic quickly. To save these animals, to make sure others don’t get sick, and to protect the future of the rewilding initiative we can’t take a risk in guessing what kind of treatment might work—we have to quickly figure out what, exactly, they have been eating. That’s where any preparation to enable rapid dietary testing can help guide our response in real time.

Emerging strategies that enable rapid DNA testing to minimize the economically costly loss of livestock are becoming highly effective and scalable—they are about to spill over into the wildlife sector where they can help bolster conservation initiatives as well. We anticipate this could become especially important for wildlife translocation and reintroduction programs, where animals are presented an array of unfamiliar foods that their systems are not accustomed to. 

A new Kartzinel Lab data release, built with partners across Central and South America, is creating the reference tools needed to identify parasitic worms (helminths) that infect wildlife using DNA barcoding. HelmBank links expertly identified and voucher-backed parasite specimens to host species and geographic data—so conservation biologists, wildlife veterinarians, and molecular ecologists can translate parasite detections from sick or free-ranging animals into reliable data.

First public release of HelmBank strengthens parasite detection for Neotropical mammals
Release R1 publishes 45 parasite DNA barcode sequences, drawn from a larger working collection of more than 100 specimens. Hosts represented across HelmBank already include big cats (ocelot, jaguar, puma), foxes, tapirs, peccaries, sloths, armadillos, anteaters, and opossums—a cross-section of wildlife central to conservation and wildlife health programs across the region.

Why this matters for conservation, wildlife health, and One Health
DNA-based monitoring is increasingly used to study diets, microbiomes, and pathogens—but parasites are often left out because reference datasets are missing or too geographically mismatched to support confident identification. HelmBank is designed to close that gap by building a rigorously curated "field guide" for molecular parasitology—improving comparability across studies and strengthening our ability to monitor disease risk, which is especially important for both conservation and public health in areas where wildlife, livestock, and humans share landscapes.

Biodiversity credits are moving quickly from concept notes to implementation—and East African savannas are where some of the hardest questions are being tested.

The promise is simple: markets can channel finance toward measurable, verifiable biodiversity outcomes at landscape scales. But the challenge is just as clear: unlike with carbon credits, biodiversity "units" can be counted in so many ways.

Since a credit is only as credible as the monitoring behind it, a theme that keeps emerging from technical and policy discussions involves trying to figure out whether DNA-powered approaches can help. In principle, any DNA we detect in the environment can help make biodiversity surveys more reliable and harder to game. But all DNA-based approaches rely on unseen infrastructure that most people never consider: reference DNA libraries that must be constructed based on verifiably identified specimens. When biodiversity targets are poorly covered by these libraries, even the most sophisticated survey methods can collapse into reports that are frustratingly full of "unknowns."

That message came through repeatedly at recent meetings in Nairobi, Kenya. Last week, Dr. Mary Burak (Senior Postdoc, Genomic Opportunities Lab) attended both the Business for Conservation Conference and the Global Conservation Technology & Drone Forum. A recurring question she encountered in conversations with practitioners, business leaders, and researchers went like this: what would it take to use DNA as "creditable" in savanna biodiversity programs—and who is going to build the databases we need to get there?

Because translating complex biodiversity data into actionable information is one of our team's core strengths, we wanted to share this post as a practical summary of the field. We will outline how biodiversity credits work, how programs affecting East African savannas are typically structured, and when DNA can add real value. You will discover that DNA reference libraries are currently an undervalued and high-leverage investment that savvy leaders are making—they recognize that you can't make DNA creditable without it.

​The key question we reveal for anyone who wants to participate in this market: what is the return on investment you can expect from building the reference libraries that underpin success—and how long will it take for the investment to increase the value of your monitoring services or offset programs?

When people think about funding conservation, they often picture supporting land trusts, wildlife rescue centers, or local environmental nonprofits. Those are all essential.

But there’s another engine driving progress in conservation that often flies under the radar: university-based conservation programs.

But aren’t universities already funded? Shouldn't the government pay for research? What difference could my gift make for a big institution like that?
​
I'll explain how university budgets and research funding actually work and you'll see why they often can’t cover the most urgent, innovative conservation work. Instead, you'll find out that your support can unlock exactly the kinds of impact you want to see: real habitats protected, real species spared, and real people trained to carry your conservation values forward.

Jump to: ​The problem | Our role | Theory of change (Inputs→Impact) | Partner with us

A new peer-reviewed study led by researchers at Brown University in partnership with the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management revealed that diamondback terrapins (Malaclemys terrapin), iconic turtles of America’s salt marshes, face heightened risks at the northern edge of their range in New England.

An article by science journalist Livi Milloway chronicles an "ah-ha" moment we had in our Yellowstone National Park research project. The story published in The Wildlife Society Bulletin, titled An herbivore by any other name, unpacks how Hannah Hoff's recent paper in PNAS challenges the status quo when it comes to how scientists study and understand wildlife diets. 

Tyler sat down for an interview with Abhishyant Kidangoor of Mongabay to discuss our recent Mini Review in Molecular Ecology, entitled Global Availability of Plant DNA Barcodes as Genomic Resources to Support Basic and Policy-Relevant Biodiversity Research.

You can read our conversation here at Mongabay. It covers topics that are among the most important for ensuring the reliability of DNA-based biodiversity research, including equitable access to the benefits arising from this technology and the reputations of all who use it.

The work was also highlighted in Spanish by El Mostrador: Código de barras de plantas: herramienta genética clave que busca ser fortalecida en el sur global

Mary Burak led a workshop together with Save the Elephants and the National Museums of Kenya. The meeting convened at the Save the Elephants headquarters at Samburu, and the team spent a few days learning to collect voucher plant specimens for DNA barcoding. In a very short period of time, they added an important chunk of regional plant diversity to the collections available for barcoding.

Ezequiel Vanderhoeven from the Kartzinel Lab at Brown University participated in the capture of the first two Giant Armadillos from Argentina. The animals were sampled and outfitted with tracking devices to understand more about the health and ecology of their population. This amazing species is very rare, and its global population is listed as Vulnerable and Declining on the Red List of Endangered Species. Knowledge of how they move and find enough to eat in their modern habitats will be essential for developing lasting conservation strategies.

An article was published entitled, "Rosenda, la primera tatú carreta monitoreada en el Chaco"

Congratulations to Dr. Ezequiel Vanderhoeven for your Rufford Foundation Grant! Ezequiel plans to study infectious diseases circulating in populations of armadillo species native to the Argentinian Chaco. The goal of the study is to understand how diseases impact populations of these species for the benefit of conservation and to support local governments and communities in the adoption of environmental practices that minimize the risk of spillover. It is an extremely important and ambitious project. The Rufford award not only provides crucial financial support, but also represents a valuable endorsement of the work from a leading international authority on applied conservation biology.