Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Introduction
References

Translocation Evaluation Report SEFALO +

Profile image of Anders AngerbjörnAnders Angerbjörn

Related papers

No evidence for loss of genetic variation following sequential translocations in extant populations of a genetically depauperate species
sabrina taylor

Molecular Ecology, 2007

Repeated population bottlenecks can lead to loss of genetic variation and normally should be avoided in threatened species to preserve evolutionary potential. We examined the effect of repeated bottlenecks, in the form of sequential translocations, on loss of genetic variation in a threatened passerine, the saddleback (Philesturnus carunculatus carunculatus), a species that has recovered from a remnant population with historically low levels of genetic variation. Although a slight but nonsignificant loss of alleles may have occurred between the first-order translocation and the extirpated source population, first-, second-, and third-order translocated populations had very similar levels of genetic variation to each other. The most obvious difference among the seven island populations appeared to lie in allele frequencies with little or no loss of alleles among extant populations. Although sequential translocations are known to cause loss of variation in genetically diverse species, our study indicates that genetically depauperate species may be less sensitive to loss of genetic variation through founder events presumably because the few remaining alleles are well represented in founding individuals. These results show that ancient bottlenecks may have a long-term effect on genetic variation, to the extent that contemporary population bottlenecks may leave no appreciable genetic signature. Our results suggest that subjecting genetically depauperate endangered species to sequential translocations could be used to rapidly establish new populations without further eroding genetic variation.

View PDFchevron_right
Preserving genetic diversity in threatened species reintroductions: how many individuals should be released?
Ian Jamieson

Animal Conservation, 2011

Reintroduction guidelines recommend that 'adequate' numbers of individuals be released to minimize loss of genetic diversity, but these numbers are rarely quantified. We present a framework for assessing the number of individuals required for an island reintroduction that takes account of allele loss both during the founding event and in the following establishment phase with a low population size. This is the first attempt to model release numbers for reintroductions in order to preserve alleles with a specified initial frequency, while taking post-release mortality rates, population growth rates and site carrying capacity into account. Probability of allele retention was sensitive to both release number and postrelease demography. The rate of allele loss was strongly influenced by both environmental stochasticity and delayed population growth but was little affected by increasing the annual turnover rate of the breeding population. We illustrate the model's application using parameter estimates from a threatened New Zealand passerine, the mohua Mohoua ochrocephala, for which reintroduction is a common management tool. Our modelling indicates that when population growth is moderate (l = 1.3), c. 60 individuals would need to be released to achieve at least 95% certainty that alleles at an initial frequency of 0.05 would be retained after 20 years (five overlapping generations), which is double the number typically released in translocations of mohua and other threatened forest passerines in New Zealand.

View PDFchevron_right
Integration of demography and genetics in population restorations
Alexandre Robert

Ecoscience, 2007

View PDFchevron_right
Notes and Comments Experimental Confirmation that Inbreeding Depression Increases Extinction Risk in Butterfly Populations
Katrin Schöps

2001

View PDFchevron_right
On the establishment, persistence, and inevitable extinction of populations
Peter Jagers

Journal of Mathematical Biology, 2015

Your article is protected by copyright and all rights are held exclusively by Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. This e-offprint is for personal use only and shall not be selfarchived in electronic repositories. If you wish to self-archive your article, please use the accepted manuscript version for posting on your own website. You may further deposit the accepted manuscript version in any repository, provided it is only made publicly available 12 months after official publication or later and provided acknowledgement is given to the original source of publication and a link is inserted to the published article on Springer's website. The link must be accompanied by the following text: "The final publication is available at link.springer.com".

View PDFchevron_right
Metapopulation and its applications in conservation biology
Mullica Jaroensutasinee

Metapopulation, originally pioneered by Levins, refers to a series or set of local populations, each existing on a patch of suitable habitat that is separated from other occupied patches by unsuitable terrain. Each population has its own relatively independent dynamics. The long-term persistence and stability of the metapopulation arise from a balance between population extinction and recolonisation. Although metapopulation concepts are not commonly fit to real world conditions and there are still questions about the generality of metapopulation dynamics and the applicability of metapopulation models to specific problems in conservation, they have contributed significant insights into conservation and have inspired field studies focused on collecting key data on demography and movement. Moreover, metapopulation concepts have had positive effects in conservation research, especially, as interest in metapopulation dynamics has prompted renewed research concerning dispersal capacities ...

View PDFchevron_right
The ecology of de-extinction. De-extinction and evolution
KARINE PRINCE, Joanne Clavel

1. De-extinction, the process of resurrecting extinct species, is in an early stage of scientific implementation. However, its potential to contribute effectively to biodiversity conservation remains unexplored, especially from an evolutionary perspective. 2. We review and discuss the application of the existing evolutionary conservation framework to potential de-extinction projects. We aim to understand how evolutionary processes can influence the dynamics of resurrected populations and to place de-extinction within micro-and macro-evolutionary conservation perspectives. 3. In programmes aiming to revive long-extinct species, the most important constraints to the short-term viability of any resurrected population are (i) their intrinsically low evolutionary resilience and (ii) their poor eco-evolutionary experience, in relation to the absence of (co)adaption to biotic and abiotic changes in the recipient environment. 4. Assuming that some populations of resurrected species can persist locally, they have the potential to bring substantial benefits to biodiversity if the time since initial extinction is short relative to evolutionary dynamics. The restoration of lost genetic information could lead, along with the reinstatement of lost ecological functions, to the restoration of some evolutionary pat-rimony and processes, such as adaptation and diversification. 5. However, substantial evolutionary costs might occur, including unintended eco-evolutionary changes in the local system and unintended spread of the species. Further, evolutionary benefits are limited because (i) the use of resurrected populations as 'evolutionary proxies' of extinct species is meaningless; (ii) their phylogenetic originality is likely to be limited by the selection of inappropriate candidate species and the fact that the original species might be those for which de-extinction is the most difficult to achieve practically; (iii) the resurrection of a few extinct species does not have the potential to conserve as much evolutionary history as traditional conservation strategies, such as the reduction of ongoing species declines and extinction debts. 6. De-extinction is a stimulating idea, which is not intrinsically antagonistic to the conservation of evolutionary processes. However, poor choice of candidate species, and most importantly , too long time scales between a species' extinction and its resurrection are associated with low expected evolutionary benefits and likely unacceptable eco-evolutionary risks.

View PDFchevron_right
Influence of the rate of introduction on the fitness of restored populations
Alexandre Robert

Conservation Genetics, 2004

Most studies using demographic PVA models in a context of species restoration have concluded that rather than the rate of introduction, the total number of individuals released had the most important significant influence on the chance of success. In this article we use a genetic simulation model including deleterious and adaptive alleles to assess the impact of the method of release on the change in population mean fitness. We systematically compare a strategy that consists in releasing all individuals at the same time with a strategy that consists in staggering releases over a long period of time. Our results show that the former strategy is more beneficial for long-term fitness when considering advantageous genes only, while the latter is better when considering deleterious genes only. If deleterious and adaptive alleles are considered together, the best strategy depends then essentially on which of these types of alleles has the stronger influence on the change in total fitness. Although the relative contributions of the variance in total fitness due to adaptive and deleterious alleles may vary with the initial frequencies and the selective and dominance effects of these alleles, our results show that the optimal rate of release is mostly dependant on the expected long-term population size. Thus from a genetic view-point, the temporal release strategy of reintroduced populations should be considered with respect to their environment's carrying capacity.

View PDFchevron_right
Experimental Confirmation That Inbreeding Depression Increases Extinction Risk in Butterfly Populations
Katrin Schöps

American Naturalist, 2001

View PDFchevron_right
High variability in patterns of population decline: the importance of local processes in species extinctions
richard pettifor

Proceedings of The Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2009

View PDFchevron_right

References (84)

  1. Aguirre AA, Angerbjörn A, Tannerfeldt M, Mörner T (2000) Health evaluation of endangered arctic fox (Alopex lagopus) cubs in Sweden. J Zoo Wildl Med 31: 36-40.
  2. Angerbjörn A, Arvidson B, Norén E, Strömgren L (1991) The effect of winter food on the reproduction in the arctic fox, Alopex lagopus: a field experiment. J Anim Ecol 60: 705-714.
  3. Angerbjörn A, Henttonen H, Eide N, Landa A, Norén K et al. (2007) Saving the Endangered Fennoscandian Alopex lagopus SEFALO+, EU Life progress report. Stockholm, Sweden.
  4. Armbruster P, Bradshaw WE, Steiner AL, Holzapfel CM (1999) Evolutionary responses to environmental stress by the pitcher-plant mosquito, Wyeomyia smithii. Heredity 83: 509-519.
  5. Armstrong DP, Davidson RS (2006) Developing population models for guiding reintroductions of extirpated bird species back to the New Zealand mainland. New Zealand J Ecol 30: 73-85.
  6. Audet AM, Robbins BC, Larivière S (2002) Alopex lagopus. Mammal Spec 713: 1-10.
  7. Ausband DE, Foresman KR (2007) Swift fox reintroductions on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation, Montana, USA. Biol Conserv 136: 423-430.
  8. Ballard WB, Follmann EH, Ritter DG, Robards MD, Cronin MA (2001) Rabies and canine distemper in an arctic fox population in Alaska. J Wildl Disease 37: 133-137.
  9. Bensch S, Andrén H, Hansson B, Pedersen HC, Sand H et al. (2006) Selection for heterozygosity gives hope to a wild population of inbred wolves. PLoS ONE 1: e72.
  10. Berg AL, Gavier-Widen D, Nilsson K, Widen F, Berg M et al. (2007) Necrotizing encephalitis of unknown cause in Fennoscandian arctic foxes (Alopex lagopus). J Vet Diag Invest 19: 113-117.
  11. Bessonov AS (1998) Echinococcus multilocularis infection in Russia and neighbouring countries. Helminthologia 35: 73-78.
  12. Biggins DE, Vargas A, Godbey JL, Anderson SH (1999) Influence of prerelease experience on reintroduced black-footed ferrets (Mustela nigripes). Biol Cons 89: 121-129.
  13. Braestrup F (1941) A study on the arctic fox in Greenland: immigrations, fluctuations in numbers based mainly on trading statistics. Meddelser om Grønland 131(4).
  14. Bremner-Harrison S, Prodhol PA, Elwood RW (2004) Behavioural trait assesment as a release crietrion: boldness predicts early death in a reintroduction programme of captive-bred swift fox (Vulpes velox). Anim Cons 7: 313-320.
  15. Bright PW, Morris PA (1994) Animal translocation for conservation -performance of dormice in relation to release methods, origin and season. J Appl Ecol 31: 699-708.
  16. Cabezas S, Calvete C, Moreno S (2006) Vaccination success and body condition in the European wild rabbit: Applications for conservation strategies. J Wildl Manage 70: 1125-1131.
  17. Caughley G (1994) Directions in conservation biology. J Anim Ecol 63: 215-244.
  18. Courchamp F, Macdonald DW (2001) Crucial importance of pack size in the African wild dog Lycaon pictus. Anim Cons 4: 169-174.
  19. Courchamp F, Clutton-Brock T, Grenfell B (1999a) Inverse density dependence and the Allee effect. TREE 14: 405.
  20. Courchamp F, Grenfell B, Clutton-Brock T (1999b) Population dynamics of obligate cooperators. Proc Royal Soc (Lond) Ser B 266: 557-563.
  21. Cunningham AA (1996) Disease risks of wildlife translocations. Cons Biol 10: 349-353.
  22. Dalén L (2005) Distribution and abundance of genetic variation in the arctic fox. PhD thesis, Department of Zoology, Stockholm University, Sweden.
  23. Dalén L, Elmhagen B, Angerbjörn A (2004) DNA analysis on fox faeces and competition induced niche shifts. Mol Ecol 13: 2389-2392.
  24. Dalén L, Nyström V, Valdiosera C, Germonpré M, Sablin M et al. (2007) Ancient DNA reveals lack of postglacial habitat tracking in the arctic fox. PNAS 104: 6726-6729.
  25. Dalén L, Kvaløy K, Linnell JDC, Elmhagen B, Strand O et al. (2006) Population structure in a critically endangered arctic fox population: does genetics matter? Mol Ecol 15: 2809-2819.
  26. Dalerum F, Tannerfeldt M, Elmhagen B, Becker D, Angerbjörn A (2002) Distribution, morphology and use of arctic fox Alopex lagopus dens in Sweden. Wildl Biol 8:185- 192.
  27. Dinkel A, von Nickisch-Rosenegk M, Bilger B, Merli M, Lucius R et al. (1998) Detection of Echinococcus multilocularis in the definitive host: coprodiagnosis by PCR as an alternative to necropsy. J Clinical Microbiol 36: 1871-1876.
  28. Eberhardt L, Hanson W (1978) Long-distance movements of arctic foxes tagged in northern Alaska. Can Field-Nat 92: 386-388.
  29. Edmands S (2007) Between a rock and a hard place: evaluating the relative risks of inbreeding and outbreeding for conservation and management. Mol Ecol 16: 463-475.
  30. Elmhagen B, Tannerfeldt M, Angerbjörn A (2002) Food-niche overlap between arctic and red foxes. Can J Zool 80: 1274-1285.
  31. Elmhagen B, Tannerfeldt M, Verucci P, Angerbjörn A (2000) The arctic fox (Alopex lagopus): an opportunistic specialist. J Zool 251: 139-149.
  32. Erickson DL, Fenster CB (2006) Intraspecific hybridization and the recovery of fitness in the native legume Chamaecrista fasciculata. Evolution 60: 225-233.
  33. Frankham R, Ballou JD, Briscoe DA (2002) Introduction to Conservation Genetics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  34. Fritts SH, Paul WJ, Mech LD (1984) Movements of translocated wolves in Minnesota. J Wildl Manage 48: 709-721.
  35. Fuglei E, Oritsland NA (1999) Seasonal trends in body mass, food intake and resting metabolic rate, and induction of metabolic depression in arctic foxes (Alopex lagopus) at Svalbard. J Comp Physiol B 169: 361-369.
  36. Garrott RA, Eberhardt LE (1987) Arctic Fox. In: Novak M, Baker JA, Obbard ME, Malloch B, editors. Wild Furbearer Magagement and Conservation in North America. Ontario: The Ontario Trappers Association. pp. 396-406.
  37. Gascoigne JC, Lipcius RN (2004) Allee effects driven by predation. J Appl Ecol 41:801- 810.
  38. Geffen E, Waidyaratne S, Dalén L, Angerbjörn A, Vila C et al. (2007) Sea ice occurrence predicts genetic isolation in the Arctic fox. Mol Ecol 16: 4241-4255.
  39. Griffin AS, Blumstein DT, Evans C (2000) Training captive-bred or translocated animals to avoid predators. Cons Biol 14: 1317-1326.
  40. Haglund B, Nilsson E (1977) Fjällräven -en hotad djurart. The institution of wildlife ecology, SLU.
  41. Hanski I (1998) Metapopulation dynamics. Nature 396(6706): 41-49.
  42. Hansson B, Westerberg L (2002) On the correlation between heterozygosity and fitness in natural populations. Mol Ecol 11: 2467-2474.
  43. Hedrick PW (2001) Conservation genetics: where are we now? TREE 16: 629-636.
  44. Hedrick PW, Kalinowski ST (2000) Inbreeding depression in conservation biology. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 31: 139-162.
  45. Hersteinsson P, Macdonald DW (1982) Some comparisons between red and arctic foxes, Vulpes vulpes and Alopex lagopus, as revealed by radio-tracking. Symp zool Soc Lond 49:259-289.
  46. Hersteinsson P, Macdonald DW (1992) Interspecific competition and the geographical distribution of red and arctic foxes Vulpes vulpes and Alopex lagopus. Oikos 64:505- 515.
  47. Hersteinsson P, Angerbjörn A, Frafjord K, Kaikusalo A (1989) The arctic fox in Fennoscandia and Iceland -management problems. Biol Cons 49: 67-81.
  48. Hogg JT, Forbes SH, Steele BM, Luikart G (2006) Genetic rescue of an insular population of large mammals. Proc Royal Soc B 273: 1491-1499.
  49. IUCN (1987) Guidelines for Re-introductions. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN/SSC Re- introduction specialist group.
  50. Liberg O, Andren H, Pedersen HC, Sand H, Sejberg D et al. (2005) Severe inbreeding depression in a wild wolf (Canis lupus) population. Biol Letters 1: 17-20.
  51. Linnell JDC, Strand O, Loison A, Solberg EJ, Jordhøy P (1999) A future for the arctic fox in Norway? a status report and action plan. NINA Oppdragsmelding 576: 1-34.
  52. Loison A, Strand O, Linnell JDC (2001) Effect of temporal variation in reproduction on models of population viability: a case study for remnant arctic fox (Alopex lagopus) populations in Scandinavia. Biol Cons 97: 347-359.
  53. Lönnberg E (1927) Fjällrävsstammen i Sverige 1926. Uppsala: Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.
  54. Lynch AB, Brown MJF, Rochford JM (2006) Fur snagging as a method of evaluating the presence and abundance of a small carnivore, the pine marten (Martes martes). J Zool 270: 330-339.
  55. Marr AB, Keller LF, Arcese P (2002) Heterosis and outbreeding depression in descendants of natural immigrants to an inbred population of song sparrows (Melospiza melodia). Evolution 56: 131-142.
  56. Marshall TC, Spalton JA (2000) Simultaneous inbreeding and outbreeding depression in reintroduced Arabian oryx. Anim Cons 3: 241-248.
  57. Mathews F, Moro D, Strachan R, Gelling M, Buller N (2006) Health surveillance in wildlife reintroductions. Biol Cons 131: 338-347.
  58. McKay JK, Latta RG (2002) Adaptive population divergence: markers, QTL and traits. TREE 17: 285.
  59. Moehrenschlager A, Macdonald DW (2003) Movement and survival parameters of translocated and resident swift foxes Vulpes velox. Anim Cons 6: 199-206.
  60. Molony SE, Dowding CV, Baker PJ, Cuthill IC, Harris S (2006) The effect of translocation and temporary captivity on wildlife rehabilitation success: An experimental study using European hedgehogs (Erinaceus europaeus). Biol Cons 130: 530-537.
  61. Moritz C (1999) Conservation units and translocations: strategies for conserving evolutionary processes. Hereditas 130: 217-228.
  62. Mork T, Prestrud A (2004) Arctic rabies -a review. Acta Vet Scand 45: 1-9.
  63. Nordrum NMV (1994) Effect of inbreeding on reproductive performance in blue fox (Alopex lagopus) vixens. Acta Agric Scand, Sect A, Animal Sci 44: 214-221.
  64. Norén K (2007) Genetic monitoring as a tool in conservation of the Fennoscandian arctic fox. Licentiate thesis, Department of Zoology, Stockholm University, Sweden.
  65. Norén K, Dalén L, Kvaløy K, Angerbjörn A (2005) Detection of farm fox and hybrid genotypes among wild arctic foxes in Scandinavia. Cons Gen 6: 885-894.
  66. Nyström V, Angerbjörn A, Dalén L (2006) Genetic consequences of a demographic bottleneck in the Scandinavian arctic fox. Oikos 114: 84-94.
  67. Prestrud P (1991) Adaptations by the arctic fox (Alopex lagopus) to the polar winter. Arctic 44: 132-138.
  68. Pulliainen E (1965) On the distribution and migrations of the Arctic fox (Alopex lagopus L.) in Finland. Aquilo, Ser Zool 2: 25-40.
  69. Robert A, Sarrazin F, Couvet D, Legendre S (2004) Releasing adults versus young in reintroductions: Interactions between demography and genetics. Cons Biol 18: 1078- 1087.
  70. Rout TM, Hauser CE, Possingham HP (2007) Minimise long-term loss or maximise short-term gain? Optimal translocation strategies for threatened species. Ecol Model 201: 67.
  71. Scholander PF, Hock R, Walters V, Johnson F, L. I (1950) Heat regulation in some arctic and tropical mammals and birds. Biol Bull 99: 237-258.
  72. Seddon PJ, Armstrong DP, Maloney RF (2007) Developing the science of reintroduction biology. Cons Biol 21: 303-312.
  73. Selimov SA, Botvinkin AD, Khozinski VV, Klyieva EV, King A et al. (1990) Lyssavirus characterization with monoclonal antibodies on strains of certain regions of the USSR. Rabies Bulletin Europe 14: 8-9.
  74. Sheller FJ, Fagan WF, Unmack PJ (2006) Using survival analysis to study translocation success in the Gila topminnow (Poeciliopsis occidentalis). Ecol Appl 16: 1771-1784.
  75. Sigg DP, Goldizen AW, Pople AR (2005) The importance of mating system in translocation programs: reproductive success of released male bridled nailtail wallabies. Biol Cons 123: 289-300.
  76. Tallmon DA, Luikart G, Waples RS (2004) The alluring simplicity and complex reality of genetic rescue. TREE 19: 489-496.
  77. Tannerfeldt M (1997) Population fluctuations and life history consequences in the arctic fox. PhD thesis, Department of Zoology, Stockholm University, Sweden.
  78. Tannerfeldt M, Angerbjörn A (1996) Life history strategies in a fluctuating environment: Establishment and reproductive success in the arctic fox. Ecography 19: 209-220.
  79. Tannerfeldt M, Angerbjörn A (1998) Fluctuating resources and the evolution of litter size in the arctic fox. Oikos 83: 545-559.
  80. Tannerfeldt M, Angerbjörn A, Arvidson B (1994) The effect of summer feeding on juvenile arctic fox survival -a field experiment. Ecography 17: 88-96.
  81. Tannerfeldt M, Elmhagen B, Angerbjörn A (2002) Exclusion by interference competition? The relationship between red and arctic foxes. Oecologia 132: 213-220.
  82. Willi Y, Van Kleunen M, Dietrich S, Fischer M (2007) Genetic rescue persists beyond first-generation outbreeding in small populations of a rare plant. Proc Royal Soc B 274: 2357-2364.
  83. Wright S (1951) The genetical structure of populations. Ann Eugenics 15: 323-354.
  84. Zetterberg H (1945) Två fredlösa. Almquist & Wiksell, Uppsala.

Related papers

Gene flow and endangered species translocations: a topic revisited
A. Storfer

Biological Conservation, 1999

Understanding the evolutionary role of gene¯ow is pivotal to the conservation of endangered populations. Gene¯ow can be enhanced through population translocations that are conducted to maintain genetic variation and combat the negative consequences of inbreeding depression (two of the major concerns in the conservation of subdivided or isolated populations). While researchers have given extensive consideration to the idea that gene¯ow can act as a creative evolutionary force by maintaining genetic variation or spreading adaptive gene complexes, the focus of this paper is to investigate gene¯ow as a force that constrains local adaptation. I brie¯y review the theoretical basis of and summarize empirical studies that indicate gene¯ow can constrain local adaptation, and may thereby lower short-term population ®tness. This review suggests that knowledge of gene¯ow rates and understanding ecological dierences among populations is necessary before embarking on a program to arti®cially enhance genē ow.

View PDFchevron_right
Reintroductions of birds and mammals involve evolutionarily distinct species at the regional scale
François Sarrazin

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2018

View PDFchevron_right
Experimental separation of genetic and demographic factors on extinction risk in wild populations
Catherine Pfister

Ecology, 2013

When populations reach small size, an extinction risk vortex may arise from genetic (inbreeding depression, genetic drift) and ecological (demographic stochasticity, Allee effects, environmental fluctuation) processes. The relative contribution of these processes to extinction in wild populations is unknown, but important for conserving endangered species. In experimental field populations of a harvested kelp (Postelsia palmaeformis), in which we independently varied initial genetic diversity (completely inbred, control, outbred) and population size, ecological processes dominated the risk of extinction, whereas the contribution of genetic diversity was slight. Our results match theoretical predictions that demographic processes will generally doom small populations to extinction before genetic effects act strongly, prioritize detailed ecological analysis over descriptions of genetic structure in assessing conservation of at-risk species, and highlight the need for field experiments manipulating both demographics and genetic structure on long-term extinction risk.

View PDFchevron_right
Subspecies hybridization as a potential conservation tool in species reintroductions
Alan Templeton

Evolutionary Applications, 2021

Reintroductions are a powerful tool for the recovery of endangered species. However, their long-term success is strongly influenced by the genetic diversity of the reintroduced population. The chances of population persistence can be improved by enhancing the population's adaptive ability through the mixing of individuals from different sources. However, where source populations are too diverse the reintroduced population could also suffer from outbreeding depression or unsuccessful admixture due to behavioural or genetic barriers. For the reintroduction of Asiatic wild ass Equus hemionus ssp. in Israel, a breeding core was created from individuals of two different subspecies (E. h. onager & E. h. kulan). Today the population comprises approximately 300 individuals and displays no signs of outbreeding depression. The aim of this study was a population genomic evaluation of this conservation reintroduction protocol. We used maximum likelihood methods and genetic clustering analyses to investigate subspecies admixture and test for spatial autocorrelation based on subspecies ancestry. Further, we analysed heterozygosity and effective population sizes in the breeding core prior to release and the current wild population. We discovered high levels of subspecies admixture in the breeding core and wild population, consistent with a significant heterozygote excess in the breeding core. Furthermore, we found no signs of spatial autocorrelation associated with subspecies ancestry in the wild population. Inbreeding and variance effective population size estimates were low. Our results indicate no genetic or behavioural barriers to admixture between the subspecies and suggest that their hybridization has led to greater genetic diversity in the reintroduced population. The study provides rare empirical evidence of the successful application of subspecies hybridization in a reintroduction. It supports use of intraspecific hybridization as a tool to increase genetic diversity in conservation translocations.

View PDFchevron_right
Defining reintroduction success using IUCN criteria for threatened species: a demographic assessment
Christian Kerbiriou, M. Jalme, JB Mihoub

Animal Conservation, 2015

Despite recent efforts to develop the science of reintroduction biology, there is still no general 24 and broadly accepted definition of reintroduction success. We investigate this issue based on 25 the postulates that (1) successful reintroduction programs should produce viable populations, 26

View PDFchevron_right
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved