Genetic diversity and origin of captive lion (Panthera leo) in South Africa : an assessment and comparison to wild populations

DATA AVAILABILITY : All data used in this manuscript are included in the supplementary materials. The supplementary materials are archived here: https://DOI.org/10.25375/uct.23174729.South Africa has a large captive lion (Panthera leo) sector, but detailed knowledge on the origin of individuals and any potential genetic value to conservation targets is lacking. In 2021, the South African government committed to closing the sector and have since appointed a Ministerial Lion Task Team (2022) to initiate this process. Some have suggested that captive lions could be integrated into wild populations as part of the process but information on the genetic origins and diversity of captive lions is critical if this is to be explored further. Both the Biodiversity Management Plan for lions in South Africa (2015) and a High-Level Ministerial report for the South African government (2021) have called for more information on the genetic composition of captive lions. To determine the probable origin of captive lions in South Africa we summarised existing survey responses from captive facilities (collected 2017–2018) and CITES permit data (issued 1991–2019). Survey data suggest that most lions were sourced from within the South African captive sector. However, many CITES permits were also issued for the import of lions from across Africa and beyond, indicating possible mixed origins within the sector. To evaluate genetic relationships between captive and wild lions in South Africa we standardised existing microsatellite marker data from three laboratories and analysed genotypes of captive lions from 31 properties. A comparison of captive and wild lion genotypes revealed that the genetic composition of captive lions is currently comparable to existing wild South African lions. Captive lions cluster with similar probabilities to three of four regional reference populations of wild lions included in the study and no major signatures of inbreeding were identified. However, captive lions are highly genetically interconnected across properties and represent a smaller effective population size compared to Kruger National Park, the largest population of wild lions in South Africa, suggesting some risk of future inbreeding. There were also signatures of genetic drift which should be investigated further as it will likely compromise any potential conservation genetic value of captive lions in the future. The findings of this study should be considered when planning the fate of individuals within South Africa’s captive lion sector and within the broader context of African lion conservation.Open access funding provided by University of Cape Town.http://link.springer.com/journal/10592am2024Microbiology and Plant PathologySDG-15:Life on lan

Continent-Wide Survey Reveals Massive Decline in African Savannah Elephants

African elephants (Loxodonta africana) are imperiled by poaching and habitat loss. Despite global attention to the plight of elephants, their population sizes and trends are uncertain or unknown over much of Africa. To conserve this iconic species, conservationists need timely, accurate data on elephant populations. Here, we report the results of the Great Elephant Census (GEC), the first continent-wide, standardized survey of African savannah elephants. We also provide the first quantitative model of elephant population trends across Africa. We estimated a population of 352,271 savannah elephants on study sites in 18 countries, representing approximately 93% of all savannah elephants in those countries. Elephant populations in survey areas with historical data decreased by an estimated 144,000 from 2007 to 2014, and populations are currently shrinking by 8% per year continent-wide, primarily due to poaching. Though 84% of elephants occurred in protected areas, many protected areas had carcass ratios that indicated high levels of elephant mortality. Results of the GEC show the necessity of action to end the African elephants’ downward trajectory by preventing poaching and protecting habitat

A framework to measure the wildness of managed large vertebrate populations

As landscapes continue to fall under human influence through habitat loss and fragmentation, fencing is increasingly being used to mitigate anthropogenic threats and enhance the commercial value of wildlife. Subsequent intensification of management potentially erodes wildness by disembodying populations from landscape‐level processes, thereby disconnecting species from natural selection. Tools are needed to measure the degree to which populations of large vertebrate species in formally protected and privately owned wildlife areas are self‐sustaining and free to adapt. We devised a framework to measure such wildness based on 6 attributes relating to the evolutionary and ecological dynamics of vertebrates (space, disease and parasite resistance, exposure to predation, exposure to limitations and fluctuations of food and water supply, and reproduction). For each attribute, we set empirical, species‐specific thresholds between 5 wildness states based on quantifiable management interventions. We analysed data from 205 private wildlife properties with management objectives spanning ecotourism to consumptive utilization to test the framework on 6 herbivore species representing a range of conservation statuses and commercial values. Wildness scores among species differed significantly, and the proportion of populations identified as wild ranged from 12% to 84%, which indicates the tool detected site‐scale differences both among populations of different species and populations of the same species under different management regimes. By quantifying wildness, this framework provides practitioners with standardized measurement units that link biodiversity with the sustainable use of wildlife. Applications include informing species management plans at local scales; standardizing the inclusion of managed populations in red‐list assessments; and providing a platform for certification and regulation of wildlife‐based economies. Applying this framework may help embed wildness as a normative value in policy and mitigate the shifting baseline of what it means to truly conserve a species.The South African National Biodiversity Institute, the Department of Environmental Affairs, E Oppenheimer & Son and De Beers Group of Companies, and the Endangered Wildlife Trust that funded the national Mammal Red List project. The University of Pretoria and the South African National Biodiversity Institute provided M.C. with funding.https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/152317392020-10-01hj2019Centre for Wildlife ManagementMammal Research InstituteZoology and Entomolog

Guidelines for evaluating the conservation value of African lion (Panthera leo) translocations

As the top predator in African ecosystems, lions have lost more than 90% of their historical range, and few countries possess strong evidence for stable populations. Translocations (broadly defined here as the capture and movement of lions for various management purposes) have become an increasingly popular action for this species, but the wide array of lion translocation rationales and subsequent conservation challenges stemming from poorly conceived or unsuitable translocations warrants additional standardized evaluation and guidance. At their best, translocations fill a key role in comprehensive strategies aimed at addressing the threats facing lions and fostering the recovery of wild populations in their historic range. At their worst, translocations can distract from addressing the major threats to wild populations and habitats, divert scarce funding from more valuable conservation actions, exacerbate conflict with humans in recipient sites, disrupt local lion demography, and undermine the genetic integrity of wild lion populations in both source and recipient sites. In the interest of developing best practice guidelines for deciding when and how to conduct lion translocations, we discuss factors to consider when determining whether a translocation is of conservation value, introduce a value assessment for translocations, and provide a decision matrix to assist practitioners in improving the positive and reducing the negative outcomes of lion translocation.Grant from the European Union through IUCN Save Our Species, and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/conservation-scienceam2023Zoology and Entomolog

Management of African elephant populations in small fenced areas: Current practices, constraints and recommendations

No abstract available

A framework to measure the wildness of managed large vertebrate populations

As landscapes continue to fall under human influence through habitat loss and fragmentation, fencing is increasingly being used to mitigate anthropogenic threats and enhance the commercial value of wildlife. Subsequent intensification of management potentially erodes wildness by disembodying populations from landscape‐level processes, thereby disconnecting species from natural selection. Tools are needed to measure the degree to which populations of large vertebrate species in formally protected and privately owned wildlife areas are self‐sustaining and free to adapt. We devised a framework to measure such wildness based on 6 attributes relating to the evolutionary and ecological dynamics of vertebrates (space, disease and parasite resistance, exposure to predation, exposure to limitations and fluctuations of food and water supply, and reproduction). For each attribute, we set empirical, species‐specific thresholds between 5 wildness states based on quantifiable management interventions. We analysed data from 205 private wildlife properties with management objectives spanning ecotourism to consumptive utilization to test the framework on 6 herbivore species representing a range of conservation statuses and commercial values. Wildness scores among species differed significantly, and the proportion of populations identified as wild ranged from 12% to 84%, which indicates the tool detected site‐scale differences both among populations of different species and populations of the same species under different management regimes. By quantifying wildness, this framework provides practitioners with standardized measurement units that link biodiversity with the sustainable use of wildlife. Applications include informing species management plans at local scales; standardizing the inclusion of managed populations in red‐list assessments; and providing a platform for certification and regulation of wildlife‐based economies. Applying this framework may help embed wildness as a normative value in policy and mitigate the shifting baseline of what it means to truly conserve a species.The South African National Biodiversity Institute, the Department of Environmental Affairs, E Oppenheimer & Son and De Beers Group of Companies, and the Endangered Wildlife Trust that funded the national Mammal Red List project. The University of Pretoria and the South African National Biodiversity Institute provided M.C. with funding.https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/152317392020-10-01hj2019Centre for Wildlife ManagementMammal Research InstituteZoology and Entomolog