Nom du corpus

Corpus Systématique Animale

Titre du document

Parks or arks: where to conserve threatened mammals?

Lien vers le document
Springer (journals)
Langue(s) du document
Type de document
Mots-clés d'auteur
  • captive breeding
  • in situ conservation
  • ex situ conservation
  • zoos
  • protected areas
Nom du fichier dans la ressource
  • Andrew Balmford 1
  • N. Leader-Williams 2
  • M. J. B. Green 3
  • 1) Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, Regent's Park, NW1 4RY, London, UK
  • 2) Department of Zoology, Large Animal Research Group, Downing St, CB2 3EJ, Cambridge, UK
  • 3) World Conservation Monitoring Centre, 219c Huntingdon Rd, CB3 0DL, Cambridge, UK

Growing deterministic and stochastic threats to many wild populations of large vertebrates have focused attention on the conservation significance of captive breeding and subsequent reintroduction. However, work on both gorillas and black rhinos questions this shift in emphasis. In these species, field-based conservation can be effective if properly supported and, although this is not cheap, per capita costs may still be considerably lower than for ex situ propagation in captivity. Here we attempt to broaden the scope of this debate by contrasting the breeding success and costs of in situ and captive programmes for a range of threatened mammals. Data are scarce, but we find that across nine large-bodied genera, in situ conservation achieves comparable rates of population growth to those seen in established captive breeding programmes. Moreover, comparing budgets of well-protected reserves with zoos' own estimates of maintenance costs and the costs of zoo adoption schemes, we find that per capita costs for effective in situ conservation are consistently lower than those of maintenance in captivity. Captive breeding may be more cost-effective for smaller-bodied taxa, and will often remain desirable for large mammals restricted to one or two vulnerable wild populations. However, our results, coupled with the fact that effective in situ conservation protects intact ecosystems rather than single species, lead us to suggest that zoos might maximize their contribution to large mammal conservation by investing where possible in well-managed field-based initiatives, rather than establishing additional ex situ breeding programmes.

Catégories Science-Metrix
  • 1 - natural sciences
  • 2 - biology
  • 3 - ecology
Catégories INIST
  • 1 - sciences appliquees, technologies et medecines
  • 2 - sciences biologiques et medicales
  • 3 - sciences biologiques fondamentales et appliquees. psychologie
  • 4 - ecologie animale, vegetale et microbienne
Catégories Scopus
  • 1 - Physical Sciences ; 2 - Environmental Science ; 3 - Nature and Landscape Conservation
  • 1 - Physical Sciences ; 2 - Environmental Science ; 3 - Ecology
  • 1 - Life Sciences ; 2 - Agricultural and Biological Sciences ; 3 - Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
Catégories WoS
  • 1 - science ; 2 - environmental sciences
  • 1 - science ; 2 - ecology
  • 1 - science ; 2 - biodiversity conservation
Identifiant ISTEX

Biodiversity & Conservation

Année de publication
Présence de XML structuré
Version PDF
Score qualité du texte
  • Mammiferes
Type de publication
Powered by Lodex 9.3.8