Successful conservation depends on accurate taxonomy. Currently, the taxonomy of canids in Africa, Eurasia and Australasia is unstable as recent molecular and morphological studies have questioned earlier phenetic classifications. We review available information on several taxa of Old World and Australasian Canis with phylogenetic uncertainties (namely, African jackals, Asian wolves and Australasian dogs), in order to assess the validity of suggested scientific names and provide a scientific basis for reaching a taxonomic consensus primarily based on molecular data, but also including morphology, biogeography and behavioural ecology. We identify major knowledge gaps, provide recommendations for future research and discuss conservation implications of an updated taxonomic framework. Recent molecular studies indicate that the former Afro‐Eurasian ‘golden jackal’ represents two distinct lineages, the golden jackal (Canis aureus) from Eurasia and the African wolf (C. lupaster) from Africa. Phylogenetic research also indicates that the side‐striped and black‐backed jackals form a monophyletic group that branched earlier than Canis, Cuon and Lycaon, which should be reassigned to the genus Lupulella as L. adusta and L. mesomelas, respectively. The Himalayan/Tibetan and Indian wolf lineages appear to have diverged earlier and are distinct from all other grey wolves (C. lupus) based on mitochondrial and nuclear genome data. However, until genome‐wide data from multiple individuals across the range clarify relationships with other taxa, we suggest referring to the Himalayan/Tibetan wolf lineage as Canis lupus chanco. We support the currently accepted nomenclature for the Indian wolf Canis lupus pallipes for the wolf populations found on the Indian subcontinent and possibly also in south‐western Asia (exact geographical boundary pending). The information presented here provides a current and consistent taxonomic framework for use by conservationists and other practitioners, but it is also intended to stimulate further research to resolve current uncertainties affecting the taxonomy of Old World canids.
The platform Österreich forscht (www.citizen-science.at) was founded in 2014 with the objectives of (1) connecting citizen science actors in Austria, (2) providing the broadest possible overview of citizen science projects in Austria, and (3) scientifically advancing citizen science as a method.Following the initiative of the platform Österreich forscht, many of the institutions that are active in citizen science joined forces in the Citizen Science Network Austria in 2017, and thus agreed to advance the quality of citizen science in Austria (http://www.citizen-science.at/the-platform/the-network).An important step in this regard was the establishment of transparent criteria for projects wishing to be listed on the platform Österreich forscht. The objective of these criteria is to maintain and further improve the quality of the projects presented on the platform.Between March 2017 and February 2018, a working group of the platform Österreich forscht consisting of representatives from 17 institutions developed criteria that allow for the transparent evaluation of projects applying to be listed on Österreich forscht. This was a multi-stage process, building both on the knowledge of the working group members as well as on feedback repeatedly provided by external experts from the respective research fields. Throughout October 2017, a version of the quality criteria was available for public online consultation on the platform Österreich forscht, so as to incorporate the knowledge of the general public into the criteria as well.The final version of the quality criteria was presented at the 4th Austrian Citizen Science Conference, 1-3 February 2018, at which point the criteria also came into effect. Projects already listed on Österreich forscht can adapt to meet the criteria over the next year. Projects wishing to be newly listed on Österreich forscht must meet these criteria at the point of listing.Where necessary, the quality criteria will be adapted in the future, in order to respond to new challenges and developments. The version number, i.e. which version of the criteria a project corresponds to, will be indicated on the respective project page.The first part of the criteria is primarily aimed at establishing what defines a citizen science project. Here, we decided on a negative list (i.e. projects that are NOT citizen science), in order to be as open as possible to different concepts and disciplines. This implies that we call all projects citizen science, which are not excluded by this negative list. The professional background of the person leading the project is not crucial as long as the criteria are complied by the project.The criteria in the second part are to be understood as minimum standards which all projects listed on the platform Österreich forscht must fulfill.The evaluation will be carried out by the coordinators of the platform Österreich forscht in consultation with working group members.Version 1.0 of the quality criteria can be found on the platform Zenodo: https://zenodo.org/record/1161953
Conflicts have emerged due to range expansions of the golden jackal (Canis aureus) across Europe, characterized by their international conservation status and perceived impacts on livestock and native prey species. Most countries in Central Europe do not yet include the golden jackal in their national list of occurring, native species. Nevertheless, legal obligations arise as soon as golden jackals colonize a particular country. Legal implications of this range expansion were described in past studies from an international perspective. However, they left out specifics on the legal status within any particular country. Therefore, we examine the actual legal status within Central European countries, exemplifying the diverse federal and provincial laws. In particular, we assess the current conservation and hunting laws in Austria’s provinces and discuss them in the context of neighbouring countries to analyse implications for relevant authorities. We found substantial contrasts not only among provinces but also between direct neighbouring countries, impeding efforts for transboundary species conservation and leading to complications regarding the management of this species. Improved procedures for collecting records and hunting-bag data appear necessary for future species assessment on a European level and management on a local level. We recommend a more unified legal system but adjusted to actual golden jackal presence on the regional and cross-border level, combined assessment, or similar management strategies to minimize conflicts, reduce persecution, and clarify legal obligations.
Golden jackal (Canis aureus) monitoring in central Europe generates more interest and becomes increasingly important with the species’ appearance in areas where it was previously unestablished. For genetic monitoring of golden jackals via scat collection, the distinction of jackal scats from those of related species such as the red fox (Vulpes vulpes) is crucial: if done incorrectly, it can falsify diet studies or inflate costs of DNA analyses. In this study, we tested the potential benefits of using domestic dogs to specifically find jackal scats. We used trained scat detection dogs to locate and identify golden jackal scats in an area of dense shrubland, with the species’ presence previously confirmed via bioacoustic monitoring. On a total of 133 km of transects covering at least two golden jackal groups, two human-dog teams found 34 putative golden jackal scats. A total of 26 of these were successfully genetically analysed, of which 19 were attributed to 13 individual golden jackals, an accuracy rate of 73%. Our results show that detection dogs can successfully differentiate golden jackal scats from other species. This tool can be applied to detect golden jackal presence and establish more reliable estimates of group number and size than previously determined through bioacoustic stimulation. By combining both methods, questions about family structures and kinship, seasonal differences in habitat use and territory sizes can be answered. The regular use of detection dogs can present an efficient method to monitor golden jackals on a long-term basis and to learn more about their behaviour and population dynamics.
In the course of one year the working group for quality criteria of the Citizen Science Network Austria developed a catalogue of criteria for citizen science projectson the platform Österreich forscht. From this catalogue questions were generated, which should help the project leaders of projects in Austria to fulfil the criteria. By answering the questions, important topics are addressed during the implementation of a project and can thus also be considered by the project management. On the other hand, the answers help potential project participants to make an informed decision about participation on the basis of the information presented.Project leaders receive this catalogue of questions and send the answers back to Österreich forscht. The platform coordinators read the answers, consult with the Working Group for Quality Criteria if necessary and contact the project leaders in case of ambiguities for clarification and possible assistance. The aim of this processis not to exclude individual projects, but to jointly ensure the quality of the citizen science characteristics of the projects and eventually even increase them. An open dialogue and exchange and a respectful interaction between all participants is the prerequisite for this.
Golden jackals (Canis aureus) display a complex repertoire of calls, utilized in different communication types (e.g., marking territories, attraction of mating partners). Resident golden jackal groups can successfully be detected by active bioacoustic stimulation, as well as with passive recording devices. For monitoring, basic knowledge of the calls of the focal species and potential restrictions and strengths of the monitoring devices should be considered. We therefore tested possible applications of a low-budget autonomous recording unit for bioacoustic golden jackal monitoring and examined the following research questions: How far can group calls be detected? Can the distance to the recording device be estimated? To answer these questions, we placed 11 AudioMoth recording devices in a linear transect to record live imitated and replayed howls. For the estimation of the number of responding animals, the number of howling individuals was determined based on the maximum number of simultaneously visible fundamental frequencies in a spectrogram. To predict the distance of the playback howls to the recording devices, the relative sound level (RSL) of each call was measured and fitted in linear models. Reliable distance estimations using RSL were possible up to 400 m. Estimated number of responding animals showed a negative relationship with distance. Our results present a baseline for future studies and show that AudioMoths can be a helpful asset in distance estimation of golden jackal packs—both in passive but also active monitoring.
Die Plattform Österreich forscht (www.citizen-science.at) wurde 2014 mit den Zielen gegründet, (1) Citizen Science Akteurinnen und Akteure in Österreich zu vernetzen, (2) einen möglichst umfassenden Überblick über Citizen Science Projekte in Österreich zu geben und (3) allgemein die Methodik Citizen Science wissenschaftlich weiter zu entwickeln.Viele Institutionen, welche in Citizen Science aktiv sind, haben sich 2017 auf Initiative der Plattform Österreich forscht im Citizen Science Network Austria zusammengeschlossen und sich damit dazu bekannt, die Qualität von Citizen Science in Österreich zu fördern (http://www.citizen-science.at/die-plattform/das-netzwerk).Ein wichtiger Schritt zur Förderung dieser Qualität war es, transparente Kriterien aufzustellen, die jene Projekte erfüllen müssen, welche auf der Plattform Österreich forscht gelistet werden möchten. Das Ziel dieser Kriterien ist, die Qualität der auf der Plattform vorgestellten Projekte weiter hochzuhalten und noch zu steigern. Von März 2017 bis Februar 2018 hat daher eine Arbeitsgruppe der Plattform Österreich forscht, bestehend aus Vertreterinnen und Vertretern von 17 Institutionen, Kriterien ausgearbeitet, die eine transparente Bewertung jener Projekte ermöglichen, die auf Österreich forscht gelistet werden möchten. Die Ausarbeitung erfolgte in mehreren Schritten, wobei zusätzlich zum Wissen der Arbeitsgruppenmitglieder auch mehrmals Feedback von externen Expertinnen und Experten aus den jeweiligen Fachbereichen eingearbeitet wurde. Um auch das Wissen der Bevölkerung in die Kriterien einfließen lassen zu können, wurde über den gesamten Oktober 2017 hinweg ein Entwurf der Qualitätskriterien für eine öffentliche Onlinekonsultation auf der Plattform Österreich forscht freigegeben. Die finale Version der Qualitätskriterien wurde im Rahmen der 4. Österreichischen Citizen Science Konferenz, 1.-3. Februar 2018, der Öffentlichkeit präsentiert. Mit diesem Datum haben die Qualitätskriterien ihre Gültigkeit erlangt. Bereits gelistete Projekte auf Österreich forscht haben die Möglichkeit, sich den Kriterien innerhalb eines Jahres anzupassen. Projekte, welche neu auf Österreich forscht gelistet werden möchten, müssen diese Kriterien bei Listung erfüllen. Die Qualitätskriterien werden zukünftig nach Bedarf adaptiert, um neuen Herausforderungen und Entwicklungen gerecht zu werden. Die Versionsnummer der Kriterien, welcher ein Projekt entspricht, wird auf der jeweiligen Projektseite angegeben.Der erste Teil der Kriterien dient vor allem der Feststellung, was ein Citizen Science Projekt ausmacht. Hier haben wir uns zu einer Negativliste entschlossen (d.h. wir legen fest, was alles NICHT Citizen Science ist), um die Plattform möglichst offen für unterschiedliche Konzepte, Herangehensweisen und Disziplinen zu halten. Dies bedeutet, dass wir alle Projekte, welche nicht durch diese Kriterien ausgeschlossen werden als Citizen Science Projekte verstehen. Der professionelle Hintergrund der Person, welche die Projektleitung übernimmt, ist nicht ausschlaggebend, solange die Kriterien vom Projekt selbst erfüllt werden. Die Kriterien im zweiten Teil sind als Mindeststandards zu verstehen, welche alle Projekte auf Österreich forscht erfüllen müssen.Die Evaluierung erfolgt durch die Koordinatorinnen und Koordinatoren der Plattform Österreich forscht unter Beratung von Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern der Arbeitsgruppe. Version 1.0 der Qualitätskriterien finden Sie frei zugänglich auf der Plattform Zenodo: https://zenodo.org/record/1161922
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.