Optimal plans to manage captive populations for propagation depend upon the goals of the program. Two basic goals have been proposed. The first and more frequent is preservation of genetic diversity in captivity for return to natural environments. The second is adapting a wild population to propagation in the captive environment. Each goal prescribes a general strategy for demographic and genetic management: a plan for return to natural environments and a plan for adaptation to the captive environment. These plans can be considered ends of a spectrum of possible management programs. Similarities and differences in the two plans are discussed. Practical contraints limit the implementation of the basic management plans.
In 1973 the International Species Inventory System (ISIS), a computer‐based information system for wild animals maintained in captivity, was established at Minnesota Zoological Garden. By 1989 ISIS (now called the International Species Information System) was an independent organization with a Board of Trustees. Membership of ISIS has increased steadily and at time of writing the pooled database includes information on over 322 000 live tetrapod specimens, over 134 000 fishes (many in groups), plus a larger number of their ancestors, at 595 institutions in 68 countries on six continents. ISIS produces routine pooled inventories and other reports on request and three software tools for personal computers have been developed: arks (Animal Records Keeping System) for maintaining basic specimen records, MedARKS (Medical Animal Records Keeping System) for veterinary records and sparks (Single Population Animal Records Keeping System) for veterinary records, studbooks, genetic and demographic analyses, and Speces Survival Plans. Having collected data for over 25 years, ISIS is also a highly credibile source of information from the zoological community for use by international conventions and regulatory bodies.
Earnhardt et al. (1995) ask (1) if the census data of ISIS are accurate enough for North American regional zoo collection planning, and (2) can the "raw" zoo records presently available from ISIS substitute for a formal studbook and be used directly for genetic and demographic analysis. To check census, they compared ISIS Abstracts with summary SSPO reports in AZA's Annual Report on Conservation and Science (AZA-ARCS), assumed that they represented counts for the same population, and found only a moderate correlation (r = 0.835). We repeated their analysis and closely examined the 15 species with apparent census differences greater than 50. We find that most of the census differences arise because the two sources are not counting the same population. When nonzoo specimens are removed from census counts for just these 15 species, the overall correlation between ISIS and AZA-ARCS (for the full 68 species) rises to 0.974. We conclude that ISIS census data are reasonably accurate for the North American zoo population. Earnhardt et al. (1995) find "raw" ISIS data unsuitable for genetic and demographic species management. This conclusion came from comparing 10 ISIS species datasets to the respective North American regional studbooks. We re-examined the two taxa with the most reported discrepancies. For gorillas, studbook numbers on ISIS are indeed confused-in large part because multiple, conflicting studbook numbers are being assigned by different studbook keepers to individual specimens. For cinereous vultures, the large number of birth date discrepancies arise from records intentionally altered in the studbook, which substitutes amval date for estimated or unknown birth dates of wild-caught specimens. Whereas this studbook's minimuni age convention may well be useful for certain analyses, we find that the ISIS data accurately reflects the holding zoo's records. We generally agree with Earnhardt et al. (1995) that at present, "raw"
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.