We performed a bibliometric analysis to investigate the efficiency of release techniques (soft and hard–release), to analyse the characteristics and outcomes of the translocation programs, to identify knowledge gaps, and to provide recommendations. Animal conservation studies involving animal release to the wild increased significantly over the 31 years studied and were more frequently performed with terrestrial mammals than with other taxonomic groups. Most of the studies were performed by researchers from developed countries. Translocations occurred mostly in temperate regions, with almost no translocations occurring in the tropics. Almost 60 % of the studies did not provide information regarding the success or failure of the translocation programs. The most commonly used technique was hard release. Wild–caught specimens were preferred for translocations. Translocation programs were less common for groups like amphibians, fishes, and invertebrates. If criteria for suitable translocation are met, this management tool should also be conducted for tropical threatened species, led by native researchers. Furthermore, criteria for successful translocation should be clearly identified in order to improve future conservation actions.
1. Animal conservation translocation is an important tool available to conservation biologists to address problems of isolated, declining or endangered populations.This approach includes both captive-bred and free-ranging origin animals, which are used to rescue genetically limited populations and re-establish extirpated populations. Both soft and hard-release protocols (the release of animals with or without acclimatization, respectively) are used in animal conservation translocation programmes; however, there is no consensus on whether one has better conservation outcomes than the other.2. Here, we analysed data from 17 studies to measure the efficiency of both techniques for fauna conservation. Using phylogenetic meta-analysis, we compared results from articles that used soft and hard-release protocols to determine the overall effect size. In addition, we examined if the success metrics, type of environment, taxonomic group and animal's origin affected the outcomes of each type of translocation programmes.3. We calculated 61 effect sizes for 17 species. We found that the soft-release protocol is approximate 40% better than the hard-release protocol (Estimates = 0.44, CI 95: 0.11-0.76). Soft-release programme increased success by 77% (Estimates = 0.78, CI 95: 0.37-1.19) when movement metrics were used (as compared to hardrelease) and were 41% more successful with terrestrial species. 4. In general, soft-releases showed better outcomes by reducing movements away from the release site, but this was driven mostly by terrestrial reptile translocations (77% chance of success); when birds and mammals or the other success metrics were evaluated, both release techniques had similar effects. Lastly, the origin (i.e. captive or wild) of the released animals did not influence the success rate of softversus hard-releases. Synthesis and applications.We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate which is the best release protocol for success in animal conservation: soft-or hard-release. Our results showed that soft-releases are in general better than hard-releases, especially for reptiles. Protocol outcomes were similar for birds and mammals and were not linked to the origin of the released animals. We recommend that the decision of which protocol to use needs also to consider the financial costs of the used protocol.
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
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.