Amphibians and conservation breeding programmes: do all threatened amphibians belong on the ark?

Abstract

Amphibians are facing an extinction crisis, and conservation breeding programmes are a tool used to prevent imminent species extinctions. Compared to mammals and birds, amphibians are considered ideal candidates for these programmes due to their small body size and low space requirements, high fecundity, applicability of reproductive technologies, short generation time, lack of parental care, hard wired behaviour, low maintenance requirements, relative cost effectiveness of such programmes, the success of several amphibian conservation breeding programmes and because captive husbandry capacity exists. Superficially, these reasons appear sound and conservation breeding has improved the conservation status of several amphibian species, however it is impossible to make generalisations about the biology or geo-political context of an entire class. Many threatened amphibian species fail to meet criteria that are commonly cited as reasons why amphibians are suitable for conservation breeding programmes. There are also limitations associated with maintaining populations of amphibians in the zoo and private sectors, and these could potentially undermine the success of conservation breeding programmes and reintroductions. We recommend that species that have been assessed as high priorities for ex situ conservation action are subsequently individually reassessed to determine their suitability for inclusion in conservation breeding programmes. The limitations and risks of maintaining ex situ populations of amphibians need to be considered from the outset and, where possible, mitigated. This should improve programme success rates and ensure that the limited funds dedicated to ex situ amphibian conservation are allocated to projects which have the greatest chance of success.

The Amphibians of Mount Oku, Cameroon: an updated species inventory and conservation review

“…These action plans have strong involvement with local stakeholders, particularly appropriate for the anurans restricted to the summit grasslands of Oku, where conflicts exist with livestock herders (Maisels et al 2000). Ex-situ colonies of captive Xenopus longipes are being developed (Michaels et al 2015; Tapley et al 2016) following recommendations of the species’ 2004 IUCN assessment (Tinsley and Measey 2004), though it should be noted that ex-situ conservation projects can have limited effectiveness, particularly without adequate planning and collaboration in situ (Tapley et al 2015). Small steps have been made in addressing the threats to the Lake Oku Clawed Frog: firstly acquiring ecological data on this species; training local researchers; engaging and informing the community on issues such as the risks of fish introductions; and advocating the general importance of amphibians and environment on Oku.…”

Challenges of operating a multi‐species breeding‐for‐release facility at Perth Zoo, Australia

“…Important lessons about the need to breed most species as soon as they reach sexual maturity or enter a breeding programme have been documented in studies, including those conducted at Perth Zoo (Carnio, ; Lambert et al ., ). Long‐term involvement in breeding programmes also allows more holistic views to be formed on the merits and challenges of such projects (Seddon et al ., ; Tapley et al ., ).…”

Meeting the Aichi targets: Pushing for zero extinction conservation

“…For the latter groups, zoos can actively engage in the ex situ breeding of rescued animals (in some cases the last of the species) for subsequent re-introductions if and when the conditions in the wild are adequate. Zoos and affiliated research centres can also generate the knowledge necessary to allow the treatment of the disease, raise awareness and engage in capacity building (Tapley et al 2015). …”

“…Cost for birds vary moderately between 0.33 and 0.42 million US$ (median: 0.34) but much more for mammals, 0.66–10.27 million US$ (median: 0.38), reflecting the large size differences ranging from small rodents and insectivores to the Javan rhinoceros ( Rhinoceros sondaicus ). Although ex situ costs are relatively low, the decision to take this option must be based on a rigorous cost–benefit assessment and adaptive planning to maximize the chances of success (Fa et al 2011; Tapley et al 2015). In particular, the cost for re-introductions can be exceedingly high because this process and subsequent active management is lengthy and because achieving the optimal demographic and genetic structure of the new populations require well-planned long-term monitoring schemes.…”