Assessment of conservation units for the Sumatran rhinoceros (Dicerorhinus sumatrensis)

Abstract

An assessment of conservation units for the Sumatran rhinoceros (Dicerorhinus sumatrensis) was conducted using a population aggregation analysis (PAA) of mitochondrial DNA site substitutions. Populations were defined as the three geographically separated regions of West Malaysia, Sumatra, and Borneo. The intent of this assessment was to explore management options for this highly endangered lineage rather than conduct a traditional taxonomic revision.Individual DNA positions were not diagnostic for any population. A single haplotype provided a character as support for diagnosing the West Malaysian and Bornean population. The haplotypes on West Malaysia and Sumatra were more similar to each other than either was to the one on Borneo. These data, and a review of the morphological characters, support the option of treating Sumatran rhinos as a single conservation unit, providing managers with greater flexibility in managing the unique Dicerorhine lineage. 0 1995 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Sorting out tigers (Panthera tigris): mitochondrial sequences, nuclear inserts, systematics, and conservation genetics

“…The findings of this study are consistent with the hypothesis that Sumatran tigers were isolated, and then subsequently differentiated, on Sumatra after a rise in sea-level created that island approximately 6000 to 12 000 years ago (Seidensticker, 1986). The small amount of genetic divergence between Sumatrans and other tigers reflects that recent age of origin and is paralleled by the slight genetic differences reported in the Sumatran rhinoceros (Dicerorhinus sumatrensis) and mainland rhinoceros populations (Amato et al, 1995), also thought to be isolated from one another by the same sea-level rise. Given the diagnostic status of Sumatran tigers, our data provide no evidence to suggest interbreeding with the mainland after isolation and differentiation.…”

“…Moreover, the line between subspecies and biological species is fuzzy, depending often on an arbitrary assessment of degree of difference. Recent discussions over the applicability of species concepts to conservation have generally supported the notion that some form of the phylogenetic species concept (PSC) is most appropriate for conservation biology (Cracraft, 1991(Cracraft, , 1997Vogler & DeSalle, 1994;Amato et al, 1995;Barrowclough & Flesness, 1996).…”

“…Many systematists and conservation biologists have recognized the fact that phylogenetic species are largely what conservation biologists mean by evolutionary significant units (Cracraft, 1991(Cracraft, , 1997Vogler & DeSalle, 1994;Amato et al, 1995;Zink & Kale, 1995;Barrowclough & Flesness, 1996). That being the case, and for the other reasons noted above, it makes sense for conservation biology to substitute the formal taxonomic language provided by the phylogenetic species concept for the informal ESU.…”

Phylogenetic Relationships of the Five Extant Rhinoceros Species (Rhinocerotidae, Perissodactyla) Based on Mitochondrial Cytochrome b and 12S rRNA Genes

“…used complete mitochondrial genomes but included only the white and Indian rhinoceroses. Other studies have dealt with the conservation genetics of the Sumatran (Amato et al, 1995;Morales et al, 1997) and the black (O'Ryan et al, 1994) rhinoceroses using mitochondrial DNA markers.…”

Captive breeding, reintroduction, and the conservation genetics of black and white ruffed lemurs, Varecia variegata variegata

“…In a reintroduction program, especially one designed for population reinforcement, a greater emphasis might be placed on having the captive population more carefully match the specific local genetic type in order to allay fears of outbreeding that may result in reduced fitness ( Templeton 1986; Lynch 1996). While this issue may have been overstated by some authors ( Amato et al . 1995 ), it has frequently been the major concern of local wildlife managers (e.g.…”