Is the endangered Grevy's zebra threatened by hybridization?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Hybridization between an abundant species and an endangered species is cause for concern. When such hybridization is observed, it is both urgent and necessary to assess the level of threat posed to the endangered species. We report the first evidence of natural hybridization between two equids: the endangered Grevy's zebra Equus grevyi and the abundant plains zebra Equus burchelli. Grevy's zebra now number <3000 individuals globally, and occur only in northern Kenya and Ethiopia. In recent years, Grevy's zebra have become increasingly concentrated in the south of their range due to habitat loss in the north. Both species are sympatric in the Laikipia ecosystem of northern Kenya, where we have observed purportedly hybrid individuals. Using mitochondrial and Y chromosome DNA, we confirmed the hybrid status of the morphologically identified hybrids and demonstrate conclusively that all first‐generation hybrids are the offspring of plains zebra females and Grevy's zebra males. Behaviorally, hybrids integrate themselves into plains zebra society, rather than adopting the social organization of Grevy's zebra. Two hybrids have successfully raised foals to over 3 months in age, including one which has reached adulthood, indicating the fertility of female hybrids and viability of their offspring. We hypothesize that hybridization occurs due to (1) skewed sex ratios, in favor of males, within Grevy's zebra and (2) the numerical dominance of plains zebra in the region where hybridization is occurring. Stakeholders have discussed hybridization as a potential threat to Grevy's zebra survival. We argue, however, based on behavioral observations, that hybridization is unlikely to dilute the Grevy's zebra gene pool in the short term. As a conservation concern, hybridization is secondary to more direct causes of Grevy's zebra declines.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".