Genetic Structure and Diversity Among Historic and Modern Populations of the Sumatran Rhinoceros (Dicerorhinus sumatrensis)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Sumatran rhinoceros (Dicerorhinus sumatrensis), once widespread across Southeast Asia, now consists of as few as 30 individuals within Sumatra and Borneo. To aid in conservation planning, we sequenced 218 bp of control region mitochondrial (mt) DNA, identifying 17 distinct mitochondrial haplotypes across modern (N = 13) and museum (N = 26) samples. Museum specimens from Laos and Myanmar had divergent mtDNA, consistent with the placement of western mainland rhinos into the distinct subspecies D. s. lasiotis (presumed extinct). Haplotypes from Bornean rhinos were highly diverse, but dissimilar from those of other regions, supporting the distinctiveness of the subspecies D. s. harrissoni. Rhinos from Sumatra and Peninsular Malaysia shared mtDNA haplotypes, consistent with their traditional placement into a single subspecies D. s sumatrensis. Modern samples of D. s. sumatrensis were genotyped at 18 microsatellite loci. Rhinos within Sumatra formed 2 sub-populations, likely separated by the Barisan Mountains, though with only modest genetic differentiation between them. There are so few remaining Sumatran rhinoceros that separate management strategies for subspecies or subpopulations may not be viable, while each surviving rhino pedigree is likely to retain alleles found in no other individuals. Given the low population size and low reproductive potential of Sumatran rhinos, rapid genetic erosion is inevitable, though an under-appreciated concern is the potential for fixation of harmful genetic variants. Both concerns underscore 2 overriding priorities for the species: 1) translocation of wild rhinos to ex situ facilities, and 2) collection and storage of gametes and cell lines from every surviving captive and wild individual.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".