Limited contributions of released animals from zoos to North American conservation translocations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the loss of biodiversity accelerating, conservation translocations such as reintroductions are becoming an increasingly common conservation tool. Conservation translocations must source individuals for release from either wild or captive-bred populations. We asked what proportion of North American conservation translocations rely on captive breeding and to what extent zoos and aquaria (hereafter zoos) fulfill captive breeding needs. We searched for mention of captive breeding and zoo involvement in all 1863 articles included in the North American Conservation Translocations database, which comprises journal articles and grey literature published before 2014 on conservation translocations in Canada, the United States, Mexico, the Caribbean, and Central America before 2014 as identified by a comprehensive literature review. Conservation translocations involved captive breeding for 162 (58%) of the 279 animal species translocated. Fifty-four zoos contributed animals for release. The 40 species of animals bred for release by zoos represented only 14% of all animal species for which conservation translocations were published and only 25% of all animal species that were bred for releases occurring in North America. Zoo contributions varied by taxon, ranging from zoo-bred animals released in 42% of amphibian conservation translocations to zero contributions for marine invertebrates. Proportional involvement of zoos in captive-breeding programs for release has increased from 1974 to 2014 (r = 0.325, p = 0.0313) as has the proportion of translocation-focused scientific papers coauthored by zoo professionals (from 0% in 1974 to 42% in 2013). Although zoos also contribute to conservation translocations through education, funding, and professional expertise, increasing the contribution of animals for release in responsible conservation translocation programs presents a future conservation need and opportunity. We especially encourage increased dialogue and planning between the zoo community, academic institutions, and governments to optimize the direct contribution zoos can make to wildlife conservation through conservation translocations.
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 | 0.007 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".