Minimizing genetic adaptation in captive breeding programs: A review
Open accessAbstract
Captive breeding for species of conservation concern is the act of bringing rare or endangered animals into captivity with the hope of rearing sustained captive populations for eventual reintroduction into the wild. Within captivity, genetic changes can occur that may reduce a species' ability to persist once a population is reintroduced back into its natural habitat. We sought to determine the efficacy of recommendations made to minimize genetic adaptation to captivity by addressing the following questions: (i) Are these recommendations already being carried out in captive programs? (ii) How practical is each recommendation? and (iii) Which recommendations call for future investigation? We performed an extensive search of the published literature for studies of non-domestic, non-model, captive animals in which the investigators used and reported a strategy that can minimize genetic adaptation to the captive environment. We found different forms of each recommendation already being executed in captive programs to varying degrees. In all, we reviewed 90 articles covering four broad categories of strategies. We conclude that the best approach to minimize genetic adaptation is to reduce the number of generations that a species spends in captivity. If this is not possible, then we suggest attempting to minimize generations first by delaying reproduction and then by cryopreservation of germplasm. Other strategies are effective to varying degrees depending on the species' natural h…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Pressures that govern wild behavior, such as competition, predation and foraging, are absent in captivity.
“However, pressures that govern wild behavior, such as competition, predation and foraging, are absent in captivity (Williams and Hoffman, 2009)”
From Husbandry and enclosure influences on penguin behavior and conservation breeding (2016) · cites this paper as Williams and Hoffman, 2009
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 167 · Cited by 316
- Authors
- Williams, S. E., & Hoffman, E. A.
- Affiliations
- University of Central Florida (US)
- Corresponding author
- Hoffman, Eric A.
- ORCID
- Hoffman, Eric A.
- Venue
- Biological Conservation
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009-11
- Volume
- 142
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 2388-2400
- ISSN
- 0006-3207 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2170637888
- Cited by
- 316
- References
- 167
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 49 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 16
- FWCI
- 6.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Locations
- Biological Conservation (publishedVersion)
- Journal of International Crisis and Risk Communication Research (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic diversity and population structure
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Conservation, Ecology, Wildlife Education
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
- Keywords
- captive breeding, captive populations, threatened species, reintroduction, conservation genetics, delayed reproduction, captive husbandry
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review