What you may not have read about the scary decline in Grauer's Gorilla numbers

Cover of the WCS and FFI Report

Over a week ago, a report from Wildlife Conservation Society and Fauna and Flora International hit the press about Grauer's gorillas (Gorilla beringei graueri).  Grauer's gorillas, previously known as eastern lowland gorillas, are one of four subspecies of gorillas. Consuming fruits and vegetation, Grauer's gorillas are the largest subspecies. They are listed as endangered and are found only in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

They made the headlines, and not just on the science news sources, because the latest data shows their numbers have declined dramatically. Over the past twenty years, Grauer's gorilla numbers have declined by an astonishing 77%, with only 2, 585 animals estimated alive today. Their range has been reduced by 84-93%. If you saw this on the news, you probably also saw that civil unrest and other human pressures are the reasons behind the sudden decline. This is hardly surprising.

What you may have missed are some of the more nuanced details behind these numbers, details that can be found in the report itself, which also covers chimpanzees in the same area. In their report titled, "Status of Grauer's Gorilla and Chimpanzees in Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo: Historical and Current Distribution and Abundance," we learn that increases in agriculture and the availability and use of shot guns caused habitat loss and extinctions of local populations in the 60s and 70s. Surveys done in the 90s also suggested species decline due to expanding human populations and hunting. The late 90s and early 2000s saw these threats exacerbated when refugees from civil war in Rwanda, internally displaced people, and armed groups in the DRC put further pressure on DRC forests and wildlife. This influx of people needed fuel for firewood, land for agriculture, timber, and also hunted wildlife and mined.

The main threats to Grauer's gorillas are hunting for bushmeat and habitat loss due to the spread of agriculture. Hunting practices are related to artisanal mining though. These mines are found adjacent to or even in protected areas, are illegal, and are controlled by armed militias (Kirkby et al., 2015). They allow people an economic opportunity to earn an income quickly and attract people from multiple social classes(Kirkby et al., 2015). Once working at these remote mines, miners rely on bushmeat for food and consume primates and other large mammals(Kirkby et al., 2015). The miners aren't evil people though, as many said they wouldn't hunt bushmeat if alternatives were available and also said they wanted to leave the mining industry.

SMART patrols, reconnaissance surveys, transects, and occupancy surveys were used to determine gorilla decline and show that one of the areas with the highest number of animals, Kahuzi-Biega National Park saw a decline of 87% in gorilla density, and this is with a portion of the Park protected reasonably well. Seven of the eleven sites surveyed through encounter rates show an average decline of 94%. These findings are enough to support raising the IUCN status of Grauer's gorillas to critically endangered.

Occupancy probability model from report. Blue areas
mean high likelihood and red very low likelihood of gorillas

Behind these alarming numbers, a story emerges of people pushed beyond their limits and forced to use the forests available in order to survive. Civil war, changes in government, and general civil unrest gives the DRC its tumultuous historic timeline, the effects of which not only impact people but also the flora and fauna of the region. Some may find it easy to forget, but humans and nature are intricately linked.

You may think you have no connection to this story other than one as an innocent bystander, but the resources mined from the DRC are part of an industry many of us play into. Most of the mines are for cassiterite, gold, coltan, and wolframite. The first is an important source of tin, the second you may be wearing now, coltan is used in electronics such as our cell phones, and the last is an important source of tungsten. Given that mining is one of the main reasons Grauer's gorillas are threatened, chances are many of us are connected to this problem, as uncomfortable as that may make us feel.

Links of potential interest
IUCN Page for Grauer's Gorillas
IUCN Categories and Their Criteria
BBC's Country Profile of the DRC

Works cited:

Kirkby, A., Spira, C., Bahati, B., Twendilonge, A., Kujirakwinja, D., Plumptre, A., ... & Nishuli, R. (2015). Investigating artisanal mining and bushmeat around protected areas. Unpublished report to USAID and Arcus Foundation.

Plumptre, A.J., Nixon, S., Critchlow, R., Vieilledent, G., Nishuli, R., Kirkby, A., Williamson, E.A., Hall, J.S. & Kujirakwinja, D. (2015). Status of Grauer’s gorilla and chimpanzees in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo: Historical and current distribution and abundance. Unpublished report to Arcus Foundation, USAID and US Fish and Wildlife Service.

Potential trouble for the endangered Udzungwa red colobus monkey

Recent genetic analysis of the Udzungwa red colobus monkey (Procolobus gordonorum) indicates the species might be in trouble in the future. This endangered monkey is endemic to the Udzungwa Mountains in Tanzania with population numbers currently in decline due to habitat loss and fragmentation (Struhsaker et al., 2008).

Udzungwa red colobus monkey, credit:Stevage

Ruiz-Lopez and colleagues (2015) did genetic analyses on 121 individuals using DNA collected from fecal samples. Samples were collected from populations living in five forest fragments of varying size. Scientists then used what is termed, "landscape genetics," combining genetic analysis with geographic-information-science (GIS). Ruiz-Lopez and colleagues (2015) specifically looked at how fragmentation affects P. gordonorum's genetic variation and what landscape features explained genetic differences.

Results showed that the greatest genetic differences were found between monkeys that are separated by villages and/or by areas of land that experienced high densities of fires. Given that the red colobus monkey is arboreal, Ruiz-Lopez and colleagues were surprised forest coverage is not a significant factor contributing to genetic variation. Despite differences in forest fragment size and in population density of the monkeys themselves, genetic variation is not significantly affected by the forest fragment individuals inhabit. Forest fragmentation in this area is relatively new (Marshall, 2007), thus these populations have only recently been genetically isolated from each other. Perhaps not enough time has passed for differences to manifest.

Ruiz-Lopez and colleagues (2015) are careful in their conclusions though and state that their findings do not necessarily prove that human activities are the main cause of this genetic variation. Human habitation and human-caused fires are likely contributing to the genetic differences, but these differences may be natural in origin, with humans simply reinforcing and maintaining genetic variation (Ruiz-Lopez et al., 2015).

Although Ruiz-Lopez and colleagues are unable to show a direct cause-and-effect relationship, this work does highlight the importance of human activity on the landscape and its impact on genetic changes in primate populations. As of today, inbreeding is not a problem for the Udzungwa red colobus monkeys, but it could be in the future, given this new evidence suggests human impacts are contributing to genetic differentiation. This is one of the few studies to use landscape genetics in this region.

Links of interest:
IUCN Redlist Page
Why we need corridors

Works cited:
Marshall AR. (2007) Disturbance in the Udzungwas: Responses of monkeys and trees to forest degradation. PhD thesis University of York: UK.
Struhsaker, T, Butynski, T.M. & Ehardt, C. 2008. Procolobus gordonorum. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2008: e.T40015A10302163. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2008.RLTS.T40015A10302163.en . 

Ruiz-Lopez, M. J., Barelli, C., Rovero, F., Hodges, K., Roos, C., Peterman, W. E., & Ting, N. (2015). A novel landscape genetic approach demonstrates the effects of human disturbance on the Udzungwa red colobus monkey (Procolobus gordonorum). Heredity.

Chimpanzee populations in Uganada greater than previously thought

 Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) are currently listed as endangered by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) due to threats from habitat loss and degradation causing a decrease in population numbers that will likely continue (Oates et al., 2008). However, a recent study examining chimpanzee numbers in Uganda gives us reason to hope for our close primate relatives. In the open access journal BMC Ecology, McCarthy and colleagues report that 15 months of data collection has lead them to determine that over two hundred and fifty chimpanzees live in a corridor that was previously assumed to hold ~seventy individuals.

Chimpanzees with offspring, Photo credit: flickr user Valerie

The Budongo and Bugoma Forest Reserves in Uganda are two large areas of protected land separated by an unprotected area that contains villages, agricultural fields, along with grasslands and forest. It's not your typical, ideal chimpanzee habitat. This corridor is dominated by humans, with 107 humans per square km (NPHC, 2014). Yet, studies like this one have obvious merit as we lose more and more pristine habitat.

Researchers collected fecal samples and genotyped those samples from 2011-2013. They then used models to determine the number of individuals. This noninvasive method is more accurate than counting the number of nests chimpanzees make at night in order to determine the number of individuals. (Chimpanzees make nests out of branches and forest materials every night that they sleep in. See a video here.) Using this method, they were able to determine that there are at least nine communities, each with anywhere between eight to thirty-three individuals. Because not all areas of the unprotected corridor were not sufficiently sampled in this study, it is possible this is a conservative estimate, and numbers may be even higher.

McCarthy and colleagues point out that chimpanzees exhibit a great deal of behavioral flexibility, which likely accounts for how they've coped with a less-than-ideal environment. Chimps are omnivores and can adapt their diet if they need to, including human-cultivated foods. Provided a lack of pressure from hunting, it is worth considering these stretches of land that previously may have been overlooked as viable areas worthy of conserving. The next steps will be understanding just how the chimps are doing so well in this habitat. What behavioral changes are they making?

Links of interest:
IUCN Redlist page on chimpanzees 
Map showing current range of chimpanzees 
The fate of western lowland gorillas and chimpanzees over the next decade
How human are chimps?

Works cited:
Maureen S McCarthy, Jack D Lester, Eric J Howe, Mimi Arandjelovic, Craig B Stanford, Linda Vigilant. Genetic censusing identifies an unexpectedly sizeable population of an endangered large mammal in a fragmented forest landscape. BMC Ecology, 2015; 15 (1) DOI: 10.1186/s12898-015-0052-x
NPHC 2014 provisional results report. Uganda Bureau of Statistics, Kampala; 2014.
Oates, J.F., Tutin, C.E.G., Humle, T., Wilson, M.L., Baillie, J.E.M., Balmforth, Z., Blom, A., Boesch, C., Cox, D., Davenport, T., Dunn, A., Dupain, J., Duvall, C., Ellis, C.M., Farmer, K.H., Gatti, S., Greengrass, E., Hart, J., Herbinger, I., Hicks, C., Hunt, K.D., Kamenya, S., Maisels, F., Mitani, J.C., Moore, J., Morgan, B.J., Morgan, D.B., Nakamura, M., Nixon, S., Plumptre, A.J., Reynolds, V., Stokes, E.J. & Walsh, P.D. 2008. Pan troglodytes. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2015.2. <www.iucnredlist.org>. 

How hurricane severity affects extinction probabilities for howler monkeys

Howler on Barro Colorado Is. Photo: Vince Smith

Howler monkeys are known for their long, bellowing calls that can be heard in the forests of Central and South America. There are five subspecies, the taxonomic rank below species, of howler monkeys. Alouatta palliata mexicana is a critically endangered subspecies found in parts of Mexico and Guatemala. Ameca y Juárez and colleagues had the idea to examine how hurricanes affect population numbers of this arboreal, New World primate. Using data from 1988 to 2002, the authors modeled how hurricane intensity affects extinction likelihood of local populations of this New World primate. They also wanted to know which human disturbance, hunting or habitat loss, had a greater impact when combined with different intensities of hurricanes.

Previous studies have examined how other species of howler monkeys have been impacted by hurricanes on a short-term basis, but this study is the first to look at the effects over a long period of time. The area in which A. p. mexicana inhabits is experiencing more hurricanes lately (Manson et al., 2009; Portilla-Ochoa et al., 2006), thus this study is of increasing relevance.

Studying A. p. mexicana living on Agaltepec Island in Mexico, which is isolated and predator-free (including human predators),  Ameca y Juárez and colleagues estimated predator, hunting, and habitat loss pressures from other A. p. mexicana populations in the area. They used population viability analysis (PVA) to determine the impact of different hurricane intensities on howler monkeys' quasi-extinction risk, or the probability of reaching a population size in which additional threats could cause the loss of the entire population.

The lowest degree hurricane disturbance result in a 28% quasi-extinction risk forty years later. Baseline estimates of hurricane intensity result in a 74% risk. Overall, the authors found that hurricanes have the ability to exceed the risk of human impacts. The combination of hurricanes and habitat loss have a substantially faster effect than when hurricanes and hunting are paired together.  It is the decrease in survival of adults that most affects the quasi-extinction rates, with adult males having an especially significant effect on the population.

The authors do point out that recurrent exposure to disturbances, including hurricanes, can be expected to affect the adaptability over time, thus reducing the likelihood the species will go extinct from the disturbance. Thus, the relationship between quasi-extinction risk and hurricane intensity won't be lineal in reality, as populations frequently exposed to hurricanes over time will adapt to lessen or moderate the negative effects.

As more frequent and intense hurricanes are expected in the future, studies such as this one allow us to determine how primate populations might be affected. Future modelling of hurricane intensity and frequency may incorporate other factors likely to affect population numbers, such as inbreeding.

Food for thought:
How might conservation biologists use information from this study to protect A. p. mexicana?
How might this study apply to other species of primates and other animal species in general?

Links of interest:
IUCN's page on A. palliata
How animals survive hurricanes
Why we should expect more extreme weather
Howler monkeys' call


Works cited:
Ameca y Juárez EI, Ellis EA, Rodríguez-Luna E. 2015. Quantifying the severity of hurricanes on extinction probabilities of a primate population: Insights into “Island” extirpations. American Journal of Primatology 77:786-800.

Manson RH, Jardel Pelaez E, Jimenez Espinosa M, et al. 2009. Perturbaciones y desastres naturales: impactos sobre las ecorregiones, la biodiversidad y el bienestar socioeconomico, en: Capital natural de Mexico, vol II: Estado de conservacion y tendecias de cambio. Conabio, Mexico, pp. 131-184. 

Portilla-Ochoa E, Sanchez-Herdandez AI, Hernadez-Meza D. 2006. El impacto de los huracanes en la biodiversidad del estado de Veracruz. In: Inundaciones 2005 en el estado de Veracruz. pp. 101-119. Universidad Vercruzana, Veracruz Mexico. 

The fate of western lowland gorillas and central chimpanzees over the next decade

The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) recently published a new report detailing what threats central chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes troglodytes) and western lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) face and identifying conservation priority areas for the next ten years.

Central chimpanzees are currently listed as endangered whereas western lowland gorillas are considered critically endangered. The new regional action plan identifies three main threats to the survival of both great apes including 1) poaching (forbidden by national laws but still a serious problem), 2) disease and 3) habitat loss. These main forces threatening central chimps and western lowland gorillas are aided by increased habitat access, a growing demand for bushmeat, and a lack of law enforcement as well as corruption.

Obstacles detailed in the regional action plan include a lack of solution to the Ebola endemic and mining and logging in forests that were once remote and inaccessible. Mining and logging aren't directly threatening to apes, but these industries create access through roads or railroads to great ape habitat. These animals and others can then be poached. Another obstacle is the growth of agriculture, specifically palm oil, which will mean the loss of forested areas that are presently home to chimps and gorillas. The report also details an overall lack of management, law enforcement, adequate monitoring and research. A legal system with substantial corruption is making matters worse.

The report identified six new priority landscapes in addition to the twelve first identified in 2005. Fifty-one percent of central chimpanzee and western lowland gorilla geographic range is now included in these eighteen landscapes, covering 77% of chimp and gorilla population. These priority landscapes are not all protected areas however. In fact, the protected areas within these landscapes currently protect 21% of the population.

The IUCN report recommends the following actions to ensure the survival of central chimpanzees and western lowland gorillas: law enforcement and better regulations, national and regional land-use planning, and outreach to all sectors that deal with protecting natural resources and land.

Monitoring the cause and effect of responses in reducing pressures that are detrimental to great ape populations will allow researchers to determine the success of this regional action plan. The first year will be about implementation with reports that are fully accessible to the public available in year ten.

The action plan concludes by stating that much has been accomplished since 2005. However, more needs to be done as the region continues to experience population growth (humans) and an increasing and global demand for extracting natural resources from the area also creates new problems. The report is optimistic that holistic solutions that allow biodiversity protection and the well-being of humans can be found and reached if governments make thoughtful decisions that look far into the future.

You can read the full regional action plan here.


Links of interest:
A.P.E.S. Portal
IUCN Primate Specialist Group
Ebola and Primates
SMART-Wildlife Conservation Tool 
In Situ Conservation I and II

Locals knowledgable of ecosystem are more likely to conserve

A study by Sawchuck and colleagues (2015) published in the journal Marine Policy explores how angler understanding of the ecosystem and fishing practices affects their views on conserving Puget Sound rockfish (Sebastes spp.). Multiple species of Puget Sound rockfish were listed under the Endangered Species Act in 2010 (Drake et al., 2010). The current study conducted by Sawchuck and colleagues (2015) found that fisherman with knowledge of the Puget Sound rockfish support conservation efforts, and individual preference on conservation efforts are influenced by where those individuals fish. Clearly, knowledge is power when it comes to conservation.

While this study is specific to conserving rockfish in Puget Sound, something I admittedly know little about, the results are applicable to many conservation biologists. Those who live closely alongside and act as part of the ecosystem are more likely to develop an attachment and appreciation of it. I know the more time I spend surrounded by nature, the more I both understand and love it. As wildlife increasingly comes into contact with humans, studies like this one that examine how people view conservation initiatives are important. They help us better understand what makes people want to conserve certain species.

Yelloweye rockfish, Sebastes ruberrimus

As the authors state in this paper, there are many factors (economic, social, cultural) that influence a person's beliefs, support, and compliance with conservation efforts. This holds true whether we're discussing fish, primates, or wild cats. Sawchuck and colleagues (2015) also state that while the Puget Sound rockfish has been studied previously, "...few have engaged recreational anglers in the recovery process and examined the underlying knowledge and perceptions that may ultimately affect support for recovery measures."

Scientists can declare that we need to protect a certain species and go through all of the hoops and bureaucracy associated with getting that species attention on a national or state level, but if there isn't local support and cooperation for conservation plans, it seems obvious to me that those plans will be less successful. People live alongside these animals and ecosystems and interact with them on a regular basis, something we're beginning to understand and appreciate more as scientists. Granek and colleagues (2008) found that commitment to conservation is higher when recreational fisherman are involved in protecting their fish from external threats to recreational fishing (commercial fishing or habitat destruction), which may simply be a matter of protecting self-interest but maybe not. The more recent study conducted by Sawchuck and colleagues (2015) shows that knowledgeable local stakeholders are more likely to support conservation.

Food for thought:

How do you think local knowledge should influence policy decisions?
When is it appropriate for scientists to include the beliefs and ideologies of locals? When might it not be appropriate or logical?

Sources:
Drake JS, Berntson EA, Cope JM, Gustafson RG, Holmes EE, Levin PS, et al. Status of five species of rockfish in Puget Sound, Washington: Bocaccio (Sebastes paucispinis), Canary Rockfish (Sebastes pinniger), Yelloweye Rockfish (Sebastes ruberrimus), Greenstriped Rockfish (Sebastes elongatus) and Redstripe Rockfish (Sebastes proriger). U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum; 2010. NMFS-NWFSC-108, 234 p.
E.F. Granek, E.M.P. Madin, M.A. Brown, W. Figueira, D.S. Cameron, Z. Hogan, et al. Engaging recreational fishers in management and conservation: global case studies Conserv Biol, 22 (5) (2008), pp. 1125–1134

Sawchuk, Jennifer Heibult, et al. "Using stakeholder engagement to inform endangered species management and improve conservation." Marine Policy 54 (2015): 98-107.

Studying the ecology of disease and primates

We often think of habitat loss, hunting, and perhaps even the pet trade as serious threats to primate conservation. Disease, on the other hand, is commonly forgotten. Yet, increasingly fragmented forests create more opportunities for humans and wildlife to come into contact and potentially transfer and spread disease. Our close genetic relationship with non-human primates further increases the likelihood of spreading illness through contact, making this a topic worth paying attention to.

Cryptosporidium parvum

A study came out recently in the journal PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases that should remind all of us not to exclude disease as a potential threat to non-human primate conservation. Parsons et al., 2015 studied chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and baboons (Papio anubis) in Gombe National Park (where Jane Goodall studied chimps) and found that they are exposed to a parasite called Cryptosporidium. Cryptosporidium is transmitted through food, water, and zoonotic means (from animals to humans).

Death from infectious disease is the leading cause of mortality for the three chimpanzee communities inhabiting Gombe (Lonsdorf et al., 2006; Williams et al., 2008), thus studying disease ecology should allow us to better conserve the Gombe population. While Papio anubis is not endangered, Pan troglodytes is.

Of the 131 non-human primates tested, 16% were positive for Cryptosporidium compared to 9.6% of livestock and just 4.3% of the 185 humans tested. Baboons and chimpanzees were infected at a similar rate. Three species of Cryptosporidium were detected: C. hominis, C. suis, and C. xiaoi.
 

Bush pig, Photo credit: Derek Keats

Half of the Cryptosporidium documented in the Kasekela community of chimpanzees are of a Cryptosporidium species (C. suis) typically associated with pigs. Surprisingly, C. suis was not detected in any of the humans, baboons, or livestock tested. The authors suggest that the transmission cycle may involve bush pigs, Potaochoerus larvatus, because domesticated pigs are not present in this area due to a mainly Muslim population. The bush pigs are found in the forest the Kasekela chimps inhabit and may serve as a reservoir for the parasite. It seems there are more details to be teased out when understanding the connection between C. suis and humans. Another species of the Cryptosporidium parasite found in this study, C. hominis, is one of two species most commonly found in humans (Chalmers and Katzer, 2013; Insulander et al., 2013). Yet C. hominis was also found in baboons and one of the chimpanzee communities, raising a red flag.

Cryptosporidium has been found in other primate species as well, including mountain gorillas, which were found to have the same species of Cryptosporidium, C. parvum, as found in nearby human populations (Nizeyi et al., 1999; Graczyk et al., 2001). Cryptosporidium has also been reported in red colobus and black and white colobus monkeys (Sayler et al., 2012). The Parsons study thus contributes to a growing body of literature on the prevalence of zoonotic diseases and their transmission. The authors stress the need to further understand the complex connections between primates, their ecology, their contact with humans, and the spread of disease so that we can better understand this relatively unexplored area of primate conservation.

This is an interesting article because Parsons and colleagues tackled a question that is poorly studied. The ecology of how diseases like Cryptosporidium spread and affect our primate relatives is not well understood, but zoonotic diseases make up the majority (60.3%) of emerging diseases worldwide (Jones et al., 2008). This is a timely and interesting paper that is worth reading or at least skimming. You can find the article posted online here. It's free and worth a look!

Links of interest:
Non-human primate biosafety from the University of Minnesota
Studying disease emergence in primates may help us understand emergence in humans
ScienceDaily article on paper


Sources:

Chalmers, Rachel M., and Frank Katzer. "Looking for Cryptosporidium: the application of advances in detection and diagnosis." Trends in parasitology 29.5 (2013): 237-251.

Insulander, M., et al. "Molecular epidemiology and clinical manifestations of human cryptosporidiosis in Sweden." Epidemiology and infection 141.05 (2013): 1009-1020.

Jones KE, Patel NG, Levy MA, Storeygard A, Balk D, et al. (2008) Global trends in emerging infectious diseases. Nature 451: 990–993 doi: 10.1038/nature06536
Graczyk TK, DaSilva AJ, Cranfield MR, Nizeyi JB, Kalema G, et al. (2001) Cryptosporidium parvum Genotype 2 infections in free-ranging mountain gorillas (Gorilla gorilla beringei) of the Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, Uganda. Parasitology Research 87: 368–370. pmid:11403378 doi: 10.1007/s004360000337 

Lonsdorf EV, Travis D, Pusey AE, Goodall J (2006) Using retrospective health data from the Gombe chimpanzee study to inform future monitoring efforts. American Journal of Primatology 68: 897–908 

Parsons, M. B., et al. "Epidemiology and Molecular Characterization of Cryptosporidium spp." Humans, Wild Primates, and Domesticated Animals in the Greater Gombe Ecosystem, Tanzania. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 9.2 (2015): e0003529.

Nizeyi JB, Mwebe R, Nanteza A, Cranfield MR, Kalema G, et al. (1999) Cryptosporidium sp and Giardia sp infections in mountain gorillas (Gorilla gorilla beringei) of the Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, Uganda. Journal of Parasitology 85: 1084–1088. pmid:10647041 doi: 10.2307/3285672 
Salyer SJ, Gillespie TR, Rwego IB, Chapman CA, Goldberg TL (2012) Epidemiology and Molecular Relationships of Cryptosporidium spp. in People, Primates, and Livestock from Western Uganda. Plos Neglected Tropical Diseases 6.(4):e1597. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0001597. pmid:22506085

Williams JM, Lonsdorf EV, Wilson ML, Schumacher-Stankey J, Goodall J, et al. (2008) Causes of death in the Kasekela chimpanzees of Gombe National Park, Tanzania. American Journal of Primatology 70: 766–777 doi: 10.1002/ajp.20573

The Great Chain of Being is still relevant today and not for the right reasons

The Great Chain of Being, also known as scala naturae, is a concept that was derived from the ideas of Plato and Aristotle. It's the idea that there is an inherent hierarchy of nature with a perfect god at the top, angels right below god, kings below the angels, and animals, birds, worms and then rocks at the very bottom with much in between the kings and the animals. Birds are lower than animals and worms are lower than birds. This method of ranking living and nonliving things classifies them based on perfection with each step down becoming gradually less ideal.

Select portion of Haeckel's Evolution of Man

With a perfect god at the top, this system obviously has religious roots, but it was how naturalists and biologists thought too. The idea has changed over time and eventually living things were grouped based on their anatomy as opposed to this system based on perfection and closeness to a god. It sounds like an archaic way of thinking, yet the idea that some species are higher than others pervades our thinking to this day. Many people believe humans are better or above other animals, that we deserve all of the resources we consume regardless of other species' needs, and even that we deserve these resources because we're more intelligent. We drastically change the landscape and ecology of the planet, building dams, spraying pesticides, logging forests, and so forth, because we believe we're making the world a better place to live in (for humans).

Learning more about wildlife and seeing animals in action, whether it's in a zoo or the wild, is the easiest way I can think of removing these biases. By learning that chimpanzees appear to mourn for their dead, we realize we're not so different. Going on a whale watch and seeing humpback whales with your own eyes is hard to forget and makes these aquatic giants seem more than just another species we need to protect. Learning that the aye-aye's creepy pointed finger has a unique and important function helps us understand that this weird primate is worth saving despite its oddities. Reading about animal intelligence and understanding the tremendous diversity of adaptations animals have to their environments makes it clear that there are multiple ways of measuring importance and worth of a species. One species isn't better than another but each species is different and has its own value. Just because an ant doesn't create art doesn't mean that we should ignore them. Ants wage wars, they are one of the strongest animals in relation to their size, some ants can swim, and some can reproduce asexually. They're more than just an annoyance at a picnic and they're a lot of things we're not. Who are we to judge if they're "better"? Ants aren't humans and humans aren't ants. Different doesn't mean we need to undervalue them.

Monteseny brook newt

Many people also believe that certain animals (usually the photogenic or cute and cuddly ones) are worth protecting over others. This too is similar to the idea that some animals are higher than others. Humans will gladly donate to save the endangered giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) but saving the critically endangered Montseny brook newt (Calotriton arnoldi) is a lot harder. One species is cute and cuddly and widely recognized and loved whereas the other is unknown to most people. The World Wildlife Foundation uses the giant panda as its symbol or logo. Should the Montseny brook newt remain unknown and ignored because it isn't as cuddly as the panda? Do we really want to base our conservation priorities on which animal takes the best photos and sells the most stuffed animals? Probably not but that's often what happens.

How do we make newts, frogs, insects, snakes, spiders, and other animals more attractive compared to pandas, tigers, orcas, and gorillas? Well, I'm not sure we can. Pandas look good on tee-shirts and there are more tv and movie documentaries on pandas than on newts. Our best bet is likely educating people about how important those less desirable animals are to our world and how interesting they really are. (To learn more about the Montseny brook newt, click here.) This may be one instance where it makes sense to spend more time educating adults than it does children. I'd hope adults are more susceptible to listening to the facts rather than basing their donations and interest solely on the charisma of an animal, but who's to say?

Drumming up support for local species is also a good idea. You're more likely to protect a species that you see in your own neighborhood than one that you'll probably never see because it's on another continent far away. Take for example the California condor (Gymnogyps californianus). This is not a cute species, yet it has rebounded from only a few individuals living in the wild to more than four hundred due to captive breeding programs initiated by the US government. Protecting condors started out as a government initiative, but condors have found their way into our hearts (or at least found their way onto our radar) despite having bald heads and feathers. You can easily donate online to help reintroduction efforts.

The Great Chain of Being should be a concept that pops up only when we're discussing history. Instead, it permeates our ideas about the value of conserving wildlife. This is an outdated idea that doesn't make sense given all we know about the animal kingdom. Gorillas are not higher than rodents and protecting them based on this idea is misguided and outdated. Let's move on from scala naturae and protect species based on other characteristics.

Food for thought: What makes a species worth protecting? How should we judge which species deserve our attention?

Links of interest:
Valuation of species and nature conservation in Asia and Oceania
Science Video: Why do we value some species more than others?
Ethics for Wildlife Conservation: Overcoming the Human-Nature Dualism
TED Talk on bringing the condor back from near extinction

The importance of wildlife corridors in conservation

As habitats become more and more fragmented, wildlife corridors are of increasing importance. A wildlife corridor is a straightforward concept: it connects two habitats that have been disconnected,

Fragments in the Amazon, Photo from Google Earth

usually through human activity of some sort.

Ideally, if we wanted to save a species, we would conserve as much of that species' habitat as possible. It's a no brainer. The reality is often different. Continuous stretches of rainforest would be wonderful, but sometimes only parts of an area can be protected. Maybe the government decides that a highway is crucial to connect an outlying town to nearby cities and a forest is interrupted and cut in two pieces. Or maybe parts of a savanna are sold off as farmland, disrupting continuous forests and instead making patches of forest. Either way, the landscape changes and life has to cope.

Dispersal of plants and animals is challenging when that plant or animal has to cross a stretch of non-habitat. A bird can cover that highway or palm oil plantation by flight, but a howler monkey or a sloth is going to have a much harder time crossing that space, missing breeding opportunities, foraging opportunities, dispersal opportunities and unable to move into new habitat if needed.

A troop of monkeys may survive just fine in parcel X of forest, but imagine there's a drought. They're starving, visibly losing body weight, mothers losing infants, and they need to feed from a patch of trees that they wouldn't normally eat from because the leaves provide such low nutrition but now they have no choice. Let's say that patch of typically undesirable trees in what is now parcel Y.  Parcel Y is separated from the monkey's forest by a rice field. Can our troop of staving monkeys cross the rice field safely to get to that much needed resource? A juvenile jaguar reaches sexual maturity and needs to find a mate so that he can breed and increase his fitness, or the number of offspring an individual produces that survive to sexual maturity. The only available mates in this jaguar's forest are close relatives. If the jaguar breeds with a close relative, inbreeding may become a problem. Inbreeding over time decreases the genetic diversity of a species, making the species more susceptible to disease and genetic defects. These are just two examples of animals that do better with continuous habitat or with patches of habitat that they can cross. If that jaguar can't cross into another patch of forest to mate with a non-relative, he may never produce any offspring. If those monkeys can't cross the rice field, their population numbers will likely decrease even further and the troop won't be around for very long.

This bridge allows wildlife to safely cross above the highway

Wildlife corridors are created to solve these problems. Corridors may be designed specifically with a particular species in mind or more broadly to conserve multiple species. They may be reconstructed to look like the two habitats they're connecting or they may be more artificial. The Jaguar Corridor Initiative seeks to use farmland and other human modified areas as corridors where, while humans may use and own these lands, the jaguars can cross safely. Wildlife corridors allow species to move between fragments that they otherwise may struggle or fail to reach and they are proven to increase plant biodiversity. They're monitored to better understand if those corridors are actually being used. To check out more about the latest in corridor science, be sure to visit Conservation Corridor.

 Food for thought: what might be some of the challenges or barriers be to creating these wildlife corridors?

True or false: an animal or plant only has to cope with a patchy habitat if humans have been involved.



Answer: false. Patches are created by rivers, by mountains and in other natural ways. Patches of habitat are not always man-made.

What is a keystone species?

A keystone species is any species that plays a critical role in how the ecosystem functions. Couldn't one argue that every species is a keystone species, playing an important role? Well, a keystone species plays a disproportionately large role in maintaining the ecosystem structure and function.

Sea otters are a great example of a keystone species

For example, let's look at sea otters. They're a common example of a keystone species. Why? Well, because they feed on urchins. Urchins feed on kelp. By preying on the urchin population, sea otters prevent urchins from consuming too much kelp. Kelp forests are home to many species, including invertebrates, fish, and marine mammals. In addition to being important habitat, lots of other animals feed in the kelp forests, such as seals and sea lions. Kelp forests can be destroyed by urchins, but the sea otters feed on urchins, preventing this from happening. Without the sea otters to feed on the urchin, the urchin might consume massive amounts of kelp, destroying important habitat feeding waters for other animals. So the effect of this one species on the ecosystem is very large, larger than one would expect for a single species.

Many predators function as keystone species, limiting the population growth of multiple omnivores/herbivores. Wolves eat deer and deer eat small trees, so wolves protect this new growth. Jaguars, tiger sharks, mountain lions and sea stars are all predators that function as keystone species.

Pacific salmon is another good example of a keystone species and not because of what this species does during its life but because its death is so important. The salmon life cycle involves salmon returning to the freshwater streams they were born in to spawn (males release sperm and females release ova into the water) and then die. Like anything that's dead, the salmon then decompose in these waters. Their death provides a significant amount of nitrogen to the watershed (the area of land where all of the rain or water under the land drains to, click here for more info).  Salmon runs, when salmon return to the freshwater they were born in and spawn themselves, provide a crucial source of nutrients to areas that otherwise might have low productivity, and they act as a food source for many animals, including grizzlies and eagles.

Red mangroves

But let's not forget our green friends. Plants can function as keystone species too. Red mangroves, Rhizophora mangle, are found at the edge of the water. Their roots act as a nursery to fish and crustaceans. Red mangroves provide habitat for many species, such as manatees, birds, and fish, They protect against erosion and act as buffers from large waves, literally structuring the land around them by preventing soil erosion and acting as anchors.

The concept of a keystone species was first introduced by Robert Paine in 1969, who studied sea stars and noticed that removing this key predator had cascading effects. Since Paine's work, we've come to realize the importance keystone species have in their communities. These important species are often targets for conservation efforts, as conserving them protects many species and ecosystems.

Food for thought: Do some research on the reintroduction of wolves to Yellowstone National Park. How did the arrival of wolves in 1995 change Yellowstone? How is this example of a keystone species connected to conservation in Yellowstone?

If you want to learn more, check out this great resource from Nature: Keystone Species.

Ten Stories to Be Thankful for This Thanksgiving

1. In Western Australia, a species once thought to be locally extinct (extinct in that area only-not globally), was spotted again after a decade long absence. Highly sensitive to habaitat disturbances, it seems like the spectacled hare-wallaby has managed to prevail.

2. Climate change and the need to be green are topics familiar to most people in western countries, but greening up practices is harder in areas where hunger and access to basic sanitation are real problems. That hasn't stopped Ethiopia from deciding to transform sewage to fertilizer and biogas. Talk about an interesting source of renewable energy.

Wind energy is more affordable than ever

3. Solar and wind power have been out of reach for most due to their high costs.  Prices are changing though and wind and solar power are more affordable than ever, with prices down 50-70% in recent years. While not yet a replacement for goal and natural gas, I'm thankful we're getting closer.

4. I'm proud to be an American after the U.S. pledged 3 billion dollars to the Green Climate Fund. The U.S.'s pledge puts us significantly closer to the goal of 10-15 billion raised (we're just under 7 right now). The GCF redistributes money from developed countries to less developed countries and helps them tackle climate change.

5. You've probably heard about the Galapagos Islands, a series of Islands with high biodiversity. Well, giant tortoises were once very near extinction on these islands, but they're making a comeback! Only 15 were left in the 60s but now there are over 1,000!

6. The second most populated country in the world, India, recently announced it will invest 1 billion dollars to renewable energy. They're looking to double their wind energy capacity by 2019. Way to step it up India.

7.  In what is one of the most exciting stories of an "extinct" species coming back from the dead I've read in a while, it looks like there's at least one Sumatran rhino left in the wild. Whether or not enough Sumatrans rhinos exist to maintain a sustainable population is uncertain and perhaps unlikely, but there might be some hope left, and that's good news.

Air pollution

8. Obama is expected to announce even stricter regulations on ozone emissions sometime today. I'm thankful we'll see less smog from factories and power plants. Everyone deserves clean air to breathe.

9.  Arizona residents have a new neighbor, not seen in decades, the gray wolf is back. A female wolf has been spotted wandering around the state. Let's hope a male decides to join her.

10. Finally, China and U.S. made the headlines globally when they reached a climate deal. China agreed to slow and curb carbon emissions. This historic deal means China will reach peak emissions by 2030 and then curb them, putting an actual deadline out there for the first time. This something we all should be thankful for.


Thanks for reading and Happy Thanksgiving! There's a lot of work to be done but there's a lot to be thankful for too!

Higher Greenhouse Gases

A report by the World Meteorological Organization which was released Sept 9, 2014 found that greenhouse gases (gases in the atmosphere that absorb and emit infrared radiation such as carbon dioxide, warming the planet) are higher than ever previously recorded. The report reads, "Carbon dioxide or CO2 levels increased more from 2012 to 2013 than any year since 1984," showing that, despite increased attention to global warming, there doesn't appear to be any improvement.

How does global warming affect wildlife? What does any of this have to do with ecology?

Coral reef
Photo credit: Jim Maragos/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

According to the World Meteorological Organization, roughly 25% of greenhouse gas emissions are absorbed by the oceans, a further 25% are absorbed by the biosphere (life on earth, or the global ecological system), and the rest is then absorbed by the atmosphere. The oceans don't absorb all of these emissions without consequence, however. The result is ocean acidification, a decrease in pH caused by the uptake of carbon. Ocean acidification is thought to cause coral bleaching, a depressed immune response for some organisms, and reproductive disorders in certain fish. Lower pH levels are bad news for marine life inhabiting the oceans' dead zones, where oxygen levels are low. Dead zones with low pH levels are linked to increased rates of death and decreased rates of growth for young bay scallops and hard clams.

 It's important to keep in mind that this change in pH is happening suddenly and quickly. Organisms can't adapt fast enough and, like in a row of dominos, everything is connected. Food webs are affected, and the consequences could reach all the way to commercial fishing and the food we like to see on the menu.

Sea levels are also rising, which will certainly effect coastal ecosystems. Remember, warmer temperatures mean more evaporation, which will lead to more precipitation and thus possibly increased flooding in some areas. Rainfall is tightly linked to the types of vegetation that can grow in an area, and thus the animals that eat that vegetation. Hibernating animals, such as marmots,  wake up earlier or don't hibernate at all. Food sources for these hibernating animals aren't available during times when animals previously hibernated but are now awake, thus increasing the risk of starvation. I could give more and more examples (monarch butterflies changing their migration patterns, higher extinction rates, habitat changes for turtles, and so forth ), but I hope they're not needed.

Snares crested penguins

The effects of global warming are complex and potentially underestimated. What may seem like a small rise in sea level can have drastic consequences for multiple ecosystems. A seemingly slight rise in air temperature can mean a species needs to change its behavior, mating patterns, or habitat use. Changes to our planet are happening rapidly, as the World Meteorological Organization shows us. The question remains, what are we going to do about these changes? Are we going to do anything?



What do you think we should be doing to slow rising greenhouse gas emissions? How are different people and organizations (scientists, policy-makers, teachers, politicians, every day people, etc) responsible? What are some realistic approaches we could make to combat rising greenhouse gases?

SMART-A Wildlife Conservation Tool

From Stokes et al., 2010 paper

SMART, the Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool, is a conservation software that allows government organizations and other agencies to monitor and measure the effectiveness of patrols in protected areas. Data is input into the software and maps of patrol areas can be created along with maps showing where wildlife is being hunted or logging is occurring.

The creators of SMART are fully aware of the need to quickly assess and monitor areas, rather than rely on stale data. This is important because, of course, the world is not static; species ranging, human land use, ecologies, and so forth are always changing. Up-to-date data can be used by agencies to make key decisions about how to change patrols/conservation efforts. Management can then communicate quickly with patrols/those enforcing the law to implement timely adjustments.  Developed by conservationists to aid those on the "front-line," SMART is made so that managers can see what their current strategies are doing in real time and change them if needed. There's no time lag. No maps showing what species distribution looked like two years ago when new patrols or initiatives have been put in place. Managers can see where hunting is occurring now and then quickly arrange for new patrols in those areas. SMART is a useful tool because it detects these changes, so managers can see how implementing a new patrol affects species abundance for example.

The software also measures which conservation strategies are most effective. SMART has training tools and best practices developed by experts and people who use the software.

It's not marketed as for every one when in reality only those Westerners with a PhD can understand how to use the software. The creators of SMART worked to ensure their software would be put into actual use by field assistants, patrols, station managers, and so forth whether or not they have an advanced degree (or any degree at all for that matter). SMART is free and designed to be easy to use. It's available in local languages, and there's an online forum where users can post questions and help each other. Training manuals with modules designed to take users step-by-step through tasks such as, "Setting up a Conservation Area" and "Analysis: Queries and Summaries" were uploaded in May 2014.

Panthera tigris

The software has been used to monitor great apes and elephants in the Republic of Congo, tigers in multiple countries in Asia, and rhinos in Kenya.

I learned about this great tool in a talk titled, "Getting Smart About Great Ape Anti-Poaching Efforts by EJ Stokes of the Wildlife Conservation Society" by E. J. Stokes. I wanted to post about SMART for a couple of reasons: 1) it can and actually is being used by scientists and non-scientists; 2) it provides real-time data; 3) best practices are included with the program; and 4) it allows organizations to see what's working and what isn't. Using SMART, data and people can come together to effectively protect areas. It's just plain SMART! (Sorry, I had to go there.)

The ApeApp

I've had the privilege of attending talks at the International Primatological Society's Congress in Hanoi, Vietnam this week, and one of the sessions I made sure to attend was on the applications of technology to primatology and conservation.

One of the particularly interesting presentations was, "The ApeApp and Tablet Advocacy: How Best to Inspire Conservation in Mobile Technology" by L. Darby, D. Cress, and J. Refisch. With so many people using mobile devices (more people have access to a mobile device than a working toilet, I learned during the talk), it's no surprise that conservation has spread to our smart phones.

The ApeApp was created by the Great Ape Survival Partnership or GRASP to teach people about the Great Apes (Chimpanzees, Bonobos, Orangutans, and Gorillas) and to allow people to donate through their mobile phones to conservation causes. It's available for the iPhone, iPad, and Android devices for free and was a finalist for the Appy Awards. The ApeApp creates a link between the public and 95 partners of GRASP, ranging from research institutions to conservation agencies to UN agencies. You can donate to the Diane Fossey Gorilla Foundation, the African Wildlife Foundation, and others. Except for the PayPal fee, all of your money goes towards the cause you chose. I think it's great that users can choose to donate say to habitat protection with the Orangutan Conservancy or Congo Shipping project with the African Wildlife Foundation.

You can also learn about these projects you donate to. For example, the Congo Shipping Project provides local communities with a boat to transport crops to cities so that they can sell them, whereas before this project, many people could not sell their crops and thus resorted to hunting apes. The project also trains communities in sustainable farming.

The ApeApp also teaches users about these apes, providing information on the average size and weight of each ape, species habitat, their population numbers and conservation status, subspecies, sleep patterns, vocalizations, and, my favorite, food. There's plenty to learn and it's easy to use.

I think this is a great example of how technology and conservation and mesh well together. Next time you're on your phone, instead of playing games or checking social networking sites, why not spend some time learning about our closest living relatives? Or better yet, donate to a cause you learned about on the ApeApp through the ApeApp itself.

Fun fact: Guess how many hours Americans spend on some sort of technology (computers, radio, tv, mobile phones, etc)?



Answer: 11 hours!

Palm Oil Problems

Fruit from which palm oil is produced

Palm oil is an ingredient in countless household items ranging from cosmetics to food items to biofuels. It's become a huge conservation issue because the majority of palm oil plantations come from Indonesia and Malaysia, where forests have been cut down to put up these plantations, causing massive habit loss for animals such as orangutans, rhinos, sun bears, leopards, other species of monkeys, and many more animals. Deforestation has resulted in forests that are increasingly fragmented, making it harder for animals to find potential mates, to disperse, and making it difficult for those species requiring large home ranges to survive. Additionally, all of this cutting has resulted in increased greenhouse gases, contributing to global warming.

The demand for this popular vegetable oil is growing. Already 40-50% of the items found in homes in the US and one out of every ten items in supermarkets in the UK contain palm oil.

A recently published study (July 10) in the journal Current Biology report the need to prevent these large plantations from spreading to Africa. The article states that of the area deemed suitable for palm oil plantations, 42.3% of that area overlaps with the African great apes (chimpanzees, bonobos, and gorillas). Almost 40% of the distribution of great apes in Africa on unprotected land overlaps with areas considered suitable for palm oil plantations.  The authors determined that palm oil plantations will pose a significant threat to apes in Africa. In some countries, areas suitable for growing this crop overlap with ape habitat by as much as 80%.

Palm oil plantation

So what do the authors suggest to prevent palm oil companies from extending their reach even further into Africa? Public awareness of the environmental and social impacts (such as issues with water quality  and poor working conditions) this industry creates. Most people have never heard of palm oil, which can also be labeled as palmate, vegetable oil, Elaeis guineensis, etc. They have no idea of the destruction it causes to forests across the world. So what can we do to help? Be informed, tell your friends, and reduce your usage of palm oil as much as possible. It's very difficult to do, as palm oil truly is in so many products, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try.



Food for thought: Apes have a very long life cycle. For example, orangutan offspring remain with their mothers until on average eight years old and won't give birth themselves until around age 15. When they do give birth, it's to a single offspring. How does this long life history work against them when it comes to conservation efforts? Think about population numbers.

Sustainable ecotourism

People travel to Costa Rica for different reasons (bird watching, volunteering, seeing wildlife and/or the diversity of flora, and so forth), but what is the point of traveling to a foreign country and consuming only Western-style foods, staying in hotels with the exact amenities one could find at home, and maybe seeing a few parks or tourist spots while away? Americans or other foreigners run many of these large hotels and resorts, tourists come and spend their money, happy to have hot showers and air conditioning, but Costa Ricans don’t see much of that money. 

This beautiful art is made from repurposed tires!

Staying at hotels, eating at restaurants, using tour companies all owned and run by local people gives back to the country. Yes, this involves a little research on the tourist’s part. Giving money back to the beautiful country one visits is a much better practice then simply spending foreign money on Costa Rican experiences while that money goes to more foreigners.  You can support the local economy by choosing to have dinner at a restaurant owned and run by Costa Ricans rather than the familiar Subway chain you saw advertised on a billboard or by buying souvenirs from local artists who will benefit from your money rather than mass, factory produced items. Besides, why come to Costa Rica if you just want to eat familiar foods? Experience the culture and learn what “Costa Rican food” or “comida typico” means! Buying souvenirs from local artists means that no one else will have a painting or a glass identical to the one you bought. There are benefits to the country you’re visiting and benefits to you as a tourist.

We travel through Costa Rica and other countries and see that their living standards may be substantially different than ours. Travelling sustainably is about ensuring the future of locals for an extended period of time (generations later). It’s about practices that will allow adults to run businesses and provide money for their families and for their children after them to do the same. In many instances, it’s about travelling as “green” as possible as well. Walking instead of taking a two minute taxi ride, choosing mass transport rather than taking a car, bringing biodegradable soaps and shampoos, picking up trash you see on the beach, staying on paths in the forest rather than trampling new trails, and so forth are all ways of minimizing your impact.