Premium
How many came home? Evaluating ex situ conservation of green turtles in the Cayman Islands
Author(s) -
Barbanti Anna,
Martin Clara,
Blumenthal Janice M.,
Boyle Jack,
Broderick Annette C.,
Collyer Lucy,
EbanksPetrie Gina,
Godley Brendan J.,
Mustin Walter,
Ordóñez Víctor,
Pascual Marta,
Carreras Carlos
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
molecular ecology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.619
H-Index - 225
eISSN - 1365-294X
pISSN - 0962-1083
DOI - 10.1111/mec.15017
Subject(s) - biology , captive breeding , ex situ conservation , endangered species , genetic diversity , in situ conservation , turtle (robot) , population , genetic monitoring , captivity , ecology , microsatellite , zoology , effective population size , habitat , demography , allele , biochemistry , sociology , gene
Ex situ management is an important conservation tool that allows the preservation of biological diversity outside natural habitats while supporting survival in the wild. Captive breeding followed by re‐introduction is a possible approach for endangered species conservation and preservation of genetic variability. The Cayman Turtle Centre Ltd was established in 1968 to market green turtle ( Chelonia mydas ) meat and other products and replenish wild populations, thought to be locally extirpated, through captive breeding. We evaluated the effects of this re‐introduction programmme using molecular markers (13 microsatellites, 800‐bp D‐loop and simple tandem repeat mitochondrial DNA sequences) from captive breeders ( N = 257) and wild nesting females ( N = 57) (sampling period: 2013–2015). We divided the captive breeders into three groups: founders (from the original stock), and then two subdivisions of F 1 individuals corresponding to two different management strategies, cohort 1995 (“C1995”) and multicohort F 1 (“MCF1”). Loss of genetic variability and increased relatedness was observed in the captive stock over time. We found no significant differences in diversity among captive and wild groups, and similar or higher levels of haplotype variability when compared to other natural populations. Using parentage and sibship assignment, we determined that 90% of the wild individuals were related to the captive stock. Our results suggest a strong impact of the re‐introduction programmme on the present recovery of the wild green turtle population nesting in the Cayman Islands. Moreover, genetic relatedness analyses of captive populations are necessary to improve future management actions to maintain genetic diversity in the long term and avoid inbreeding depression.