2020
DOI: 10.1007/s10592-020-01292-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Genetic impacts of conservation management actions in a critically endangered parrot species

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
23
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…the decrease of their population growth rate in parallel to the decline of their population size (Crates et al ., 2017). In the case of the critically endangered orange‐bellied parrot Neophema chrysogaster , establishment of acaptive population temporarily decreased genetic diversity of the wild population (Morrison et al ., 2020), and release of captive bred birds to the wild has not corrected their population decline (Stojanovic et al, 2020). For swift parrots, cessation of deforestation of breeding and foraging habitat may stop exacerbating habitat limitation and predation (Stojanovic et al .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…the decrease of their population growth rate in parallel to the decline of their population size (Crates et al ., 2017). In the case of the critically endangered orange‐bellied parrot Neophema chrysogaster , establishment of acaptive population temporarily decreased genetic diversity of the wild population (Morrison et al ., 2020), and release of captive bred birds to the wild has not corrected their population decline (Stojanovic et al, 2020). For swift parrots, cessation of deforestation of breeding and foraging habitat may stop exacerbating habitat limitation and predation (Stojanovic et al .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A captive insurance population of the OBP was established in 1986 with 10 wild birds (seven of which bred) and, although the population was supplemented intermittently over the years, it suffered from low fecundity in the 2000s (Morrison, Johnson, Grueber, & Hogg, 2020). An additional harvest of 21 juveniles in the summer of 2010/2011, which equated to almost half of the wild juvenile population, improved genetic diversity of the captive population, but had a negative genetic impact on the remaining wild population (Morrison, Johnson, et al, 2020). For any long‐term captive breeding program, adaptation to captivity is of concern (Frankham, 2008) and a recent multispecies analysis suggests that such breeding programs limit the number of generations in captivity (Farquharson, Hogg, & Grueber, 2021).…”
Section: Case Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Even some of Australia's most well-resourced captive programs (e.g. Tasmanian devils Sarcophilus harrisii and orange-bellied parrots Neophema chrysogaster) have theorised or realised genetic issues (Farquharson et al 2017;Grueber et al 2017;Morrison et al 2020). There is a clear focus within many programs on understanding and maximising genetic diversity (Hogg 2013), including for captive amphibians (Lees et al 2013).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%