What is a Snow Leopard? Biogeography and Status Overview

McCarthy, Thomas M.; Mallon, David; Sanderson, Eric W.; Zahler, Peter; Fisher, Kim

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-802213-9.00003-1

Cited by 37 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These include <2500 mature individuals and an estimated 20% decline in 2 generations, corresponding to ∼16 years in snow leopards (IUCN Standards and Petitions Subcommittee 2016). Applying the results from our phylogeographic analysis, we generated a preliminary population size estimate for each subspecies using population size estimates in McCarthy et al (2016b) by summing those within the approximate range of each respective subspecies (Supplementary Table S8 and Supplementary Figure S6). The estimate for P. u. uncia was 2124-3356 individuals, for P. u. uncioides it was 1402-3083, and for P. u. irbis it was 741-1646.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Range-Wide Snow Leopard Phylogeography Supports Three Subspecies

Janečka

Zhang

et al. 2017

Journal of Heredity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The snow leopard, Panthera uncia, is an elusive high-altitude specialist that inhabits vast, inaccessible habitat across Asia. We conducted the first range-wide genetic assessment of snow leopards based on noninvasive scat surveys. Thirty-three microsatellites were genotyped and a total of 683 bp of mitochondrial DNA sequenced in 70 individuals. Snow leopards exhibited low genetic diversity at microsatellites (A N = 5.8, H O = 0.433, H E = 0.568), virtually no mtDNA variation, and underwent a bottleneck in the Holocene (∼8000 years ago) coinciding with increased temperatures, precipitation, and upward treeline shift in the Tibetan Plateau. Multiple analyses supported 3 primary genetic clusters: (1) Northern (the Altai region), (2) Central (core Himalaya

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Range-Wide Snow Leopard Phylogeography Supports Three Subspecies

Janečka

Zhang

et al. 2017

Journal of Heredity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The estimates proposed for the global snow leopard population in literature vary from a low of 3,920 (Snow Leopard Working Secretariat, ) to a high of 8,745 (McCarthy, Mallon, Sanderson, Zahler, & Fisher, ). These estimates are based largely on expert opinion, interviews, questionnaire surveys and counting snow leopard signs—techniques that do not yield scientifically robust estimates.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These estimates are based largely on expert opinion, interviews, questionnaire surveys and counting snow leopard signs—techniques that do not yield scientifically robust estimates. For example, the estimate by McCarthy et al () are based on interview surveys (35 sites), expert opinions (11 sites) and sign surveys (36 sites), and other research such as telemetry and livestock attacks (9 sites), while the use of scientifically acceptable camera trap data (5 sites) was limited. Interview surveys, expert opinions and livestock attacks are useful for presence and distribution surveys, but unreliable for estimating populations (Jones, Adriamarovololona, Hockley, Gibbons, & Milner‐Gulland, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sampling bias in snow leopard population estimation studies

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accurate assessments of the status of threatened species and their conservation planning require reliable estimation of their global populations and robust monitoring of local population trends. We assessed the adequacy and suitability of studies in reliably estimating the global snow leopard (Panthera uncia) population. We compiled a dataset of all the peer-reviewed published literature on snow leopard population estimation. Metadata analysis showed estimates of snow leopard density to be a negative exponential function of area, suggesting that study areas have generally been too small for accurate density estimation, and sampling has often been biased towards the best habitats. Published studies are restricted to six of the 12 range countries, covering only 0.3-0.9% of the presumed global range of the species. Re-sampling of camera trap data from a relatively large study site (c.1684 km 2 ) showed that small-sized study areas together with a bias towards good quality habitats in existing studies may have overestimated densities by up to five times. We conclude that current information is biased and inadequate for generating a reliable global population estimate of snow leopards. To develop a rigorous and useful baseline and to avoid pitfalls, there is an urgent need for (a) refinement of sampling and analytical protocols for population estimation of snow leopards (b) agreement and coordinated use of standardized sampling protocols amongst researchers and governments across the range, and (c) sampling larger and under-represented areas of the snow leopard's global range.

show abstract

“…We also compiled maps from range-wide priority setting exercises that mapped areas where a species was definitely occurring, probably/possibly occurring and extirpated. We assembled maps for tigers (Panthera tigris) (Dinerstein et al, 2006), white-lipped peccary (Tayassu pecari), and tapir (Tapirus terrestris) (Taber et al, 2008), Asian black bear (Ursus thibetanus), brown bear in Asia (Ursus arctos), sloth bear (Melursus ursinus) and sun bear (Helarctos malayanus) (Garshelis et al, 2007), snow leopard (Panthera uncia) (McCarthy et al, 2016;Sanderson et al, 2016) and Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) (Hedges et al, 2009;Calabrese et al, 2017). Although large areas of IFL and LWE occur in boreal forest, analogous full range assessments of boreal species other than brown bear in Asia were not available.…”

Section: Species With Range-wide Priority Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%