Are the gorillas in western zoos really pure western lowland gorillas?

Yassa

Well-Known Member
15+ year member
In the last days, a german animal welfare group brought up concerns (and lanced serveral press articles) that a large number of the gorillas in captivity may not be pure western lowland gorillas, but subspecies hybrids between gorilla gorilla and gorilla diehli - western lowland and cross river gorillas. These concerns are based on an anaylisis of the studbook, because a number of gorillas originate from Nigeria, where both subspecies occur. They critize that no genetic analysis of zoo gorillas has ever happened.

I was stunned to read this because I never considered the possibility that some zoo gorillas could be cross river gorillas, which are even rarer then mountain gorillas. I think they have always been much rarer then the western lowland gorillas, which makes the possibility that some came to western zoos small.

What do you think???
 
I believe there are only around 200 cross river gorillas left in the wild with their hope for survival very bleak so; maintaining their genes (even through hybrids) is, in my opinion, a good thing. However, genetic testing is needed and if these claims are proved to be true, the next step can be taken.
 
Well, zoos need to make DNA tests soon - and see what happened.

For me at least, zoo gorillas look pretty uniform.
 
Well, zoos need to make DNA tests soon - and see what happened.

For me at least, zoo gorillas look pretty uniform.

Agree there, I just hope that this doesn't turn out like the pure Rothschild giraffe and finding that quite a few of the thought pure bred are in fact hybrids. As it would be massive step backwards if they were to try and just breed the pure bred animals.
 
Well, zoos need to make DNA tests soon - and see what happened.

For me at least, zoo gorillas look pretty uniform.

I've never been able to identify what makes Cross River Gorillas different from any other Western Gorillas- there don't seem to be any strong or obvious physical characteristics but they are believed to be a distinct species as proved from their DNA. It is perfectly possible that some came to Europe in the past though.

Western Lowland Gorillas do have a very wide distribution which in turn means there are probably some subtle distinguishing features between various populations. I believe the coastal living Gorillas from e.g. Spanish Guinea are smaller than their inland counterparts. I learned recently(from the Gorilla Haven website) that the Gorillas that sport bright red/orange crowns on the head are believed to represent the Cameroon population. Sometmes you will come across a captive individual that is noticeably darker, greyer, or longer-haired than most others- again I think these sometimes represent 'local' differences.
 
There are a couple of females at Toronto Zoo that have a reddish tint to their heads which I've seen in Cross River Gorilla photos/video footage, but I think it's just a colour variation or they've been getting into the hair dye ;)
 
In the last days, a german animal welfare group brought up concerns (and lanced serveral press articles) that a large number of the gorillas in captivity may not be pure western lowland gorillas, but subspecies hybrids between gorilla gorilla and gorilla diehli - western lowland and cross river gorillas. These concerns are based on an anaylisis of the studbook, because a number of gorillas originate from Nigeria, where both subspecies occur. They critize that no genetic analysis of zoo gorillas has ever happened.

I was stunned to read this because I never considered the possibility that some zoo gorillas could be cross river gorillas, which are even rarer then mountain gorillas. I think they have always been much rarer then the western lowland gorillas, which makes the possibility that some came to western zoos small.

What do you think???

Well it is all well and good raising issues. It is not so good that these animal welfare groups spread rumours without ever contacting the European studbook keeper nor cooperating with them in giving "purported" evidence. Their sole purpose is of creating a media racket! No more, no less.

Besides, if they were really interested in sound western lowland gorilla breeding .... We maintain studbooks for the kind of thing they are raising. Any individual can easily trace who is the current EEP studbook coordinator for the species. So, rather than go to the media first without any corroborating evidence they should have contacted him in the first place.

Another example how animal welfare groups have no long term conservation objective whatsoever. Which is my personal form of criticism on them. Their ONLY objective is shutting down zoos completely, whereas they do not fund nor finance any sound long term in situ conservation programmes (and zoos do, though admittedly more could be done, but hey ... so could the rest of the western world).

What I do find disconcerting is that quite frequently zoos do not take this kind of attack quite seriously and sort of ignore it. The damage being done, journalists with a nose for a story will go for the sensationalist approach ... and without checking their own information just publish.

Is the free press not great. One can ofcourse litigate for defamation, but often that is in an obscure spot of the paper ... you will find some form of reparation.

If someone might have the current/latest studbook, I will gladly look into the evidence in there ... and comment in earnest.

K.B.
 
I think this is important, the better we get at identifying subspecies and cryptic species using mitochondrial DNA analysis, the more fragmented existing zoo populations will become, unless regional studbook decisions are taken to mix the remaining animals to create generic populations. We have already seen this with elephants - I don't think anyone is idealistic enough to propose we start to only breed pure subspecific elephants, and while the data on genetic distinctions in gorillas would be interesting, I don't see a welfare argument for splitting up existing breeding groups just because they are discovered to be producing generic animals.

Ecologically, african tropical rainforest ecosytems benefit from gorillas, and if the wild population was suddenly wiped out in 10 years, I doubt the genetic purity of the animals repatriated from the captive population would matter.
 
Exactly. There's too much obsession with races and sub-species when whole species are in danger of disappearing.

"Species" should be the unit of concern, not race.
 
I think we would all be surprised many times if one traced back the origins of the zoo populations of popular species with special focus on subspecies/species. Especially in animals like gibbons or various species of reptiles, in which fertile interspecific(!) hybrids are well-known, and where the "mixing" could have taken place any time, may it be on the Asian animal market where they were brought to from all over the place, the Western animal trade that collected and transported them to Europe or America, or in the zoos as the final destination, such searches would soon become quite unclear.

It's funny, and not all too surprising that animal rights activists attack the subspecies hybridisation in popular species like gorillas or tigers, but turn a blind eye to less popular species in respect of this aspect...
 
Ecologically, african tropical rainforest ecosytems benefit from gorillas, and if the wild population was suddenly wiped out in 10 years, I doubt the genetic purity of the animals repatriated from the captive population would matter.

I imagine the majority of the captive Western Lowland Gorillas are just that, WLG's. There may be a few Cross River genes somewhere but as this has historically been a very small population, its unlikely very many have ever found their way into zoos. I believe there is currently one female at a centre in Limbe(?). But only DNA tests could take this any further and would anyone bother as it seems a rather extreme accusation anyway.
 
Back
Top