The conservation of bantang

[Monty]

This piece is on the Bantang in Australia, and whether they should be conserved. This is the largest word population of the species, and they have been tested to be pure, not hybrids.

I believe this shows the benefit of moving populations of endangered species to places where they can be better managed to protect the species, as well as providing a backup population.

 

[Chlidonias]

the video will only play up to the 48 second mark for me, and then stops. So without actually knowing what is said on there, its worth pointing out that the feral banteng in Australia are literally just that: feral banteng. They are a feral population of domestic banteng introduced from Bali (i.e. Bali cattle), they are not the wild form of banteng. Its like saying the feral water buffalo in Australia should be nurtured because wild water buffalo in southeast Asia are endangered. Or zoos promoting the endangered status of their Bactrian camels when in actual fact they are all the domesticated form.

 

[Monty]

That video includes the study of DNA and the scientist who did it. He found no evidence of cattle DNA and the DNA showed they were pure Bantang.

I suspect that national parks were hoping and expecting to find them not pure. They would love to eradicate then as they are not native. Having them test as pure was probably a surprise for all concerned. Another problem national parks have is the aboriginals like them and want to keep them there as well.

 

[lintworm]

@Monty, that doesn't change the fact that they are still domesticated, and makes it the same as conserving domesticated water buffaloes that haven't been interbred with other species.

My concern is that they do more damage in their Australian habitat than it is worth to maintain them in a non-native habitat.

And the idea of moving big animals to places they don't belong, to conserve them, makes me feel sick.... Why are so many "ecologists" only looking to the big mammals and don't seem to bother about plants and smaller animals, especially invertebrates??

 

[Chlidonias]

That video includes the study of DNA and the scientist who did it. He found no evidence of cattle DNA and the DNA showed they were pure Bantang.

I suspect that national parks were hoping and expecting to find them not pure. They would love to eradicate then as they are not native. Having them test as pure was probably a surprise for all concerned. Another problem national parks have is the aboriginals like them and want to keep them there as well.

I think you're confusing "domesticated" with "hybrid". If you test the DNA of domestic water buffalo they won't show any evidence of hybridisation with domestic cattle either, because they aren't hybrids, they are domesticated water buffalo. Same for banteng.

Sure, if banteng become extinct in the wild you could use domestic animals to create a feral population in the natural range (they wouldn't be the same animal but close enough) but why bother importing ones from Australia to do that when there are hundreds of thousands of domestic banteng already in Asia?

Best thing to do with the Australian ones is to shoot them all.

 

[Ituri]

I think you're confusing "domesticated" with "hybrid". If you test the DNA of domestic water buffalo they won't show any evidence of hybridisation with domestic cattle either, because they aren't hybrids, they are domesticated water buffalo. Same for banteng.

Sure, if banteng become extinct in the wild you could use domestic animals to create a feral population in the natural range (they wouldn't be the same animal but close enough) but why bother importing ones from Australia to do that when there are hundreds of thousands of domestic banteng already in Asia?

Best thing to do with the Australian ones is to shoot them all.

But not before every Aussie zoo has a herd!

 

[Jarkari]

Sorry but im confused. Just say some asians bought elephants to Australia to help with logging or something like that, then we got trucks and the elephants were just set free and we now had a population of feral elephants roaming far north queensland. are you saying these are domestic elephants and therefore would have no conservation value?

I know this is unrealistic but the point is the same.

 

[Jarkari]

I'm not having a go either just confused about why they couldnt be used to support conservation if the genetics are the same as wild Banteng. or are you saying they genetically arent the same?

 

[Monty]

I have been trying to find out more about domesticated Bantang. So far I have not found out much except pure ones are vary rare due to hybridisation with cattle. I am unable to find the difference between them and wild Bantang. As the theywere introduced over 150 years ago the Australian population may be the only remaining pure domesticated Bantang at the least.

To improve the conservation value of these Bantang and increase genetic diversity maby an AI program could be run using wild Bantang semen. The info I have read says there are more Bantang in Australia than in their native habitat, and if that trend continues Australia will end up with the only pure Bantang population.

www.wildcattleconservation.org | Banteng Bos javanicus d'Alton, 1823

The number of banteng remaining in its native range is estimated to be only 3,000 to 5,000 individuals and the species is experiencing a rapid decline across its entire range. There has been at least an 80% reduction in the global banteng range in only 20 years (Hedges, 1996) due to massive increases in human populations in south-east Asia. Moreover, only a handful of large herds remain and other populations are at risk of extinction due to both demographic and genetic stochasticity. The main threats to this species are poaching, habitat destruction and human encroachment, overgrazing by domestic cattle, genetic introgression and disease transmission from livestock. Poaching to sell the horns as trophies constitutes the main cause of overexploitation of remnant populations even though the banteng is legally protected across all its range. In 1849, 20 domesticated banteng from Bali were introduced in Arnhem Land, Northern Territory, Australia, during an unsuccessful attempt at European settlement in the Cobourg Peninsula (Calaby, 1975). This founder population of banteng has since proliferated and now numbers around 6000 individuals, still ranging on the 2200 km2 of this remote peninsula (Bradshaw et al., 2005). Molecular analysis has demonstrated that Australian banteng are pure-strain of B. javanicus (Bradshaw et al., 2006). Although non-native, these individuals constitute the world’s largest population of banteng and number more than the rest of the native banteng populations combined. Thus, they represent an important demographic and genetic reservoir of this endangered species and they could be use to reinforce declining populations of banteng or to reintroduce this species in its former range. However, this population has been affected by a severe bottleneck during its introduction in Australia, and as such, its level of genetic variability is probably reduced (Bradshaw et al., 2006). Ex situ conservation programs are implemented for banteng in US, Europe and Asia. Most of these captive individuals belong to B. j. javanicus. Finally, several applications of assisted breeding technology have been tried in this species, including semen cryopreservation, artificial insemination, and interspecies embryo transfer (Johnston et al., 2002). In 2003, an attempt was made to clone banteng in US, using DNA from frozen banteng cells kept by San Diego Wild Animal Park.

 

[Monty]

It is a pity Kouprey were not introduced to Australia 150 years ago.

Bantang may go the same way in their native habitat.

 

[Chlidonias]

Sorry but im confused. Just say some asians bought elephants to Australia to help with logging or something like that, then we got trucks and the elephants were just set free and we now had a population of feral elephants roaming far north queensland. are you saying these are domestic elephants and therefore would have no conservation value?

I know this is unrealistic but the point is the same.

elephants are not a domestic animal in the real sense of the word. They have traditionally been obtained by capturing wild individuals and taming them. If "domestic" (i.e. tamed) elephants established populations in a non-native country they would be the same animal as the wild animal in its natural state.

 

[Chlidonias]

I have been trying to find out more about domesticated Bantang. So far I have not found out much except pure ones are vary rare due to hybridisation with cattle. I am unable to find the difference between them and wild Bantang. As the theywere introduced over 150 years ago the Australian population may be the only remaining pure domesticated Bantang at the least.

To improve the conservation value of these Bantang and increase genetic diversity maby an AI program could be run using wild Bantang semen. The info I have read says there are more Bantang in Australia than in their native habitat, and if that trend continues Australia will end up with the only pure Bantang population.

I will retract what I said about there being loads of domestic banteng in Asia that could theoretically be used for re-introductions. It does indeed seem that throughout Asia "pure" domestic banteng have become rare due to interbreeding with other domestic oxen species (and thus I quite understand your original points about the Australian ones not showing evidence of hybridisation). In this respect I suppose the Australian population is important, but not at the expense of the native environment (i.e. they are better off being taken into a domestic situation again).

With regards to the differences between wild and domestic, in all domesticated species the animal is selected for non-wild characteristics, such as docility, smaller or larger body size (depending on the needs of the selector), etc and thus becomes noticeably different from wild stock, often becoming overall more "juvenile" in its characteristics. In the case of Bali cattle, they are smaller and more gracile than "real" banteng, have a smaller and narrower skull, smaller horns, less pronounced dimorphism between sexes, younger age of maturity and shorter gestation.

 

[Jarkari]

I will retract what I said about there being loads of domestic banteng in Asia that could theoretically be used for re-introductions. It does indeed seem that throughout Asia "pure" domestic banteng have become rare due to interbreeding with other domestic oxen species (and thus I quite understand your original points about the Australian ones not showing evidence of hybridisation). In this respect I suppose the Australian population is important, but not at the expense of the native environment (i.e. they are better off being taken into a domestic situation again).

With regards to the differences between wild and domestic, in all domesticated species the animal is selected for non-wild characteristics, such as docility, smaller or larger body size (depending on the needs of the selector), etc and thus becomes noticeably different from wild stock, often becoming overall more "juvenile" in its characteristics. In the case of Bali cattle, they are smaller and more gracile than "real" banteng, have a smaller and narrower skull, smaller horns, less pronounced dimorphism between sexes, younger age of maturity and shorter gestation.

Thanks for explaining. Not confused anymore.

 

[Jurek7]

I think Bali cattle, that is domestic breeds of banteng, counts among cattle polluting gene pool of wild banteng.