equidae
Well-Known Member
Are the skin issues in captivity due to climatic or nutritional reasons?
Trends in European zoo collections in the 21st century
- Thread starter lintworm
- Start date
You yourself provided the evidence that zoos, unintentionally, made a test of these morphological and genetic differences and the results were negative. Although maybe you did not realize it.
Mousedeer in zoos were examined using these morphological differences and turned unidentifiable. Giraffes turned wrongly identified. And giraffe 'species' brought together into zoos turned to be completely interfertile, without any signs of, for example, reduced survival of hybrids.
Giraffes in Vincennes are a striking case. It is improbable that a species was mistaken for decades in a group of large, major mammal present in a big European zoo, seen perhaps by thousands of specialists over the years. Could a herd of Grevvy zebras be mistaken for Hartmann's zebras? Could jaguars be mistaken for leopards? Or chimps be mistaken for bonobos? Simply these giraffes are not different species, and alleged morphological differences are not diagnostic.
I think you may not understand that genetic and genomic methods are science, but ranks like species and subspecies are not science, they are opinions. People permanently confuse the two.
BTW, most of the recent taxonomic changes are actually reversals. Not perhaps giraffe, which seem to be at most 2 species, until 2010s splits to 6 or 4 species. But, in general, about 100 years ago taxonomists recognized very many, very similar species. In the 1970s, it was realized that the differences are often trivial, and many cases cannot be delimited in nature, because they pass one into another. It is like a pendulum swinging back and forth.
Actually, postage stamp collectors like taxonomy changes, because it gives them more postage stamps to collect.
Last edited:
You've once again completely ignored the fact that no one has ever claimed they were mistaken for a different species - only a different subspecies. Both within the modern taxonomy you reject and more traditional models, Kordofan and West African Giraffe represent sister subspecies within a single species. Considering I already clarified this one for you once already, I am starting to suspect you're doing it deliberately in order to further your axe to grind
Incidentally, there was a very interesting article within the 2022 Bartlett Society Journal demonstrating conclusively that one of the chimpanzees held at Chessington Zoo prior to WWII was in fact a bonobo.... so one of your mocking hypotheticals can and has indeed happened!
I did not, unless you are adhering to a very strict version of the Biological Species Concept none of what happens in captivity matters anyway. And even if it would prove your point, which it does not, that these species are recognized falsely, it does not prove malign intent.
In the mousedeer case it isn't even known whether any of the founders were from Java, it might very well be a pure Tragulus kanchil population, as it is known that one particularly widespread group originally came from Indochina. The only reason most mousedeer are still signed as T. javanicus is because that is the name used before the split for all lesser mousedeer and it is not exactly clear where all founders came from.
But more importantly, it doesn't matter what animals do in captivity, species concepts and taxonomists care about the wild. If hybridization in unnatural settings is considered we might as well lump white-headed duck with ruddy duck as well as a good number of other species. What matters is that in the wild there is hardly any breeding between the different giraffe species where they meet in Kenya, whereas that would be expected given the lack of geographical barriers. So there is a clear reproductive barrier it is however not yet the genetic difference that creates this barrier. Given the high genetic differences found in the field and near-complete separation it makes no sense to treat them as a single species, except if you are a very strict adherent of the Biological Species Concept, in which case you will need to lump a good many more species that everyone recognizes.
As @TeaLovingDave mentioned you got this one upside down. For starters they are not treated as different species by anyone these days, and the different populations in zoos actually belonged to the exact same subspecies, making your point moot. That that only became clear when wild populations were sampled is no surprise given the morphological differences that are often clear within subspecies. Just look at the light (much of the Dortmund line) and dark morphs (much of the Lisbon line) of Angolan giraffes that are around. Nobody argues for them to be split, simply because there is no genetic evidence for it.
I don´t follow recent taxonomy and genetic studies in mammals much. But I have random example of bird species - Spanish imperial eagle - where probably conservation/political (national pride in endemic species) reasons lead to incorrect taxonomy to prevail. So I understand where Jurek´s suspicion is coming from.
(details: Spanish imperial eagle was considered a subspecies of Eastern imperial eagle, but was lifted to full species in late 20th century. Impetus was a single genetic study that estimated split of both populations 1 mio years ago. Since then more detailed study of several parts of their genome came to conclusion that the split was very recent (Holocene) and caused probably by dying out of bridging population in North Africa, and even indicated gene flow of 1 bird per generation from East towards Spanish population. Another study of paleotologic remains shows that imperial eagle arrived to Iberia only at the very end of Pleistocene or beginning of Holocene and argues against full species status for A.adalberti too. But nobody has lifted a finger to correct official taxonomy status of Spanish imperial eagle back to subspecies.)
(details: Spanish imperial eagle was considered a subspecies of Eastern imperial eagle, but was lifted to full species in late 20th century. Impetus was a single genetic study that estimated split of both populations 1 mio years ago. Since then more detailed study of several parts of their genome came to conclusion that the split was very recent (Holocene) and caused probably by dying out of bridging population in North Africa, and even indicated gene flow of 1 bird per generation from East towards Spanish population. Another study of paleotologic remains shows that imperial eagle arrived to Iberia only at the very end of Pleistocene or beginning of Holocene and argues against full species status for A.adalberti too. But nobody has lifted a finger to correct official taxonomy status of Spanish imperial eagle back to subspecies.)
Last edited:
Osedax
Well-Known Member
And we would have to lump mallards with every species of duck other than the Mandarin Duck and the North American Wood Duck...
Indolencio Aguilar
Active Member
Climatic. But in general hairless animals are susceptible to skin issues. The EAZA site have an entire free access paper of 90 pages about Babyrusa if you want a complete knowledge of the state of the art about Babyrusa in zoo
It's interesting to see the warthog under 'gaining popularity'.
As a Dutch person, I've watched this species all but disappear from the country.
I remember a time when Rhenen, Rotterdam, Arnhem and Hilvarenbeek all kept this species. Now, there is only Rhenen.
As a Dutch person, I've watched this species all but disappear from the country.
I remember a time when Rhenen, Rotterdam, Arnhem and Hilvarenbeek all kept this species. Now, there is only Rhenen.
Number of zoos kept (current and former during the holding period):
A 1 zoo
B 2-5 zoos
C 6-10 zoos
D >10 zoos
Time period kept:
1 < 1 year
2 1-5 years
3 6-10 years
4 11-20 years
5 > 20 years
* Species successfully bred
♱ Dead end (in case of species gained)
↑ Species gaining popularity (in case of species gained)
A 1 zoo
B 2-5 zoos
C 6-10 zoos
D >10 zoos
Time period kept:
1 < 1 year
2 1-5 years
3 6-10 years
4 11-20 years
5 > 20 years
* Species successfully bred
♱ Dead end (in case of species gained)
↑ Species gaining popularity (in case of species gained)
Bovids - Bovidae
145 species across 54 genera
76 species kept this century (52%)
This is the family with the most species kept this century in European zoos and it is currently the most speciose family kept in European zoos too (Muridae has 75 species kept this century, Cercopithecidae 72 to complete the podium). As such this family will be split in multiple posts, which aren’t necessarily taxonomically correct.
Cattle and allies - Bovinae
# Species kept 1-1-2000: 15
# Species kept currently: 14 (-1)
# Species gained: -
# Species lost: 1
This subfamily contains the largest members of the family, but is more diverse than cattle only. It also includes 2 antelope groups from Asia and Africa respectively. The vast majority of species shows a surprising stability in the number of holders this century, despite plenty of changes for single zoos.
@Therabu The number of lesser kudu has remained stable, though the loss of long-term breeding groups poses a risk for the future.
Species lost
Chowsingha - Tetracerus quadricornis B5*
These unique antelope are the only wild species that can sport 4 horns and is thus also commonly known as the four-horned antelope or chousingha. Apart from that they look like the most generic antelope-deer imaginable. In recent decades this has always been a rarity with (breeding) groups in Zoo Berlin, both Parisian zoos and in the Aspinall parks. They have in recent history been kept from 1977-2009. Until the 1990s and the early 2000s there was regular breeding in Howletts Wild Animal Park and both Parisian zoos, but never in Berlin. The final animal of this unique species passed away in the Menagerie/ Jardin des Plantes in Paris in 2009
@Maguari Some of the final individuals of this almost duiker-like bovids in Paris at the start of the century
Species gaining popularity
Bongo - Tragelaphus eurycerus
These beautiful forest antelopes were one of the most prized ungulates in the 1970s and were mostly kept in prestigious larger zoos. With nearly 50 European holdings it is slowly becoming one of the more commonly kept ungulates. Apart from their beauty, the critically endangered status of the mountain bongo (ssp. isaaci), which is kept in Europe, makes it an interesting addition for many zoos. Whereas American bongo have found their way back to Kenya for a re-introduction program, I haven't heard of any European bongo going that direction.
@hmb_zoo The days of bongo as rarity are all but over
Species losing popularity
Gaur - Bos gaurus
This is the heaviest member of the family and they can have a temper, so zoos that want this species generally invest in a heavily fortified (and hence more expensive) enclosure, except if you are Parc Animalier de Bouillon…. That in combination with needing heating in winter makes this not the easiest cow to keep and just like the banteng (Bos javanicus) there has been a struggle to find new holders. The TAG has now decided to phase out gaur entirely, to free up space for banteng. This hasn’t yet resulted in a notable decline in gaur holders (or an increase in banteng holders), but most zoos slowly let gaur die out by keeping them in single sex groups. Not so Zoo Zlin-Lesna, Czechia, which don’t want their 2019 gaur import from India go to waste and together with Cabarceno they continue breeding. Because of these 2 zoos there is a good chance gaur will remain in Europe for the foreseeable future.
Nilgai - Bosephalus tragocamelus
These large and stocky Asian antelope have long been a staple of many zoos. They are hardy and easy to breed, so were widespread in the 20th century in big and small zoos. This century the number of holders of this least concern species has been significantly reduced. Hoofstock aren’t a priority and nilgai are an easy phase-out. They are still a widespread feature in Indian mixed species enclosures, often with blackbuck and axis deer though. But they are also readily mixed with other deer and even rhinoceroses. In such mixed-species exhibits they will likely have a secure spot for the future.
@Rhino00 Not dead yet! Not all EAZA zoos have decided phasing out gaurs is a good idea
Dead ends
Mountain anoa - Bubalus quarlesi B5*
While the species status of the mountain anoa is still called in question, it is 100% clear that this species will disappear from Europe soon. The European population was always small and inbred as it was mainly kept in Zoo Berlin and Zoo Krefeld, which were the only zoos with regular breeding results. But in the end the population slowly died out and there is currently only a single animal remaining in Zoo Krefeld, which is not the youngest one either.
@Pyrrhula Mountain anoa "Idris" in Zoo Krefeld, when you are on first name terms with a rarity, you often know it is the last one standing
Progress
21/22 orders completed
100/106 families completed
543-552 species present in 2000
560-563 species present in 2023
221-232 species gained this century
213-217 species lost this century
Dvůr is slowly starting negotiating on some reintroduction program FWIH
Indolencio Aguilar
Active Member
I think that certain species of hofstock pay the big "obsession" for mixed exhibit. Certain species like the lesser kudu aren't suited for cohesistence with popular species like zebra. There is an entire guide about lesser kudu from EAZA. The resume is that they are very shy and suffer the stress. Put them alone
Also; male and female of lot of these species normally stay separated each other for a vast majority of time. Idea for mixed exhibit; 2/3 species only female. A single male alone in his smaller exhibit. When you need more individual; reunite the groups. More naturalistic and a drop of thing testosterone charged that try to maul eachother.
A male Nyala can try to beat the odds against a wildebeest. Or a waterbuck.
Also; male and female of lot of these species normally stay separated each other for a vast majority of time. Idea for mixed exhibit; 2/3 species only female. A single male alone in his smaller exhibit. When you need more individual; reunite the groups. More naturalistic and a drop of thing testosterone charged that try to maul eachother.
A male Nyala can try to beat the odds against a wildebeest. Or a waterbuck.
OkapiJohn
Well-Known Member
I always wondered, why space for Banteng or Gaur cannot be obtained via phasing out of American bison or Water Buffalo? It is absurd that some zoos keep Gayal or Kerabau when there is a need for space for Gaur and Banteng. Like, Gaur or banteng are the actual wild endangered species in this case.
I’d say, as lintworm mentioned, the need of heated barns makes it difficult but that doesn’t explain the Southeast Asian domestics which may need heat as well. Maybe the stakes are higher with wild endangered species compared to tropical domestics.
One difficulty is that some exhibits are located in American themed areas. However i guess the biggest problem is the need of heated stables for Banteng and Gaurs. But still Wisents would be a better choice than American Bisons. Not only for conservation also for educational purpose. It is frightening how many peoples around here doesn't even know that the biggest land animal of Europe exist. Gayal and Kerabau are also quite rare. And the casual domestic water buffalo is already more cold temperature tolerate (at least as far as i know).
OkapiJohn
Well-Known Member
Indeed, but even in southern European countries, Gaur and Banteng are rare and the climate is more appropriate there. I remember Lisbon Zoo to have Gaur in the late 90s and 2000s. They stuck to the American bison. Possibly the often 30-35ºC days would be more easily tolerated by a tropical cattle species than by the bison.
So there might be something else. Beekse Bergen is a good example of how Banteng could do very well in more safari parks, but still, only a few have them. But water buffalos are quite common in safari parks.
I also think that Wisent could be more common, but I imagine that the stock is more important to be used/sent to wild reserves to supplement/introduce the species back into its habitat. In situ should always take priority in my opinion.
So there might be something else. Beekse Bergen is a good example of how Banteng could do very well in more safari parks, but still, only a few have them. But water buffalos are quite common in safari parks.
I also think that Wisent could be more common, but I imagine that the stock is more important to be used/sent to wild reserves to supplement/introduce the species back into its habitat. In situ should always take priority in my opinion.
Considering the fact only one zoo keeps Gayal full stop - Tierpark Berlin - and it's sister collection to the west of the city keeps both Gaur and Banteng I think you're making a mountain out of a bovine molehill as regards that one
OkapiJohn
Well-Known Member
You are right, that I haven't seen Gayal anywhere else than in Tierpark. Sorry for not having Zootierlist printed on my brainConsidering the fact only one zoo keeps Gayal full stop - Tierpark Berlin - and it's sister collection to the west of the city keeps both Gaur and Banteng I think you're making a mountain out of a bovine molehill as regards that one
. Still, I think that space would be better used for Gaur, especially if the species needs that. Sometimes collecting 1 or 2 more holders can make a big difference for a population to be maintained long-term.All French zoos housing gaurs do not have heated stables, and none of them is in the South where the climate would justify the lack of. Is it good for them ? I do not think so but that does not seem to prevent some breeding. I think it is much deeper and due to zoo directors perception.
Gaurs are perceived as irascible and dangerous, much more than bison. All bisons in Europe are not necessaraly kept in enclosures that are really bison-proof. So while it is ok to house bisons with cattle fence, it seems not for the gaur.
In the end, the founder base have always been quite small isnt'it ? While it is a shame to see the specie slowly disappear from Western zoos (it is my favourite cattle by far but also for the sake of diversity), the need for a captive population of Indian gaur in Western zoos does not seem obvious. Indian zoos have good stocks and the specie benefit from other big mammals protection in India. The population would be from the Malayan subspecie, the answer could have been different.
Gaurs are perceived as irascible and dangerous, much more than bison. All bisons in Europe are not necessaraly kept in enclosures that are really bison-proof. So while it is ok to house bisons with cattle fence, it seems not for the gaur.
In the end, the founder base have always been quite small isnt'it ? While it is a shame to see the specie slowly disappear from Western zoos (it is my favourite cattle by far but also for the sake of diversity), the need for a captive population of Indian gaur in Western zoos does not seem obvious. Indian zoos have good stocks and the specie benefit from other big mammals protection in India. The population would be from the Malayan subspecie, the answer could have been different.
Of course you don't, but you can still check it anytime before you make a claim...