Study

Captive breeding and the fitness of reintroduced species: a test of the responses to predators in a threatened amphibian

  • Published source details Kraaijeveld-Smit F.J.L., Griffiths R.A., Moore R.D. & Beebee T.J.C. (2006) Captive breeding and the fitness of reintroduced species: a test of the responses to predators in a threatened amphibian. Journal of Applied Ecology, 43, 360-365

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Captive breeding Mallorcan midwife toads

Action Link
Amphibian Conservation

Release captive-bred Mallorcan midwife toads

Action Link
Amphibian Conservation
  1. Captive breeding Mallorcan midwife toads

    A randomized, replicated, controlled study of captive Mallorcan midwife toads Alytes muletensis in the UK (Kraaijeveld-Smit et al. 2006) found that there was a significant reduction in one predator defence trait (lower tail fin depth) in animals maintained in captivity for 9–12 compared to 1–2 generations. Long-term stock tadpoles also developed more slowly and had a significant loss of genetic variation. Tail length did not differ between populations. Forty tadpoles from a population captive-bred for 1–2 or for 9–12 generations (different ancestry) were divided between two treatments: chemical cues from viperine snakes or a control. Tadpoles were measured each 15 days. DNA was analysed.

     

  2. Release captive-bred Mallorcan midwife toads

    A randomized, replicated, controlled study in captivity the UK (Kraaijeveld-Smit et al. 2006) found that predator defences were maintained in a captive-bred reintroduced population of Mallorcan midwife toads Alytes muletensis, but genetic diversity was reduced. There was no significant difference in morphological responses to predators in a population that had been captive-bred for 3–8 generations and released in a predator-free pond and the ancestral natural population. Tail length, lower tail fin shape and development did not differ. In terms of genetic diversity, although heterozygosity was similar between populations, the reintroduced population had lower allelic richness. Forty-eight tadpoles from the natural and reintroduced population (with the same ancestry) were captured. Treatments were: chemical cues from viperine snakes Natrix maura or green frogs Rana perezi or a control. Tadpoles were measured each 15 days. DNA was analysed.

     

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 18

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust