Study

Analyzing the past to understand the future: natural mating yields better reproductive rates than artificial insemination in the giant panda

  • Published source details Li D., Wintle N.J., Zhang G., Wang C., Luo B., Martin-Wintle M.S., Owen M. & Swaisgood R.R. (2017) Analyzing the past to understand the future: natural mating yields better reproductive rates than artificial insemination in the giant panda. Biological Conservation, 216, 10-17

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Use artificial insemination

Action Link
Terrestrial Mammal Conservation
  1. Use artificial insemination

    A replicated study in 1996–2016 in Sichuan Province, China (Li et al. 2017) found that following artificial insemination, a lower proportion of 78 captive female giant pandas Ailuropoda melanoleucahela became pregnant than after natural mating. Following artificial insemination, a lower percentage of female pandas became pregnant (19%) than following natural mating (61%). However, there was no significant difference in the litter size of females inseminated artificially or through natural mating (data reported as model results). Between 1996 and 2016, seventy-eight female pandas held in open-air enclosures at two facilities were subject to 65 attempts at artificial insemination and 150 attempts at natural mating. Natural mating was always attempted first but, in cases of excessive aggression between males and females, artificial insemination was used instead.

Output references

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, terrestrial 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 latest volume: Volume 17

Go to the CE Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

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