Cargando…

Hybrid apes in the Anthropocene: Burden or asset for conservation?

1. Conservationists often view hybrid animals as problematic, at least if anthropogenic influence caused the intermixing to occur. However, critics propose that humans should respect non‐human autonomy, reject and accept the creatures they have helped to create. 2. Based on two case studies of our o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Palmer, Alexandra, Sommer, Volker, Msindai, Josephine Nadezda
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8581989/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34805779
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10214
_version_ 1784596893390602240
author Palmer, Alexandra
Sommer, Volker
Msindai, Josephine Nadezda
author_facet Palmer, Alexandra
Sommer, Volker
Msindai, Josephine Nadezda
author_sort Palmer, Alexandra
collection PubMed
description 1. Conservationists often view hybrid animals as problematic, at least if anthropogenic influence caused the intermixing to occur. However, critics propose that humans should respect non‐human autonomy, reject and accept the creatures they have helped to create. 2. Based on two case studies of our own ethological, genetic and ethnographic research about chimpanzee and orangutan subspecies hybrids, we assess what, if anything, should be done about such animals. We consider problems posed by cross‐bred apes relating to: (a) Breeding—Do hybrids really experience reduced reproductive success? How are population‐level concerns and welfare of individual animals balanced in conservation breeding? (b) Essentialism—Are anti‐hybrid arguments based on essentialist or purist thinking? Does essentialism vary by conservation context? (c) Pragmatism—How do socio‐economic circumstances influence whether hybrids are embraced or ignored? Does the erosion of ‘untouched nature’ render hybrids more important? 3. We show that answers to these questions are complex and context‐specific, and that therefore decisions should be made on a case‐by‐case basis. For example, we find that anti‐hybrid arguments are essentialist in some cases (e.g. ape management in zoos) but not in others (e.g. ape reintroduction). Thus, rather than present recommendations, we conclude by posing nine questions that conservationists should ask themselves when making decisions about taxonomic hybrids. ​ A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8581989
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85819892021-11-18 Hybrid apes in the Anthropocene: Burden or asset for conservation? Palmer, Alexandra Sommer, Volker Msindai, Josephine Nadezda People Nat (Hoboken) Perspectives 1. Conservationists often view hybrid animals as problematic, at least if anthropogenic influence caused the intermixing to occur. However, critics propose that humans should respect non‐human autonomy, reject and accept the creatures they have helped to create. 2. Based on two case studies of our own ethological, genetic and ethnographic research about chimpanzee and orangutan subspecies hybrids, we assess what, if anything, should be done about such animals. We consider problems posed by cross‐bred apes relating to: (a) Breeding—Do hybrids really experience reduced reproductive success? How are population‐level concerns and welfare of individual animals balanced in conservation breeding? (b) Essentialism—Are anti‐hybrid arguments based on essentialist or purist thinking? Does essentialism vary by conservation context? (c) Pragmatism—How do socio‐economic circumstances influence whether hybrids are embraced or ignored? Does the erosion of ‘untouched nature’ render hybrids more important? 3. We show that answers to these questions are complex and context‐specific, and that therefore decisions should be made on a case‐by‐case basis. For example, we find that anti‐hybrid arguments are essentialist in some cases (e.g. ape management in zoos) but not in others (e.g. ape reintroduction). Thus, rather than present recommendations, we conclude by posing nine questions that conservationists should ask themselves when making decisions about taxonomic hybrids. ​ A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-05-12 2021-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8581989/ /pubmed/34805779 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10214 Text en © 2021 The Authors. People and Nature published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Perspectives
Palmer, Alexandra
Sommer, Volker
Msindai, Josephine Nadezda
Hybrid apes in the Anthropocene: Burden or asset for conservation?
title Hybrid apes in the Anthropocene: Burden or asset for conservation?
title_full Hybrid apes in the Anthropocene: Burden or asset for conservation?
title_fullStr Hybrid apes in the Anthropocene: Burden or asset for conservation?
title_full_unstemmed Hybrid apes in the Anthropocene: Burden or asset for conservation?
title_short Hybrid apes in the Anthropocene: Burden or asset for conservation?
title_sort hybrid apes in the anthropocene: burden or asset for conservation?
topic Perspectives
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8581989/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34805779
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10214
work_keys_str_mv AT palmeralexandra hybridapesintheanthropoceneburdenorassetforconservation
AT sommervolker hybridapesintheanthropoceneburdenorassetforconservation
AT msindaijosephinenadezda hybridapesintheanthropoceneburdenorassetforconservation