Dataset Information

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

ABSTRACT: Abstract 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. 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? 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. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.

SUBMITTER: Palmer A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8581989 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Recently, there has been increasing interest in the field of indoor localization. This field of research can facilitate building and asset management. Although there are different technologies that can be used for localization, there are many limitations that need to be improved, and therefore there is a need to explore new technologies and alternatives that can improve indoor localization. It has been proven that visible light can be used to transfer data. A German physicist, Harald Haas, introduced the term "Li-Fi", which stands for "light fidelity", as a new technology that uses light as a medium to deliver data. Accordingly, in this study, we have proposed a hybrid asset localization system using Li-Fi and Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE). This system utilizes light-emitting diodes (LEDs) and BLE tags to detect the locations of assets in a smart building with the support of crowdsourcing technology. The system can make the management, maintenance, and localization process of equipment inside the buildings more easier. To achieve the required, the paper provides a comparison between different applications that have been developed for indoor localization using Li-Fi technology in order to highlight the limitations that need more improvement. The proposed system consists of a web-based administrator panel that allows the administrator to manage maps, assets, tags, LED lamps, and maintenance requests, as well as a mobile application that enables the user to locate, search and view asset information. In addition, the mobile application performs the process of crowdsourcing to update the assets' locations. We experimentally explore the system's functionalities and the results show that the system can accurately localize assets, and can detect Li-Fi signals from 55 lx and above within a range of 1.5 m. In addition, the BLE stickers can be detected up to 7 meters away, however, the crowdsourcing process to update the asset location is performed if the distance between the mobile application and the asset is less than or equal 1 m which gives accurate results.

Project description:BackgroundLarge-scale forest conservation projects are underway in the Brazilian Amazon but little is known regarding their public health impact. Current literature emphasizes how land clearing increases malaria incidence, leading to the conclusion that forest conservation decreases malaria burden. Yet, there is also evidence that proximity to forest fringes increases malaria incidence, which implies the opposite relationship between forest conservation and malaria. We compare the effect of these environmental factors on malaria and explore its implications.Methods and findingsUsing a large malaria dataset (~1,300,000 positive malaria tests collected over ~4.5 million km(2)), satellite imagery, permutation tests, and hierarchical Bayesian regressions, we show that greater forest cover (as a proxy for proximity to forest fringes) tends to be associated with higher malaria incidence, and that forest cover effect was 25 times greater than the land clearing effect, the often cited culprit of malaria in the region. These findings have important implications for land use/land cover (LULC) policies in the region. We find that cities close to protected areas (PA's) tend to have higher malaria incidence than cities far from PA's. Using future LULC scenarios, we show that avoiding 10% of deforestation through better governance might result in an average 2-fold increase in malaria incidence by 2050 in urban health posts.ConclusionsOur results suggest that cost analysis of reduced carbon emissions from conservation efforts in the region should account for increased malaria morbidity, and that conservation initiatives should consider adopting malaria mitigation strategies. Coordinated actions from disparate science fields, government ministries, and global initiatives (e.g., Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation; Millenium Development Goals; Roll Back Malaria; and Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria), will be required to decrease malaria toll in the region while preserving these important ecosystems.

Dataset Information

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

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets