Adiposity, reproductive and metabolic health, and activity levels in zoo Asian elephant (Elephas maximus).

Many captive Asian elephant populations are not self-sustaining, possibly due in part to obesity-related health and reproductive issues. This study investigated relationships between estimated body composition and metabolic function, inflammatory markers, ovarian activity (females only) and physical activity levels in 44 Asian elephants (n=35 females, n=9 males). Deuterium dilution was used to measure total body water from which fat mass (FM) and fat-free mass (FFM) could be derived to estimate body composition. Serum was analyzed for progestagens and estradiol (females only), deuterium, glucose, insulin and amyloid A. Physical activity was assessed by an accelerometer placed on the elephant's front leg for at least 2 days. Relative fat mass (RFM) - the amount of fat relative to body mass - was calculated to take differences in body size between elephants into consideration. Body fat percentage ranged from 2.01% to 24.59%. Male elephants were heavier (P=0.043), with more FFM (P=0.049), but not FM (P>0.999), than females. For all elephants, estimated RFM (r=0.45, P=0.004) was positively correlated with insulin. Distance walked was negatively correlated with age (r=-0.46, P=0.007). When adjusted for FFM and age (P<0.001), non-cycling females had less fat compared with cycling females, such that for every 100 kg increase in FM, the odds of cycling were 3 times higher (P<0.001). More work is needed to determine what an unhealthy amount of fat is for elephants; however, our results suggest higher adiposity may contribute to metabolic perturbations.

Uncoupling elephant TP53 and cancer.

Elephant testicles do not descend, with implications for sperm production being hot enough to compromise germline DNA replication/repair. Uniquely, elephants also possess 20 copies of a gene encoding for the p53 protein. Did elephants evolve multiplication of the TP53 gene complex to protect their germline rather than to fight cancer?

Pervasive duplication of tumor suppressors in Afrotherians during the evolution of large bodies and reduced cancer risk.

The risk of developing cancer is correlated with body size and lifespan within species. Between species, however, there is no correlation between cancer and either body size or lifespan, indicating that large, long-lived species have evolved enhanced cancer protection mechanisms. Elephants and their relatives (Proboscideans) are a particularly interesting lineage for the exploration of mechanisms underlying the evolution of augmented cancer resistance because they evolved large bodies recently within a clade of smaller-bodied species (Afrotherians). Here, we explore the contribution of gene duplication to body size and cancer risk in Afrotherians. Unexpectedly, we found that tumor suppressor duplication was pervasive in Afrotherian genomes, rather than restricted to Proboscideans. Proboscideans, however, have duplicates in unique pathways that may underlie some aspects of their remarkable anti-cancer cell biology. These data suggest that duplication of tumor suppressor genes facilitated the evolution of increased body size by compensating for decreasing intrinsic cancer risk.

From the gigantic blue whale to the minuscule bumblebee bat, animals come in all shapes and sizes. Any species can develop cancer, but some are more at risk than others. In theory, if every cell has the same probability of becoming cancerous, then bigger animals should get cancer more often since they have more cells than smaller ones. Amongst the same species, this relationship is true: taller people and bigger dogs have a greater cancer risk than their smaller counterparts. Yet this correlation does not hold when comparing between species: remarkably large creatures, like elephants and whales, are not more likely to have cancer than any other animal. But how have these gigantic animals evolved to be at lower risk for the disease? To investigate, Vazquez and Lynch compared the cancer risk and the genetic information of a diverse group of closely related animals with different body sizes. This included elephants, woolly mammoths and mastodons as well as their small relatives, the manatees, armadillos, and marmot-sized hyraxes. Examining these species' genomes revealed that, during evolution, elephants had acquired extra copies of 'tumour suppressor genes' which can sense and repair the genetic and cellular damages that turn healthy cells into tumours. This allowed the species to evolve large bodies while lowering their risk of cancer. Further studies could investigate whether other gigantic animals evolved similar ways to shield themselves from cancer; these could also examine precisely how having additional copies of cancer-protecting genes helps reduce cancer risk, potentially paving the way for new approaches to treat or prevent the disease.

Complete mitochondrial genome of a woolly mammoth (Mammuthus primigenius) from Maly Lyakhovsky Island (New Siberian Islands, Russia) and its phylogenetic assessment.

We present a complete sequence and an annotation of the mitochondrial genome of the woolly mammoth (Mammuthus primigenius) found in 2012 on Maly Lyakhovsky Island (North-Eastern Siberia, Russia). The genome was 16,851 bp long and contained 13 protein-coding, 22 tRNA, and 2 rRNA genes. It was AT reach (61.3%) with A = 32.9%, T = 28.4%, C = 25.3%, and G = 13.4%.

The mummified brain of a pleistocene woolly mammoth (Mammuthus primigenius) compared with the brain of the extant African elephant (Loxodonta africana).

This study presents the results of an examination of the mummified brain of a pleistocene woolly mammoth (Mammuthus primigenius) recovered from the Yakutian permafrost in Siberia, Russia. This unique specimen (from 39,440-38,850 years BP) provides the rare opportunity to compare the brain morphology of this extinct species with a related extant species, the African elephant (Loxodonta africana). An anatomical description of the preserved brain of the woolly mammoth is provided, along with a series of quantitative analyses of various brain structures. These descriptions are based on visual inspection of the actual specimen as well as qualitative and quantitative comparison of computed tomography imaging data obtained for the woolly mammoth in comparison with magnetic resonance imaging data from three African elephant brains. In general, the brain of the woolly mammoth specimen examined, estimated to weigh between 4,230 and 4,340 g, showed the typical shape, size, and gross structures observed in extant elephants. Quantitative comparative analyses of various features of the brain, such as the amygdala, corpus callosum, cerebellum, and gyrnecephalic index, all indicate that the brain of the woolly mammoth specimen examined has many similarities with that of modern African elephants. The analysis provided here indicates that a specific brain type representative of the Elephantidae is likely to be a feature of this mammalian family. In addition, the extensive similarities between the woolly mammoth brain and the African elephant brain indicate that the specializations observed in the extant elephant brain are likely to have been present in the woolly mammoth.

Mammoth and elephant phylogenetic relationships: Mammut americanum, the missing outgroup.

At the morphological level, the woolly mammoth has most often been considered as the sister-species of Asian elephants, but at the DNA level, different studies have found support for proximity with African elephants. Recent reports have increased the available sequence data and apparently solved the discrepancy, finding mammoths to be most closely related to Asian elephants. However, we demonstrate here that the three competing topologies have similar likelihood, bayesian and parsimony supports. The analysis further suggests the inadequacy of using Sirenia or Hyracoidea as outgroups. We therefore argue that orthologous sequences from the extinct American mastodon will be required to definitively solve this long-standing question.