Extinct in the wild: The precarious state of Earth's most threatened group of species.

Extinct in the Wild (EW) species are placed at the highest risk of extinction under the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List, but the extent and variation in this risk have never been evaluated. Harnessing global databases of ex situ animal and plant holdings, we report on the perilous state of EW species. Most EW animal species-already compromised by their small number of founders-are maintained at population sizes far below the thresholds necessary to ensure demographic security. Most EW plant species depend on live propagation by a small number of botanic gardens, with a minority secured at seed bank institutions. Both extinctions and recoveries are possible fates for EW species. We urgently call for international effort to enable the latter.

Prioritizing species conservation programs based on IUCN Green Status and estimates of cost-sharing potential.

Over 1 million species around the world are at risk of extinction, and conservation organizations have to decide where to invest their limited resources. Cost-effectiveness can be increased by leveraging funding opportunities and increasing collaborative partnerships to achieve shared conservation goals. We devised a structured decision-making framework to prioritize species' conservation programs based on a cost-benefit analysis that takes collaborative opportunities into account in an examination of national and global conservation return on investment. Conservation benefit is determined by modifying the novel International Union for the Conservation of Nature Green Status for Species to provide an efficient, high-level measure that is comparable among species, even with limited information and time constraints. We applied this prioritization approach to the Wilder Institute/Calgary Zoo, Canada, a nonprofit organization seeking to increase the number of species it assists with conservation translocations. We sought to identify and prioritize additional species' programs for which conservation translocation expertise and actions could make the most impact. Estimating the likelihood of cost-sharing potential enabled total program cost to be distinguished from costs specific to the organization. Comparing a benefit-to-cost ratio on different geographic scales allowed decision makers to weigh alternative options for investing in new species' programs in a transparent and effective manner. Our innovative analysis aligns with general conservation planning frameworks and can be adapted for any organization.

Priorización de los programas de conservación de especies con base en el Estatus Verde de la UICN y las estimaciones del potencial del reparto de costos Resumen Hoy en día, las organizaciones de conservación tienen que decidir en dónde invertir sus limitados recursos a la vez que más de un millón de especies están en peligro de extinción a nivel mundial. La rentabilidad de las inversiones puede incrementarse aprovechando las oportunidades de financiación y aumentando las asociaciones de colaboración para alcanzar los objetivos de conservación compartidos. Diseñamos un marco de toma de decisiones para priorizar los programas de conservación de especies con base en un análisis de costo-beneficio que considera las oportunidades de colaboración de un estudio del rendimiento de la inversión en la conservación a escala nacional y mundial. El beneficio de la conservación se determina al modificar el novedoso Estatus Verde de las Especies de la Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza para proporcionar una medida eficiente y de alto nivel que pueda compararse entre especies, incluso con limitaciones de información y tiempo. Aplicamos esta estrategia de priorización al Instituto Wilder/Zoológico de Calgary (Canadá), una organización sin fines de lucro que pretende aumentar el número de especies a las que ayuda con reubicaciones de conservación. Intentamos identificar y priorizar programas de especies adicionales en los que la experiencia y las acciones de reubicación para la conservación pudieran tener un mayor impacto. La estimación de la probabilidad del potencial de reparto de costos permitió distinguir el costo total del programa de los costos específicos de la organización. La comparación de la relación costo-beneficio a diferentes escalas geográficas permitió a los responsables de la toma de decisiones sopesar las opciones para invertir en nuevos programas de especies de forma transparente y eficaz. Nuestro análisis innovador se ajusta a los marcos generales de planificación de la conservación y puede adaptarse a cualquier organización.

Limited contributions of released animals from zoos to North American conservation translocations.

With the loss of biodiversity accelerating, conservation translocations such as reintroductions are becoming an increasingly common conservation tool. Conservation translocations must source individuals for release from either wild or captive-bred populations. We asked what proportion of North American conservation translocations rely on captive breeding and to what extent zoos and aquaria (hereafter zoos) fulfill captive breeding needs. We searched for mention of captive breeding and zoo involvement in all 1863 articles included in the North American Conservation Translocations database, which comprises journal articles and grey literature published before 2014 on conservation translocations in Canada, the United States, Mexico, the Caribbean, and Central America before 2014 as identified by a comprehensive literature review. Conservation translocations involved captive breeding for 162 (58%) of the 279 animal species translocated. Fifty-four zoos contributed animals for release. The 40 species of animals bred for release by zoos represented only 14% of all animal species for which conservation translocations were published and only 25% of all animal species that were bred for releases occurring in North America. Zoo contributions varied by taxon, ranging from zoo-bred animals released in 42% of amphibian conservation translocations to zero contributions for marine invertebrates. Proportional involvement of zoos in captive-breeding programs for release has increased from 1974 to 2014 (r = 0.325, p = 0.0313) as has the proportion of translocation-focused scientific papers coauthored by zoo professionals (from 0% in 1974 to 42% in 2013). Although zoos also contribute to conservation translocations through education, funding, and professional expertise, increasing the contribution of animals for release in responsible conservation translocation programs presents a future conservation need and opportunity. We especially encourage increased dialogue and planning between the zoo community, academic institutions, and governments to optimize the direct contribution zoos can make to wildlife conservation through conservation translocations.