Penguin Conservation - Avian Scientific Advisory Group

Transcription

Penguin Conservation
June, 1993
vol. 6, no. 2
In this issue
New Name, Wider Horizons
1
Bringing New Penguins into the Collection, 90's Style
2
Behavioral Observations of Captive Magellanic
Penguins with Chicks
7
The Penguin Conservation and Management Plan
13
AAZPA Penguin Advisory Group Recommendation
on Magellanics in Captivity
18
More about the AAZPA Penguin Advisory Group
19
Haemoparasites in the African (Jackasss) Penguin
20
Publication information:
ISSN # 1045-0076
Indexed in: Wildlife Review and
Zoological Record
Serials librarians, please note:
Previous title was SPN: Spheniscus Penguin Newsletter.
Volume numbering continued from previous title.
Printed on recycled paper.
Penguin Conservation is published three times per year, with financial support
from the American Associa tion of Zoological Parks and Aquariums, from the Metro
Washington Park Zoo, and from its readers. Subscription is free, to those with a
serious interest in penguin conservation and study. Contributions toward printing
and postage costs are welcome; please make checks payable to "Conservation
Publications," and send to the Editor at the address below.
The drawing which serves as our cover logo is reproduced by kind permission
of the artist, Arm Munson. Thanks to Joan Skidmore, for permission to use her
penguin drawings (page 1 and back cover).
Articles submitted for publication should be typed. For articles which include
graphs (such as line or bar graphs) please include a separate sheet giving the data
used to generate the graph. Authors who work on a Macintosh computer can help
our editorial process by sending their work on disk as well as paper.
All articles for the next issue must be received by September I, 1993.
Please address all correspondence to:
Cynthia Cheney, Editor
Metro Washington Park Zoo
4001 SW Canyon Rd.
Portland, Oregon 97221 USA
Telephone: (503) 226-1561
FAX: (503) 226-6836
New Name, Wider Horizons
With this issue, the Spheniscus Penguin Newsletter becomes Penguin
Conservation. The new title reflects expansion to cover matters relating to the
conservation of all penguin species, not
just the genus Spheniscus. The publication schedule is also changing, to three
issues per year. This will allow us to
present more information, more
promptly.
Expansion is made possible by a generous grant from the American
Associa tion of Zoological Parks and
Aquariums, drawn from funds designated for penguin conservation projects.
These funds were contributed in part by
the Stride-Rite Corporation and the
Daily Juice Company. The grant will
support most of the printing costs for
this issue and the four following issues.
Postage costs will continue to be contributed by the Metro Washington Park Zoo.
Thanks to these supporters, the new
Penguin Conservation will be able to provide a means of communication for all
those, worldwide, involved in the management and study of wild and captive
penguins of all species. Conservation
planning has begun to consider all penguin species at the same time, in
evaluating threats in the wild, allocating
facilities for captive colonies, <LT1d identifying areas needing further research (see
article, page 13).
Since its fustissue in September 1988,
SPN has received financial support from
many individuals, and organizations.
The Portland Chapter of the American
Association of Zoo Keepers paid for
most of the printing costs, and Metro
Washington Park Zoo has borne th cost
of air mail postage going all ver the
world. Penguin Conference Japan made
a very generous contribution from their
members. Many individual readers also
sent contributions, which not only
helped pay the printer, but also cheered
the editor as tangible proofs that the
publication was of value to its readers.
Our thanks to you all.
Voluntary contributions from read- global climate change. Captive populaers will continue to be requested tions must be self-sustaining, with no
annually, and other sources of support recruitment foreseeabie from wild
will also be sought for the future. The populations; with sound management,
ideal remains that everyone with a se- these can be self-contained populations
rious interest in the subject may receive for the next century or two, as captive
managers now plan for such time spans.
the publication, upon request.
These
colonies can provide learning opThe general purpose of the publication also remains the same: to provide a portunities that may aid in wild
single location where all those working management, as well as helping zoologiwith or for penguins may exchange in- cal institutions to educate the public
formation. Those who read the about wildlife and promote better stewpublication, and send in articles for oth- ardship of the world's oceans and
ers to read, include field researchers, coastlines. With your help, Penguin Conveterinarians, zoologists working in the servation will address all of these areas,
lab, zookeepers, behavioralists, nutri- and others which can promote our goal
tionists, zoo curators, and all those of conserving this group of animals.
concerned with managing
-Editor
and preserving populations
of penguins. The inter-relatedness of wild and captive'
research and management is
becoming increasingly clear.
Each field has the opportunity
to collect information of value
to the other, and successful
management of limited populations in the wild or in zoos, ay
draw upon the same body of
knowledge and techniques.
Also, we will continue to serve
as a medium for inquiries, putting individuals in touch with others whose
experience may help.
Penguin Conservation's readers are
also its authors. Please consider what
aspect of your work might be of interest or use to other readers, and write
an article or short note. Article published elsewhere may also be
re-published here, and find new
reader in other parts of the world
.'. ,~~--e:
or in other disciplines.
~ ;<j
',,",,~ ...,.;.!! .~'.'
Th
f
b
criticatf:;:n;:;~~~~~ns~<~~22·~~~.'~E;:'~~"'~~i:!~!!II'~II
in the wild and in captivity. Wild
p pulations are threatened by
pollution, competition for food
sources, human interfer ce of
various sorts, and potential
Penguin Conservation June 1993 page 1
Bringing new penguins into the collection 90's style
MIRANDA
F.
MARTIN
INTRODUCTION
THE EXPERIENCE OF VARIOUS COLLECTIONS
IN HAND-REARING PENGUINS HAS SHOWN 1HAT
HUSBANDRY METHODS AND DIET REQUIRED FOR
one species are not necessarily optimal
for another. The work described in this
paper has advanced our knowledge of
methods resulting in the successful hand
rearing of King and Macaroni penguins.
Edinburgh Zoo received 50 Macaroni (Eudyptes chrysolophus) and 49 King
(Aptenodytes patagonica ) eggs on the 27th
December 1991. These were delivered to
Edinburgh by Richard Hill from
Birdland, Bourton on the Water, carried
in portable incubators. They were collected by him in South Georgia and were
therefore part-way through incubation
on arrival. The zoo's animal hospital had
been converted into a quarantine for the
purpose of housing these eggs.
Incubation
On arrival the eggs were numbered,
and placed in egg incubators which had
been preset to a temperature of 36.5 °C
and 60% relative humidity. These eggs
were now in Ministry of Agriculture
approved quarantine. The eggs were not
washed owing to the fact that they were
part-way through incubation. Cracked
eggs were put in a separate incubator to
reduce the risk of cross-infection.
Problems were encountered controlling the humidity levels, especially since
the ambient R.H. in the incubator room
varied from 20%-60%. As only one of the
incubators used (A.B. Newlife 75) had a
fully automatic humidity control system, the other four had to be monitored
twice daily and adjusted accordingly. To
facilitate this the eggs were weighed
Miranda F. Stevenson, Curator
Martin P. Gibbons, Assistant Curator
Edinburgh Zoo
Corstorphine Rd.
Edinburgh EH 12 6TS
UK
Edinburgh, Scotland
regularly to track moisture loss. Not
knowing exactly when incubation
started meant that calculating for optimal weight loss was not possible. Using
data previously collected during incubation of King and Gentoo eggs laid by
birds at Edinburgh Zoo, it was possible
to extrapolate values that were reasonably accurate. Owing to the variability
and irregularity of shape of penguin
eggs it is not possible to use described
methods (Hoyt, 1979) to estimate fresh
egg weight from volume.
The first Macaroni egg hatched on
the 29th December 1991 and the first
King on the 25th January 1992. Of the 49
King eggs, 20 proved infertile, and of the
50 Macaroni, 5 were infertile. Twentynine Macaroni hatched, a success rate of
64% and 17Kings hatched, a success rate
of 59%.
Eggs were candled with a halogen
candling lamp and on internal pipping
they were moved to a hatcher at a temperature of 35.5°C and a relative
humidi ty of approximately 75%. Chicks
took approximately 48 hours from external pipping to hatching.
Staff only aided hatching in two
separate circumstances: failure to pip
externally, and sticking. The first occurred when the chick had pipped
internally but, either due to malposihoning or general weakness, had been
unable to pip through the external shell.
Chicks were assisted if they failed to pip
externally within 24 hours of internal
pip, or if they were observed to be getting obviously weaker following the
effort of pipping internally. A chick was
judged to be weakening when its pip-
STEVENSON
P.
GIBBONS
ping attempts became shorter and
shorter in duration. (The stimulation of
handling the egg is usually enough to
stimulate this behavior, so that it can be
monitored periodically.) When the decision was made to assist the external pip,
a small hole approximately 2 mm in diameter would be drilled into the air
space and this was usually enough to
revitalise the chick. Secondly, if the chick
had become stuck to the internal membrane due to insufficient humidity or a
burst blood vessel, immediate action
was taken to release it. This occurred
with eight Macaronis and five Kings.
The procedure followed was the standard one of moistening the membrane
with sterile distillled water, using an
artist's brush. Especial care must be
taken if blood vessels are involved; at the
slightest sign of fresh blood appearing
the egg was immediately replaced in the
hatcher. If bleeding continued, Aureomycin wound powder was applied.
Experience has suggested that it is
better to assist a hatching chick, if there
is any doubt. In the present case, there
was additional concern for the eggs' viability due to storage and transportation.
In our experience, no chicks are known
to have been lost due to active intervention of this kind.
Rearing
Reject hospital human-baby in incubators were used for the early stage of
rearing.
After hatching the chicks were
moved to a 'hatching' baby incubator for
24 hours, at a temperature of 34°C. The
navel wound where the yolk sac was
absorbed was dusted with Aureomycin
dusting powder. Chicks received their
first feed approximately 24 hours after
hatching when they were moved to
'rearing' incubators. During their stay in
baby incubators the chicks were placed
in small plastic containers, or plastic
bowls, in pairs where possible. The sub-
4.000 , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,
---------
............
WILD BIRDS
,
EDINBURGH BIRDS
en
w
3,000
/
/
~
~
«0::
"
/
/
/
/
,
/
/
/
2.000
,/
/
Z
I
/
/
/
I-
3:
/
,
1,000
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
AGE IN DAYS
Figure 1. Macaroni Penguins: Growth rates of wild-caught and Edinburgh hatched chicks.
8,000 , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , EDINBURGH
7,000
BELFAST
en
w
~
~
«0::
"
6,000
5,000
4,000
Z
I-
3:
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
AGE IN DAYS
Figure 2. King Penguins: Growth rates of Edinburgh hatched and Belfast hatched chicks.
continued from page 3
strate used was paper towelling.
Containers and towelling were changed
after each feed and containers sterilised.
In some instances, the chicks' toenails
showed a tendency "to tum under the
foot causing misshapen feet; plastic
mesh was put on top of the towelling in
the containers to provide better traction
for the chicks' nails, and in more extreme cases feet were bandaged into the
correct position. This technique worked
well.
Each chick was individually banded
with coloured embroidery thread and
weighed each morning before the 0800
feed. Weight curves were checked for
each bird each day. Figs. 1 and 2 show
the growth of the Edinburgh chicks
compared with growth rate data from
Macaroni chicks in the wild and from
King chicks at Belfast Zoo.
There is danger of overheating penguin chicks and care was taken to reduce
the incubator temperature by ICC per
day in the case of the Macaronis and
O.soC per day in the case of the Kings.
(See Table 1.) Great care was taken after
the last feed to check the exact temperature of each incu ba tor. When the
Macaroni chicks were approximately 7
days old and the Kings 14 days old they
were moved to a second room, where
they were placed in plastic containers,
610x790x300 mm deep with inserted
plastic mesh bases on a SOx25 mm
wooden framing. Heat lamps were
placed over one end of each of these and
were raised in height as the chicks grew.
When the chicks reached the coolest
container they were then moved to a
third cooler room and placed in similar
containers. Containers and mesh substrates were changed after each feed. The
chicks ended up in unheated cages; in
DAY
MACARONI
TEMPERATURE IN °C
KING
TEMPERATURE IN °C
0
34.0
34.0
1
33.5
33.5
2
32.5
33.0
3
31.5
32.5
7
moved to room 1 in boxes with
heat lamp; hot end of box 28°C,
cool end 25°C
12
moved down to cooler boxes in
room 1; by day 12 (approx)
moved to room 2 with fan, at
14-18°C
moved to room 1 in boxes with
heat lamp; hot end of box 28°C,
cool end 25°C
18-22
moved to unheated cage, temp.
lO-12°C
moved to room 2,
at 14-18°C
22-23
moved to unheated cage, temp.
10-12°C
Incubator temperatures were reduced by 1°C per day for Macaroni chicks and
O.soC per day for King chicks.
Table 1. Rearing temperatures for Macaroni and King Penguin chicks.
the case of the Macaronis this was when
they reached approximately 1 kg in
weight. In the tmheated room, a fan was
used to increase air circulation. This system of gradual progression to cooler
areas as the chicks grew and their down
thickened worked well.
Feeding
Details of the gruel diet are given in
Table 2. Food was freshly prepared and
liquidised into a gruel every 24 hours
and stored in plastic containers in a refrigerator. Quantities for each feed were
placed in separate containers, and when
required for feeding the gruel was
heated by standing the container in hot
water until the contents became warm.
After feeding, any remaining heated
feed was discarded. Food containers
were washed and sterilised in a chlorinebased sterilizer. Chicks were fed from
syringes, finishing up with panacur syringes (wide-nozzled 60 ml drenching
syringes used with wormers for mammals). It was necessary to sieve gruel
that was being used in 20 ml and smaller
syringes.
For the first few feeds chicks were
tube fed, until they learned the technique of feeding from a syringe. This
was to ensure they received the correct
amount of gruel per feed for the first few
days after hatching. Macaroni chicks
were supplemented with small (approximately 30 mm long) whitebait
from the time they reached 150 kg, and
King chicks from Day 2, working up to
strips of sprat and then to entire small
sprats.
Initially chicks were fed four times a
day, at 0800, 1200, 1600, and 2000 hours.
Each chick was fed 10% of its morning
body weight in gruel each feed, up to a
maximum of 45 ml gruel for Macaronis
and 50 ml per feed for Kings. The frequency was reduced to three feeds (0800,
1400,2000), ending up with two feeds at
0800 and 1700. When on solely fish feeds
Mazuri fish-eater tablets were added to
the morning fish feed, dose as per manufacturer's recommendations.
MACARONIS
For Macaronis the regime adopted
was three feeds, two gruel and fish, and
one fish only, once they reached over 700
g in weight. This was reduced to two
feeds when their weights were over 2000
g, with gruel feeds gradually being
phased out.
When the King chicks reached a
weight of 2-3 kg they were put on three
feeds, two gruel and fish, and one fish
only. When they weighed more than 3
kg gruel was given at only one feed, and
when they reached more than 4 kg they
were put onto two feeds with no gruel.
Chick Survival
Macaroni
Of the 29 Macaronis that hatched all
survived until 25 days of age. One chick
died at 26 days and one at 27 days, both
due to secondary effects from residual
yolk sac infections. All the remaining 27
chicks fledged and were moved out of
quarantine to the new penguin exhibit.
please turn to page 6
KINGS
300ml
Hartmann's Solution
300 ml
normal saline (10%)
100 g
squid (shell & ink-sac
removed)
100g
squid
100 g
sprats (whole)
250 g
sprats
100 g
prawns (whole)
2
Mazuri fish-eater
tablets
2
Mazuri fish-eater
tablets
1
Pet Cal tablet
1
Pet Cal tablet
1 tblspn.
SA 37
1 tblspn.
SA 37
Table 2. Penguin hand-rearing diets
Subsequently, two chicks died in April
and a fifth, which was blind due to early
ulceration of the eyes and a pseudomonas eye infection, contracted aspergillosis
and had to be euthanized. This left 24
chicks at the end of 1992, a total rearing
success of 83%.
King
Of the seventeen hatched, all survived until the end of 1992, making a
100% rearing success.
Health problems
Any chick that was causing concern
after hatching was given oral prophylactic treatment with amoxycillin (for
Macaronis 0.1 ml per 100 g wt, twice
daily) After it was discovered that yolk
sac infections might be a larger problem
than initially thought, all the King chicks
were given six days prophylactic treatment with amoxicillin (0.6 mI per 300 g,
twice daily). This might have contributed to their higher rearing success rate.
Occasionally problems are caused
with penguin chicks regurgitating feed;
this can be difficult to stop and causes
rapid weight loss. If a chick regurgitated
more than two consecutive feeds it was
tubed Dioralyte instead of gruel for the
following two feeds and given oral antibiotic for four days. Dioralyte feeds were
then repeated as necessary until the
chick completely recovered.
Three King chicks developed wheezing, possibly due to inhalation of feed.
They were injected with LA oxytetracycline (100 mg per 1 kg body weight
once daily for six days and then once
every second day for the next seven
days).
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank John Stronge
of Belfast Zoo for providing us with the
diets and methodology he devised when
hand-rearing Gentoo and King penguins in 1989 and 1990. Keepers Gillian
Brooks
and
Daniella
Dixon
carried out much of the rearing and
cleaning work in the quarantine area.
We would like to thank Hoechst U.K.
Ltd. for providing us with large Panacur
syringes.
Products mentioned in the text
Aureomycin dusting powder: Chlortetracycline hydrochloride 2% powder.
Cyanamid Animal Health Division,
Gosport, Hampshire.
Clamoxyl: palatable drops of Amoxicillin Trihydrate, 50 mg per mI. Beecham
Animal Health, Brentford, Middlesex.
Dioralyte: rehydration solution.
Rorer Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Eastbourne.
Hartmann's Solution: Saline solution
made by Animalcare Ltd., Common
Road, Dunnington, York, Y015RU.
Mazuri fish-eater tablets: supplementary food by SDS, Withirn, Essex.
Pet Cal: Calcium and Phosphorus
plus Vitamin 0 3 by Beecham Animal
Health, Brentford, Middlesex.
SA-37: Multivitamin preparation by
Intervet UK Ltd., Science Park, Milton
Road, Cambridge.
References
Hoyt, D.F. (1979) Practical methods
of estimating volume and fresh weight
of birds' eggs. Auk 96: 73-77.
Recent Literature
Brooke, M. de L. and Prince, P.A.
1991. Nocturnality in seabirds. Proceedings of the Twentieth International
Ornithological Congress. 1113-1121.
Croxall, J.P. 1992. Southern ocean
environmental change: effects on seabird, seal and whale populations.
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal
Society ofLondon, Series B. 338: 319-328.
Croxall, J.P. and Briggs, D.R. 1991.
Foraging economics and performance
of polar and subpolar Atlantic seabirds. Polar Research 10:561-578.
Croxall, J.P. and Williams, T.D.
1991. The gentoo penguin as a candidate species for the CCAMLR
Ecosystem Monitoring Programme.
CCAMLR Selected Papers 1990. 483-488.
Davis, R.W., Croxall, J.P. and
O'Connell, M.J. 1989. The reproductive
energetics of gentoo and macaroni
penguins at South Georgia. Journal of
Animal Ecology 58:59-74.
Hines, Ronald S.; Patrick Sharkey
and Robin B. Friday. 1990. Itraconazole
treatment of pulmonary, ocular and
uropygeal
aspergillosis
and
candidiasis in birds-data from five
clinical cases and controls. Proceedings
of the American Association ofZoo Veterinarians, pp. 322-327.
Ghebremeskel, K., Williams, T.D.,
Williams, G., Gardner D.A. and
Crawford, M.s. 1991. Plasma metabolites in macaroni penguins (Eudyptes
chrysolophus) arriving on land for
breeding and moulting. Comparative
Biochemistry and Physiology 99A:245250.
Heinemann, D., Hunt, G.L., and
Everson, I. 1989. Relationships between the distributions of marine
avian predators and their prey,
Euphausia superba, in Bransfield Strait
and southern Drake Passage, Antarctica. Marine Ecology Progress Series,
58:3-16.
Hunt, G.L., Heinemann, D., Veit,
R.R., Heywood, R.B. and Everson, I.
1990. The distribution, abundance and
community structure of marine birds
in southern Drake Passage, and
Bransfield Strait, Antarctica. Continental Shelf Research 10:243-257.
Behavioral Observations of Captive Magellanic Penguins
(Spheniscus magellanicus) with Chicks
KATHY
LARGE POPULATIONS OF MAGELLANIC
PENGUINS (SPHENISCUS MAGELLANICUS) ARE
FOUND IN THE WILD; HOWEVER, FEW ARE
exhibited in captivity. Much of the research on this penguin species has
focused on wild populations (Boersma
et al., 1990; Boswall and Maclver, 1975;
Capurro et al., 1988; Ghebremeskel et al.,
1989; Gochfield, 1980;Jehl, 1975; Scolaro,
1987; Scolaro et al., 1983; Stonehouse,
1967; and Wilson and Wilson, 1990).
A group of 67 wild-caught Magellanic penguins were brought from Chile
to the San Francisco Zoological Gardens
in 1984. These birds have bred and produced young every spring since 1985.
Details of the exhibit design and husbandry procedures are described by
Avery-Beausoleil and Ryan (1985). The
productive colony of Magellanic penguins at the San Francisco Zoological
Gardens provided opportunities for research on this species in captivity.
Preliminary studies on this colony were
reported by Avery-Beausoleil and Ryan
(1985) and Venizelos et a!,. (1985).
In 1990, the colony consisted of 60
individuals including 16 mated pairs.
The purpose of this study was to investigate the nutrition provided to
parent-reared Magellanic penguin
chicks. This paper reports an analysis of
specific parental behaviors and focuses
on chick-feeding activities.
Methods
Behavioral observations of the penguin colony were conducted by zoo staff
and trained volunteers. Three experienced researchers served as team
leaders. All observers completed a three
Kathy A. Bennett
Pueblo Zoo
3455 Nuckolls Ave.
Pueblo, Colorado 81005
[When this paper was written, Kathy
Bennett was an Avian Intern at
the San Francisco Zoo .J
San Francisco, California
hour training session at the zoo. They
learned the various behaviors (see Appendix 1) by viewing slides and a video
tape. In addition, each observer worked
with one of the team leaders on their first
day of data collection.
To ascertain accuracy in data collection, each observer was subjected to
reliability testing. One of the team leaders collected data on a pair of penguins
simultaneously with the observer undergoing reliability testing. Each test
was run to ten minutes. Comparison of
these results demonstrated each
observer's accuracy. All observers demonstrated accuracy within 1%.
Observations were conducted three
days a week from 1100-1300 and 16001800 hours. The project began 15 March
1990 and continued until 18 June 1990
when the last three chicks were taken
from their parents for weaning.
This report focuses on the time period during which the chicks were being
parent-reared (10 May through 18 June
1990). Four pairs of penguins were observed initially. These pairs were chosen
for their tractability, visibility in their
burrows, and past breeding and chickrearing successes. During the course of
the breeding season, two additional
pairs were added to the study when two
of the original pairs became unsuitable
for the project (see Discussion). Each individual in the study was identified by
colored tags that were attached to its
numbered wing bands.
Data were collected by use of a scan
sampling technique which is a form of
instantaneous sampling (Altmann, 1974;
Lehner, 1979). Individuals were viewed
A.
BENNETT
at predetermined time intervals and
their behaviors were scored. For this
study, one individual (the male bird of
the pair) was observed on the minute
mark, and. the second individual (the
female) was observed on the 30 second
mark. At those instances, the observer
recorded the subject's behavior and location. The researchers were stationed
on benches in the public viewing area
around the penguin exhibit 3.6-4.5 m
(12-15 ft) across from the burrow they
were watching. Binoculars aided in their
ability to identify the individuals and the
behaviors. The data were later tallied
into time blocks of one hour for computer input.
The collection of data during the
same set time periods each day is defined by Lehner (1979) as haphazard
sampling. This method was chosen because the cleaning and feeding
schedules required to maintain the animals and their exhibit were disruptive to
data collection.
Scan sampling provided data suitable for estimating percentage of time
individuals spent in various activities.
Focal animal observa tions (where one
individual is the focus and behaviors are
recorded during a set time period) were
used for studying the feeding behavior.
Whenever the observers saw a parent
feeding one of the hatchlings, they recorded the time duration of this activity.
This was done in addition to the scan
sampling data collection.
Results
A total of 152.2 hours of data was collected. During the a.m. time block
(1100-1300), the penguins were observed
for 77.7 hours. During the p.m. time
block (1600-1800), the birds were observed for 74.5 hours. Total observations
for each pair were: Pair A-59.S hours,
Pair 8----46.5 hours, Pair C-25.3 hours,
Pair D-13.2 hours, and Pair E-7.4
hours.
The behaviors (see Appendix 1) were
grouped into generalized categories:
4) Nest building behaviors: arrange
nest rnaterial, carry nest rnaterial,
deposit nest material, dig, pick up
nest material;
5) Care of young behaviors: brood
young, feed young, nest relief,
young solicit food;
6) Egg-related behaviors: tum egg,
incubation;
7) Locomotive behavior: walk;
8) Stationary behaviors: rest lying
down, rest standing up
9) visual behaviors: disturbed, look
around;
10) miscellaneous behaviors: other
behaviors (including yawn, pant,
1) Maintenance behaviors: mute,
preen, rouse, wing flap;
2) Sexual/ social behaviors: call,
copulation, duet, ecstatic display,
head shake, mutual display, mutual preen, pre-copulation, preen
other bird, slender walk;
3) Aggressive behaviors: bill clack,
chase conspecific, cobra, contact
conspecific, flee conspecific;
head bob, pivot over nest, and
contact with keepers); out of
sight.
The percentages of time that these
behaviors were exhibited are shown in
Figures 1 and 2. Figure 1 shows the averages of the behaviors for all the birds
observed, while Figure 2 shows a comparison of the averages of the behaviors
between the male and female animals.
Feeding young averaged 1.19% of all
behaviors, which is only a small portion
of the care of young category (mean
39.67%). Other behaviors in the care of
young category were brooding (38.1 %),
Behaviors
Aggressive
Locomotive
Egg-related
Sexual/social
Nest-building
Visual
Maintenance
Miscellaneous
Stationary
39.7
Care of young
o
10
20
30
Percentage of Time Spent
Figure 1. Average activity budgets for Magellanic Penguins with chicks.
40
The female penguins fed their chicks
nest relief (0.17%), and young soliciting
food (0.24%). Comparison of male and a total of 160 times, while the male birds
female parents when feeding the chicks . fed 116 times. During the a.m. time
resulted in a mean of 0.99% for the male block, the penguins fed their young a
penguins and 1.79% for the females.
total of 132 times, with the females feedAnalysis of the data collected on ing 85 times and the males feeding 47
feeding durations resulted in a mean of times. The frequency of the a.m. feedings
4.44 minutes (n=107, range=1-19 min- of the young by the female parents was
utes, 50=4.17) for all pairs of parents. significantly greater than by the male
Four pairs (Pairs B-E) with only one parents (chi square, n=132, P<0.05). Durchick averaged 3.71 minutes in feeding ing the p.m. time block, the birds fed
duration (n=58, range=1-17 minutes, their chicks a total of 144 times, with the
50=3.86). Pair A with two chicks aver- females feeding 75 times compared to
aged 5.33 minutes in feeding duration the males feeding 69 instances. There
(n=49, range=1-19 minutes, 50=4.36).
was no significant difference between
the frequency of the p.m. feedings by the
male and female parents (chi square,
n=l44, P<0.05).
Discussion
Unlike other species of the genus
Spheniscus, Magellanic penguins breed
at only one time during the year
(Boswall and MacIver, 1975). This limits
the amount of data that can be collected
in a year. This is a preliminary report on
the parental behaviors of the Magellanic
penguin colony at the 5an Francisco
Zoological Gardens, and more data collection is necessary. The following
comments relate to what was learned
after one breeding season.
Behaviors
Aggressive
Locomotive
Egg-related
Sexual/social
Nest-building
Visual
Maintenance
Miscellaneous
Stationary
Care of young
o
10
20
30
40
Percentage of Time Spent
Figure 2. Comparison of parental activity budgets, by sex.
Visibility into the burrows restricted
the number of pairs that could be observed. During the course of the study,
two of the initial four pairs became unsuitable for the project when one pair's
single egg failed to hatch, and the other
pair's only chick died at three days of
age. Two additional pairs were then
added to the study group. 1his resulted
in a limited number of observation
hours for three of the pairs. Thus the results should be viewed guardedly.
The use of a scan sampling observation method is recommended by
Altmann (1974) for estimating time and
activity budgets. Review of the data indicates that the adults spend 73% of their
time engaged in 2 types of activities: care
of the young (39.67%) and stationary
behaviors (33.27%). These observations
are in accord with those by Merritt and
King (1987) on captive Humboldt penguins (Spheniscus humboldti) and
Warham (1971) on wild royal penguins
(Eudyptes chrysolophus schlegeli), where
nesting birds spent the majority of their
time in their burrows or resting near the
burrow entrances.
The scan sampling method did not
give us the information that was desired
on frequency and duration of feeding
attempts, therefore the focal animal
method was initiated to collect data on
feeding durations. Analysis of this data
reveals a discrepancy between the results of the two different observational
methods. The scan sampling method
indicated an average of 1.19%, whereas
the focal animal method disclosed an
average of 5.68%. The focal animal
method seems better suited for data collection of frequency and duration of
feedings and may be a more accurate
representation of this behavior. An interesting comparison could be made by
using the focal animal method for all the
data collection in future breeding seasons.
Haphazard samples (Lehner, 1979)
were taken because of the activities nec-
essary to maintain the penguins. There
was concern over interference by humans and its effect on data collection.
This method allows for only a limited
picture of the activities of the birds for
the entire day. A more realistic picture of
the birds' activities throughout the day
could be achieved by the use of random
samples as described by Lehner (1979).
1his involves collecting data during all
hours of the day.
Four of the pairs observed had one
chick, and one pair had two hatchlings.
Comparison of the average feeding durations shows a mean of 3.71 minutes for
pairs with one chick and a mean of 5.33
minutes for the pair with two offspring.
The small sample size limits the validity
of these comparisons.
These preliminary results indicate
that the females fed their chicks tWice as
often as the males in the a.m. time block.
The males and females fed with equal
frequency in the p.m. time block. These
results should be viewed with caution
until this study is repeated with a larger
sample size. Future observations on this
colony and on Magellanic penguins at
other zoos and aquariums will be necessary to validate these findings.
Summary
Behavioral observations were conducted during the 1990 breeding seasOn
on selected members of a captive colony
of Magellanic penguins at the San Francisco Zoological Gardens. The two
primary activities of the adult birds were
care of young and stationary behaviors.
The female penguins were observed
feeding the chicks twice as often as the
males during the mornings and equally
in the afternoon. Feedings averaged 4.44
minutes in duration. These findings
must be viewed with caution due to the
limited sample size and future research
is necessary to validate these conclusions.
Acknowledgments
Funding was made possible through
an Institute of Museum Services Grant
No. IC-80352-88. I would like to thank
the following people: penguin keepers
Jane Tollini and Carol Cone (team
leader), Kathleen Hick (team leader),
Kathy Hobson (for help with the statistics and printing of the graphs), and all
of the volunteers who participated in the
collection of the behavioral data.
References
Altmann, J., 1974. Observational
study of behavior: sampling methods.
Behav.49:227-265.
Avery-Beausoleil, 1.; Ryan, E.A.,
1985. Practical aspects of the husbandry
and maintenance of the Magellanic penguins (Spheniscus magellanicus) at the San
Francisco Zoo. Animal Keeper's Forum
12:451-464.
Boersma, P.D.; Stokes, D.L.; Yorio,
PM., 1990. Reproductive variability and
historical change of Magellanic penguins (Spheniscus magellanicus) at
Punta,Tombo, Argentina. In: L.S. Davis
and J.T. Darby (Eds.) Penguin Biology.
New York, New York: Academic Press,
Inc.
Boswall, J.T.; MacIver, D., 1975. The
Magellanic penguin (Spheniscus
magellanicus). In B. Stonehouse (Ed.) The
Biology ofPenguins. Baltimore, Maryland:
Dniv. Park Press.
Capurro, A.; Frere, E.; Gandini, M.;
Gandini, P.; Holik, T.; Lichtschein, V.;
Boersma, PD., 1988. Nest density and
population size of Magellanic penguins
(Spheniscus magellanicus) at Cabo Dos
Bahias, Argentina. Auk 105(3): 585-588.
Ghebremeskel, K.; Williams, G.;
Keymer, I.F.; Horsley, D.; Gardner,
D,.A., 1989. Plasma chemistry of
rockhopper (Eudyptes crestatus), Magellanic (Spheniscus magellanicus) and
gentoo (Pygoscelis papua) wild penguins
in relation to moult. Compo Biochem.
Physiol. 92A(1):43-47.
Gochfi.eld, M.,1980. Timing of breeding and chick mortality in central and
peripheral nests ofMagellanic penguins.
Auk 97(1):191-193.
Jehl, Jr., J.R, 1975. Mortality of Magellanic penguins in Argentina. Auk
92(3):596-598.
Lehner, PN., 1979. Handbook of Etlwlogical Methods. New York, New York:
Garland STPM Press.
Merritt, K.; King, N.E., 1987. Behavioral sex differences and activity patterns
of captive Humboldt penguins
(Spheniscus humboldti). Zoo BioI. 6:129138.
Scolaro, J.A., 1987. A model life table
for Magellanic penguins (Spheniscus
magellanicus) at Punta Tombo, Argentina. J. Field Ornithol. 58(4):432-441.
Scolaro, J.A.; Hall, M.A.; Ximenez,
I.M., 1983. The Magellanic penguins
(Spheniscus magellanicus): sexing adults
by discriminant analysis of morphometric characters. Auk 100(1):221-224.
Stonehouse, B., 1967. The general biology and thermal balances of penguins.
Advances in Ecol. Res. 4:131-196.
Venizelos, N.; Ryan, E.; Hedberg, G.,
1985. Preliminary results of the San Francisco Zoological Gardens Magellanic
penguin (Spheniscus magellanicus) program. AAZPA Annual Conf. Proc.
250-269.
Warham, J., 1971. Aspects of breeding behavior in the royal penguin
(Eudyptes chrysolophus schlegeli). Notornis
18:91-115.
Wilson, RP.; Wilson, M.PT., 1990.
Foraging ecology of breeding Spheniscus
penguins. In: L.S. Davis and J.T. Darby
(Eds.) Penguin Biologtj New York, New
Yark: Academic Press, Inc.
Reference list for Penguin Behaviors
Ainley, D.G. 1974. The comfort behavior of Adelie and other penguins.
Behavior 50:16-51.
Bekoff, M.; Ainley, D.G.; Bekoff, A.
1979. The ontogeny and organization of
comfort behavior in Adelie penguins.
Wilson Bulletin 91(2): 255-270.
Boersma, P.O. 1976. An ecological
and behavioral study of the Galapagos
penguin. Living Bird 15:43-93.
Boswall, J.; MacIver, D. 1975. The
Magellanic Penguin (Spheniscus
magellanicus). In: B. Stonehouse (Ed.),
The Biology of Penguins. Baltimore, Md.:
Univ. Park Press.
Eggleton, J.; Siegfried, W.R 1979.
Displays of the jackass penguin. Ostrich
50:139-167.
Haftorn, S. 1986. A quantitative
analysis of the behavior of the chinstrap
penguin (Pygoscelis antarctica) and macaroni penguin (Eudyptes chrysolophus) on
Bouvetoya during the late incubation
and early nestling periods. Polar Research
4(1): 33-46.
Merritt, K.; King, N.E. 1987. Behavioral sex differences and activity patterns
of captive Humboldt penguins
(Spheniscus humboldti). Zoo Biologtj 6:129138.
Myers, W.A. 1977. Scheduled displays of behavior in captive Humboldt
penguins. Curator 20(2): 102-107.
Spurr, E.B. 1975. Communication in
the Adelie penguin. In: B. Stonehouse
(Ed.), The Biologtj ofPenguins. Baltimore,
Md.: Univ. Park Press.
Warham, J. 1971. Aspects of breeding
behavior in the royal penguin (Eudyptes
chrysolophus schlegeli). Notornis 18:91-115.
Appendix 1: Behaviors
1. Maintenance behaviors:
MUTE: Pass feces and urates
PREEN: Groom feathers with bill or foot
ROUSE/STRETCH: Fluff/shake feathers,shake tail, or stretch
WING FLAP: Flap wings while standing still.
2. Sexual/Social behaviors:
CALL: Penguin recognition call, low call
COPULAnON: Male mounts female with IUs feet on her back, he taps IUs wings rapidly against her body, presses IUs tail
against her tail
DUET: Two birds call or bray to each other, wings against body, no display
ECSTATIC DISPLAY: Single bird calls/brays,wings held out, head and neck stretched upward
HEAD SHAKE: Bird tucks head down toward chest and shakes/vibrates head rapidly, usually between mated pairs or
new pairs
MUTUAL DISPLAY: Two birds call/bray, wings held out, head and neck stretched upward
MUTUAL PREEN: Two birds groom each other simultaneously
PRE-COPULATION: Male approaches female and taps wings rapidly against her body
PREEN OTHER BIRD: Bird preens another bird or chick
SLENDER WALK: Walk with neck stretched up and head bowed slightly, wings at side.
3. Aggressive behaviors:
BILL CLACK: Two or more birds slap bill against bill
CHASE CONSPECIFIC: Chase another penguin
COBRA: Aggressive posture, head and neck move in snake-like movements
CONTACT CONSPECIFIC: Aggressive contact between the penguins
FLEE CONSPECIFIC: Displaced by another penguin.
4. Nest Building behaviors:
ARRANGE NEST MATERIAL: Arrange material in burrow, usually with bill
CARRY NEST MATERIAL: Walk with sticks, grasses, etc. in bill
DEPOSIT NEST MATERIAL: Leave nest material in or near burrow entrance
DIG: Dig in burrow
PICK UP NEST MATERIAL: Pick up nest material (sticks, grasses, etc.).
5. Care of Young behaviors:
BROOD: Wann chick by lying, partially standing over, or putting wings around chick
FEED YOUNG: Parent opens mouth wide and covers chick's head and regurgitates food into chick's mouth
NEST RELIEF: One parent moves off the nest and the other parent takes over incubation or brooding
YOUNG SOLICITING FOR FOOD: Chick touches parent's bill, neck, and/or body while vocalizing.
6. Egg-related behaviors:
EGG TURN: Move egg on nest with bill (by incubating bird)
INCUBAnON: Keep egg wann by contact with brood patch.
7. Locomotive behavior:
WALK: Walk.
8. Stationary behaviors:
REST LYING DOWN: Lie down, quiet, no movement
REST STANDING UP: Stand up, quiet, no movement.
9. Visual behaviors:
DISTIJRBED: Bird looks around intently, moves head rapidly
LOOK AROUND: Look around.
10. Miscellaneous behaviors:
OlliER: Other miscellaneous behaviors (describe)
OUT OF SIGHT: Bird is not visible.
(CAMP): Introduction and Overview
SUSIE ELLIS,
REDUCTION AND FRAGMENTATION OF
WILDLIFE POPULATIONS AND HABIT ATS ARE
OCCURRING AT A RAPID AND ACCELERATING
rate. For an increasing number of taxa,
the results are small and isolated
populations that are at risk of extinction. As populations diminish in their
natural habitat, wildlife managers realize that management strategies must
be adopted that will reduce the risk of
species extinction. These management
strategies must be global in nature, and
will include habitat preservation, intensified information gathering, and in
some cases, the use of technologies
developed in captivity or scientificallymanaged captive populations that can
facilitate genetic and demographic interaction with wild populations.
The Captive Breeding Specialist
Group is one of the nearly 100 Specialist Groups of the Species Survival
Commission of the IUCN-The World
Conservation Union. CBSG is the largest and most active specialist group,
and is a network of nearly 600 volunteers with expertise in species recovery
planning, small population biology,
reproductive and behavioral biology,
and captive animal management.
Within the SSC, CBSG's primary goal
is to contribute to the development of
holistic and viable conservation strategies. CBSG's main strength is in
providing a link between in situ and ex
situ conservation efforts.
CBSG works closely with wildlife
and conservation agencies, zoos and
other organizations committed to species conservation through habitat
preservation in the wild and also
sometimes through captive breeding.
Because it does not represent any particular political constituency, CBSG is
Susie Ellis, Ph.D.
IUCNjSSC Captive Breeding
Specialist Group
12101 Johnny Cake Ridge Road
Apple Valley, MN 55124
Apple Valley, Minnesota
able to serve as a neutral catalyst and
mediator for intensive species conservation efforts throughout the world.
In collaboration with experts in the
SSC and BirdLife International Specialist Groups, wildlife
agencies,
non-governmental organizations, global captive breeding community, and
the private sector, CBSG is evolving a
series of programs, activities, and partnerships to respond to the challenge of
rapidly diminishing biodiversity.
PH.D.
ing regarding resource allocation for
species management and survival.
These tools bring together an assessment and planning process that
considers both wild and captive populations, since in at least half of the cases
with which we work, both must be
managed to ensure species survival
and recovery. One assessment tool is
called Conservation Assessment and
Management Plan (CAMP).
Conservation Assessment and
Management Plan (CAMP)
A CAMP workshop brings together 10-40 experts to evaluate the
threat status of all taxa in a broad
group (such as penguins) to set conservation action and information-gathering
priorities. It is a process that has developed within the last one and a half
The traditional technique of Triage ... whereby a
great deal of money is spent to preserve a few
select charismatic megavertebrates,
is not a viable or cost-effective technique for
long-term preservation of biodiversity
A key component in preserving biotic diversity is deciding how to use
limited resources where they can do
the most good-maximizing options
and minimizing regrets concerning
species preservation. The traditional
technique of Triage treatment of species preservation, whereby a great deal
of money is spent to preserve a few
select charismatic megavertebrates,
often at the expense of other, not so
glamorous species, is not a viable or
cost-effective technique for long-term
preservation of biodiversity. CBSG has
pioneered the use of scientifically
based management tools that allow
informed and efficient decision-mak-
years, and is an attempt to develop a
process that will:
1) assess threat, attempting to apply (and test) the Mace-Lande criteria
for threat;
2) make broad-based recommendalions concerning conservation-oriented
management and research that might
be needed to directly contribute to the
knowledge needed to develop comprehensive recovery programs; and
3) clearly define the scope of the
problem facing the taxonomic or regional group in question.
CAMPs are not intended to take the
place of Action Plans developed by
various SSC and BirdLife International
Specialist Groups, but are a resource
for the development of these plans.
The SSC has endorsed CAMPs as the
first logical step in the development of
taxon-based Specialist Group Action
Plans. A Penguin Action Plan, if it
were to develop, would be the responsibility of the BirdLife International
Seabird Specialist Group, chaired by
Dr. David Duffy.
There is wide diversity in how to
assess threat. During the 1992 Penguin
CAMP workshop, each penguin taxa
was assessed in terms of the MaceLande criteria for category of threat.
These criteria were developed by Drs.
Georgina Mace and Russ Lande at the
request of IUCN to try to make definitions of threat more explicit and have
wider applicability to multiple taxa,
basically redefining the current IUCN
Red List categories. The Mace-Lande
scheme attempts to assess threat in
terms of likelihood of extinction within
a specified period of time (see Table 1).
The characteristics of this system
are that it:
1) is simple, with few categories
2) is a probabilistic assessment of
risk
3) has flexible data requirements
4) can use flexible population units
5) uses clear terminology
6) uses a time-scale of years and
generations. Mace-Lande uses a biologic time scale of 100-200 years to take
into consideration long-lived species.
In assigning categories of threat,
several variables come into play: total
population size (N), effective population size
(N e ), number of
subpopulations, rate of population
decline, catastrophe or habitat change,
exploitation, and exotic introductions
(Table 1). The system defines three categories for threatened taxa, based on
population viability theory:
Critical: 50% probability of extinction within 5 years or 2 generations,
whichever is longer
Endangered: 20% probability of
extinction within 20 years or 10 generations, whichever is longer
Vulnerable: 10% probability of extinction within 100 years
The new category, Critical, imparts
a strong sense of urgency, with a message that any taxa assessed as such is
under the immediate threat of extinction.
In assessing threat according to
Mace-Lande criteria, workshop participants break down into working
groups of from 2-10 people, examining
information on the status and interaction of other population and habitat
characteristics in addition to total
numbers or guesstimates of total number. Information about data quality,
population fragmentation, demographic trends, range, and envirorunental
stochasticity are also considered.
For each taxa, recommendations
are generated for the kinds of intensive
management action necessary. These
recommendations are: increased intensity of management programs in the
wild currently underway, which generally includes habitat protection, in
situ and ex situ collaborative research,
and Population and Habitat Viability
Analyses (PH VA), which combines
analytic and simulation techniques to
look at the effects of an array of
variables on the survivability of popula tions with the ultima te goal of
preventing extinction and providing
for recovery in the wild. Establishment
of captive populations or the use of
captive technologies, for the sole purpose of supporting the long-term
conservation of species, are also considered.
For birds thus far, CAMPs have
been conducted for waterfowl, parrots,
cranes, Asian hornbills, pigeons and
doves, Galliformes, and penguins, in
conjunction with BirdLife International Specialist Groups. They have
also been conducted for eight mammalian and four reptile groups. Regional
CAMPs have also been carried out for
Hawai'ian forest birds and for the flora
and fauna of St. Helena Island.
There are a number of limitations
in developing a CAMP document with
limited input from biologists worldwide. Because of its design, the CAMP
process is one that cannot be achieved
with a large delegation. After the initial discussion draft of the CAMP
document is completed by workshop
participants, it is generally circulated
to 100-200 field biologists and wildlife
managers for comment and review,
and it is reviewed at regional CBSG
meetings held in conjunction with regional zoo association meetings held
throughout the world. This review
process helps in pointing out uncertainties in the data presented and
stimulates response from people who
have better data, or stimulates survey
or other specific action that will get the
needed data. Over time, each document evolves from the comments and
discussions from other biologists as
they react to the draft generated at the
initial CAMP meeting. Comments and
clarification of data and text in CAMP
documents are encouraged from all
interested parties. After review and
revision, CAMPs are distributed to all
reviewers, appropriate wildlife and
conservation agencies, and also to zoological associations worldwide. It is
the intent that these documents will be
reviewed and updated every year or
so, or as world situations change.
The Penguin CAMP Workshop
In August 1992, a Conservation
Assessment and Management Plan
workshop was held in Christchurch,
New Zealand, for penguins. This
workshop grew out of a Population
and Habitat Viability Assessment
Mace-Lande Categories and Criteria for Threat
~
~....
POPULATION TRAIT
CRITICAL
ENDANGERED
VULNERABLE
Probability of extinction
50% within 5 years,
or 2 generations,
whichever is longer
20% within 20 years
or 10 generations,
whichever is longer
10% within 100 years
OR
OR
OR
Any 2 of the following
criteria
Any 2 of following criteria or any Any 2 of following criteria or any
1 ENDANGERED criterion
1 CRITICAL criterion
Effective population Ne
Ne<50
Ne < 500
Ne <2,000
Total population N
N <250
N < 2,500
N <10,000
Subpopulations
:::; 2 with Ne > 25, N > 125
with immigration
< 1/ generation
:::; 5 with Ne >100, N > 500 or
:::; 2 with Ne >250, N> 1,250
with immig. < 1/ generation
:::; 5 with Ne >500, N > 2,500 or
:::; 2 with Ne >1000, N> 5,000
with immig. < 1/generation
Population Decline
> 20%/yr. for last 2 yrs. or
>50% in last generation
> 5% /yr. for last 5 yrs. or
>10%/gen. for last 2 yrs.
>1%/yr. for last 10 yrs.
Catastrophe: rate and
effect
>50% decline per 5-10 yrs.
or 2-4 generations;
subpops. highly correlated
>20% decline/ 5-10 yrs., 2-4 gen.
>50% decline/10-20 yrs., 5-10
gen. with
subpops. highly correlated
>10% decline5/10 yrs.
>20% decline/10-20 yrs. or
>50% decline /50 yrs.
with subpops. correlated
resulting in above pop.
effects
resulting in above pop. effects
resulting in above pop.
effects
;:l
(J
c
;:l
Vl
OR
~
~
;:,
Habitat Change
....c
..;.
;:l
?;:l
""f-\
\.0
\.0
W
'\:l
~
""
f-\
CJl
OR
Commercial exploitation
or
Interaction/ introduced
fauna
Workshop that was requested by the
New Zealand Department of Conservation to assist in developing recovery
and management plans for penguins
there. Attendance was heavily
weighted with representation from the
Australasian region; few Antarctic scientists were able to attend.
A rough draft document, developed at the workshop, was circulated
to participants of the Second International Penguin Conference held at
Phillip Island, Australia, the week following the workshop. The report
generated intense discussion and catalyzed increased involvement from
additional field biologists in the development of the second draft of the
CAMP document. One shortcoming in
the first review draft was reflected in
incomplete data for Antarctic taxa.
Generously, Dr. John Croxall of the
British Antarctic Survey offered assistance in updating and revising data for
Antarctic species, rallying the assistance of the SCAR Bird Biology
Subcommittee; a second draft containing these revised data is anticipated in
summer 1994. A separate, interim
CAMP document for Australian and
New Zealand penguin taxa is in preparation by the CBSG Office.
During the CAMP Workshop, penguins were reviewed on a taxon by
taxon basis to assess their vulnerability
to extinction and to recommend conservation actions to improve the
viability of their populations. The
recommendations contained in the
Penguin CAMP are based only on conservation criteria; adjustments for
political and other constraints will be
the responsibility of regional programs. The Penguin CAMP examined
17 species and 24 distinct taxa (forms,
subspecies, or species if no subspecies
were contained therein). Because of
taxonomic uncertainty, blue penguin
forms were considered separately, but
will likely be lumped together for the
second draft.
Levels of Threat for Penguin
Species
Eleven of the 24 taxa were assigned
to one of three categories of threat,
based on Mace-Lande criteria. None of
the penguin taxa were assessed as being critically endangered. Three taxa
were listed as Endangered: Fiordland
crested penguins, Yellow-eyed penguins (listed as endangered on the
mainland of New Zealand and on
Stewart Island, and Vulnerable on
Auckland and Campbell Islands), and
Humboldt penguins.
Eight taxa were listed as Vulnerable: Snares Island crested penguins,
Erect-crested penguins, Southern
rockhopper penguins, the Chatham
Island form and the white-flippered
form of the blue penguins, African
penguins, and Galapagos penguins.
A comparison of the difference
between assessment of threat by MaceLande criteria and by the traditional
IUCN Red List categories shows that
seven of the ten taxa that were assessed as threatened are not listed on
the current IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals.
Regional Distribution of Threatened Penguin Taxa
The majority of threatened taxa are
found in the New Zealand/ Australian
region, followed by South America,
and Africa. None of the Antarctic taxa,
during this first examination, were
designated as threatened.
CAMP Program Recommendations
Seventeen taxa were recommended
for Population and Habitat Viability
Assessment (PH VA), 11 for more intensive wild management (with three
possibly recommended after PHVA
findings), nine for captive programs
(with four possibly recommended
pending PHVA findings), five taxa
were not recommended for captive
programs (with 3 awaiting findings of
a PHVA).
All 24 taxa examined were recommended for research of some kind.
Thirteen taxa were assessed as needing
taxonomic clarification; 21 were
designated for survey and census
work; one taxon was recommended
for husbandry research; 11 were recommended for other kinds of research
(ranging from energetics and ingestion
of marine debris, to foraging to predation). The main point of exam.ining and
research recommenda tions is to take a
hard look at the kinds of data still
needed to determine conservation action.
Levels of captive programs and
their potential were also discussed.
Captive populations, if recommended,
should be treated as integral parts of
metapopulations that are managed by
conservation strategies and action
plans. If captive programs are indicated, there is an attempt to propose
the level of program required, i.e. how
soon a program should be established
and with what objective. Under circumstance where a captive program
may be of use to reinforce wild populations, initial programs should be
established in the country of origin
whenever possible. Captive populations should be a support, not a
substitute, for wild populations. In
some cases, application of "captive
technology" (e.g. cross-fostering, artificial incubation, hand-rearing) may be
sufficient to allow for species recovery
and may prove to be not only more
cost-effective but more feasible in the
long term.
Nine taxa were recommended for
captive programs; all nine are already
present in captivity. Nine additional
taxa may be recommended in the future if PHVA findings determine that
the establishment of such is necessary
for the conservation of the taxon.
CAMP participants recommended
that one taxa, the Magellanic penguin,
be managed to extinction in captivity
and that the spaces it is currently
occupying be used for Humboldt or
African penguins. This recommendation was formally endorsed by the
American Association of Zoological
Parks and Aquarium's (AAZPA) Penguin Advisory Group in Apri11992 (see
page 18 of this issue-ed. note).
Like many such documents, the
Penguin CAMP document has raised
concerns by the field community. A
common concern is that CAMP docu-
the CAMP document only if they will
contribute to the long-term conservation of the species.
One of the questions that came up
informally during the course of the
CAMP workshop was, "What in the
world does the captive community
care about penguin conservation?"
The captive community has an image
problem to overcome-zoos have tra-
Captive populations should be a support, not a
substitute, for wild populations.
ments are a ploy by the captive community to get more animals, or that
they might be mis-used by the captive
community to extract animals from the
wild. There are no recommendations
for extraction of birds from the wild in
the Penguin CAMP draft. In reviewing
the captive populations of penguins, it
is clear that there is no reason to extract
birds, for which captive populations
already exist, from the wild at the
present time. All taxa for which captive programs were recommended are
already present in sufficient numbers
in captivity and are reproducing well.
The management recommendations in
these cases are that these existing
populations should be managed more
intensively and cooperatively and that
they should be self-contained.
In cases where captive programs
are listed as Pending, the recommendation, made by the wildlife managers
and biologists present at the workshop, is that new captive programs
should not be established unless they
are indicated by a formal Population
and Habitat Viability Assessment. For
new programs, captive populations
should be established only if needed
for conservation. It is essential that
these kinds of decisions come from the
people actually working with the animals in the field, from the managers,
and not from the captive community.
Such programs are recommended in
ditionally been perceived, especially
by field researchers, as extractors, not
conservators of nature. This is changing, however, as many zoos begin to
actively support field programs and to
"adopt" wildlife areas throughout the
world.
If the world con tin ues on its
present course, some of the intensive
management techniques that have
been developed in the captive community may have to be applied to the
management of wild populations to
prevent their extinction. These may
include things like the development of
studbooks, cross-fostering, artificial
insemination, artificial incubation,
hand-rearing, management in semina tural preserves, and other
techniques. For penguins especially,
some of the techniques that are wellestablished are collection and
transport of eggs, artificial incubation,
and hand-rearing. Sea World, for example, on four separate expeditions to
collect more than 2,000 eggs from subantarctic islands, reports an overall egg
hatchability of 75% and of the birds
that hatched, an 84% fledge rate. These
data reflect techniques that were, at the
time, experimental. These tedmiques
are available, and if needed long-term,
could be used to establish captive or
semi-natural populations without detriment to existing populations.
The application of captive technology or the development of captive
populations with regard to contribution to conservation should be
carefully considered individually for
threatened penguin taxa. It is not implied that captive breeding should be
the primary means of preserva tion for
all threatened taxa. Of all taxa that
have been reviewed in CAMP workshops, captive breeding as the primary
means of preserving a taxon has only
been recommended for one bird-the
Spix's macaw (Anodorhynchus spixii). It
is, however, important to note that in
order to preserve some of the more
threatened penguin taxa, for the long
term, which means for the next 100-200
years, all parties in teres ted in the
conservation of penguins, field and
captive, will need to form partnerships,
pooling techniques and knowledge to
explore all options on a pathway that
will lead to long-term penguin survival.
A Recommendation from the AAZPA Penguin Advisory Group
concerning Magellanic Penguins (Spheniscus magellanicus)
in Captivity in North America
SHERRY BRANCH
BACKGROUND
ON
18-19
AUGUST,
1992,
A PENGUIN
CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT PLAN (CAMP) WORKSHOP WAS HELD
in Christchurch, New Zealand, in conjunction with the IUCN/SSC Captive
Breeding Specialist Group. At this
meeting, 25 penguin biologists, including field and captive managers, met to
develop draft conservation strategies
for penguins. CAMPs are intended to
provide strategic guidance for application of intensive management and
information collection techniques to
threatened taxa, providing a rational
and comprehensive means of assessing
priorities
for
intensive
management, including captive breeding, within the context of species'
broader conservation needs.
Based on a wild population estimate of approximately 1.3 million
pairs, relatively stable population
trends, reasonably limited real and
potential threats, as well as other factors, a consensus was reached by
participants that the captive management program for the non-threatened
Magellanic Penguin should be gradually eliminated in favor of expansion of
captive programs for the threatened
Humboldt (Spheniscus humboldtO and
African (Spheniscus demersus) penguins. Humboldt and African penguin
numbers are estimated at 5,000-6,000
pairs and 50,000-80,000 pairs, respectively; both species face numerous
threats that continue to exacerbate
population declines.
The Discussion Draft Edition of the
Penguin CAMP states: "Magellanic
penguins are relatively common,
which may mean that it is more important for zoos to keep other species of
penguins that are doing more poorly
in the wild and where conservation
efforts are more critically needed. For
example, it may be that Magellanic
penguins are using spaces that should
be allocated for Humboldt penguins."
All three species are currently maintained in captivity in the North
American region; all have similar spatial and environmental requirements
in captivity and compete directly for
available exhibit space.
Recommendation of the Penguin
TAG
At the Penguin Taxon Advisory
Group meeting held at the 1993 Southern Regional AAZPA Conference in
Downsizing the population will take
place through natural attrition with no
replacement, or through placement of
birds outside the North American
population.
2) Designation of a few institutions
as exhibit and holding institutions during the period of downsizing and
subsequent consolidation of this population (perhaps spanning a period of
ten or more years).
3) Spaces should be reallocated first
to Humboldt and then to African penguins, as Magellanic colonies are
consolidated into fewer institutions.
... from a conservation standpoint,
there is no reason to maintain a captive
population of Magellanic penguins
in North American collections
Lake Monroe, Florida, the membership of the TAG unanimously agreed
to support the recommendation regarding the gradual elimination of
captive programs for Magellanic penguins, as outlined in the Penguin
CAMP document. Members of the
TAG concurred that, from a conservation standpoint, there is no reason to
maintain a captive population of Magellanic penguins in North American
collections. TAG members unanimously agreed that it is in the best
interest of the genus Spheniscus to
dedicate both spaces and effort toward
those species most in need of conservation programs at this time.
The Penguin TAG asks the cooperation of AAZPA member zoos and
aquaria in accomplishing the following goals:
1) An immediate moratorium on
breeding Magellanic penguins in
North
American
collections.
In order to achieve these goals, the
Spheniscus subgroup of the Penguin
TAG will work closely with all institutions holding the three species. An
individual will be designated by the
TAG to track the current living population, by location, using ISIS data.
The controlled elimination and
eventual replacement of the captive
Magellanic popula tion will require
many years to accomplish and will be
accomplished with the well-being of
holding institutions in mind. No institution will be asked to give up their
colonies of Magellanic penguins without immediate replacement with
Humboldt or African penguins. The
contribution of all institutions, including those holding or exhibiting
Magellanic penguins and those propaga ting target species are of equal
importance in optimally managing
Spheniscus penguins in the North
American region.
The TAG is currently working on a
space evaluation that will provide insight into the possibility of combining
or relocating some birds, when appropria te, to make room for more
threatened species. We would like to
work closely with each institution that
can participate to make sure that the
needs of each institution as well as the
birds' needs are met. This concept of
phasing out an existing population is a
relatively new one and it will be important that all holders of Spheniscus
penguins work together to ensure that
our collections reflect conservation
goals of the AAZPA.
The Penguin TAG membership believes that this recommendation to
eliminate a well-established captive
population is the first such recommenda tion to origina te from an
AAZPA-endorsed avian Taxon Advisory Group. The proposed action will
serve as a positive model for the implementation of future recommendations
for the joint management of multiple
species.
Please direct questions/corrunents to:
Sherry Branch, Penguin Advisory
Group Chair
Curator of Birds
Sea World of Florida
7007 Sea World Drive
Orlando, FL 32821-8097
Tel 407 /363-2361
Fax 407/363-2377
More About the AAZPA Penguin Advisory Group (TAG)
THE PENGUIN TAXON ADVISORY GROUP
(TAG) WAS FORMED IN 1992 TO ASSIST THE
AMERICAN ASSOCIATlON OF ZOOLOGICAL
Parks and Aquariums (AAZPA) institutions in managing penguin
populations of all species. Responsibilities of the TAG include facilitating
corruntmication on conservation issues
for the taxon, promoting cooperation
between conservation and research on
related taxa, setting priorities for utilization of available captive space and
helping to expand the AAZPA Conservation program by recommending
new studbooks and Species Survival
Plans (SSPs). Members of the Tag include Bird Curators and others
interested in penguin conservation. A
group of advisors was also selected for
the TAG which includes veterinarians,
field biologists and nutritionists.
The TAG met officially for the first
time at the 1992 AAZPA National Conference in Toronto. The Penguin
CAMP which was completed August
1992 in Christchurch New Zealand (see
article on page 13-ed. note) was summarized and discussion ensued about
the CAMP recommendation to phase
out captive Magellanic penguins to
make room for the more endangered
Humboldt and African birds.
Existing studbooks include the
Humboldt and African. Tom Schneider,
Detroit Zoo, reported that the studbook petition for the crested penguins
had just been approved by the Wildlife
Conservationand Management Committee (WCMC) of AAZPA. Sea World
agreed to compile the King, Emperor,
AdeIie, Chinstrap and Gentoo data.
A decision was made to apply for
Conservation Endowment Fund support to pull a group together, in order
to compile and publish a Husbandry
Manual for Penguins.
The second TAG meeting took
place at the AAZPA regional conference in Orlando, Florida, in March
1993.
It was announced that $5,700 had
been awarded the TAG for expenses of
producing and publishing the Husbandry Manual. This meeting will be
held in Orlando, Florida June 27-29
and a copy of the completed document
sent to all U.S. institutions holding
penguins. Subsequently the manual
will be available for sale through the
TAG for other interested individuals
or institutions. A detailed penguin survey had been distributed to all U.S.
institutions in preparation for the husbandry manual meeting.
The TAG voted unanimously to
endorse the CAMP recommendation
to phase out the Magellanic population and drew up a position statement
that was distributed to all zoo directors
and bird curators of institutions holding Spheniscus penguins.
-Sherry Branch
Haemoparasites in the African (Jackass) Penguin (Spheniscus
demersus)
J-J.
THE JACKASS PENGUIN (SPHENISCUS
DEMERSUS ) CAN BREED ANYWHERE ALONG TI-lE
WHOLE SOUTHERN AFRICAN COASTLINE, BUT
effectively there are only half a dozen
major colonies. Most are on off-shore islands where numbers have declined; the
main causes are probably competition
for food, and oiling. Last year about 2000
birds were brought in for cleaning and
rehabilitation and the mortality of these
stressed birds is considerable.
The author has studied the role of
haemoparasites in this mortality. Malaria (Plasmodium relictum) occurs in up
to 20% of penguins brought in during
the summer months. Fortunately, for
reasons unknown oiling occurs mainly
in the winter, so the number of birds
exposed to malaria is less than 10% of
the total. It has been shown that malaria
does not occur in the wild populations
(Brossy 1992) which explains why they
have no resistance to the disease. Malaria has been well documented in the
American literature, but therapy remains problematic.
While screening blood smears taken
from penguins at SANCCOB (South
African Foundation for the Conservation of Coastal Birds) we found a few
cases of leucocytozoonosis. This is transmitted by simuliid flies, and occurs in
our birds only during a relatively short
period in mid-summer (mainly December). There is an incubation period of
about two weeks, and the disease is
slowly progressive. All but one of the
penguins died, but several survived for
three weeks and other factors contributed to or caused death in many.
Chloroquine was shown to reduce the
peripheral parasite load but did not
seem to affect survival. It is believed that
the parasite is L. tawaki (Earle et al. 1992)
J-J .Brossy
Department of Anatomy
Medical School
University of Cape Town
Cape Town, South Africa
Cape Town, South Africa
because the organism is morphologically similar to that seen in the Fjordland
Crested Penguin (Eudyptes pachyrynchus
) in which L. tawaki was first described
(Fallis et al. 1976). However the two penguins are geographically remote and are
not closely related. The clinical presentation suggests a local source of infection.
Further investigation is needed.
During our search for Plasmodium we
noted, on a few occasions, smears showing large numbers of ring forms
(trophozoites) in penguins which remained healthy. As malaria has been
almost uniformly fatal, we suspected
that we were looking at a different disease, and Dr. Bennett of the International
Reference Centre for Avian Haematozoa
together with Dr. Earle of Onderstepoort's Veterinary Research
Laboratory identified the parasite as a
Babesia (Earle et al. 1993) naming it B.
peircei (sp. nov.) after Dr. M. Peirce, who
has done so much work on the piroplasm group.
B. peircei is found in the peripheral
blood of about 4% of all wild penguins
tested. Testing has been done on about
1000 individuals, from colonies off the
coast of Namibia, the Western Cape
Coast, the Southern Cape, and the quite
large colony at St. Croix Island off Port
Elizabeth on the East Cape. At
SANCCOB the prevalence is higher,
with B. peircei found in the blood of 1115% of the penguins tested.
The incidence is also much higher
among the birds at SANCCOB. In the
wild penguins, usually less than 1 cell
per thousand will be infected. In the
SANCCOB birds, incidence ranges from
1 in 500, to cases where every field has
BROSSY
infected cells, and individual red cells
may have 2-4 parasites each. This almost
certainly represents the stress of oiling
and handling on the penguins.
Babesiosis is endemic, with no
known clinical signs, and alone does not
seem to have any morbidity, but when
combined with malaria or leucocytozoonosis may aggravate the disease.
Babesiosis is tick-borne but the vector
has not yet been identified. In most tickborne diseases, e.g. biliary in dogs, an
ixodid tick is responsible, but so far we
have failed to find these in penguins; by
contrast we see numerous argassids. We
are analyzing the argassid tick Ornithodorus, which is found in large numbers
on nesting penguins, for Babesia in the
hope that we will either confirm or
exclude this tick as a vector.
Two penguin colonies on or near the
mainland are thriving: that on Robben
Island immediately off Cape Town in
Table Bay, and that on Boulders at
Simon's Town on the Cape Peninsula.
However because of their location both
are liable to the diseases mentioned
above, namely malaria and leu cocytozoonosis-in fact one case of P.
relictum has already been found on a
Robben Island bird. An epizootic,
though unlikely, could be disastrous.
These two colonies are being carefully
monitored.
References
Brossy, J-J.1992. Malaria in wild and
captive jackass penguins Spheniscus
demersus along the southern African
coast. Ostrich 63:10-12.
Earle, KA., Bennett G.P. and Brossy,
J-J. 1992. First African record of
Leucocytozoon tawaki (Apicomplexa:
Leucocytozoidae) from the jackass penguin Spheniscus demersus. S. African J.
Zoology 27(2):89-90.
Earle, R.A., Huchzemeyer F.W.,
Brossy J-J., and Bennett, G.F. 1992. Babesia peircei sp. nov. from the jackass
penguin Spheniscus demersus. In press.
Figure 1. (Above). Typical rosette of
dividing Babesia [x10001.
Figure 2. (At right) Trophozoites (ring
forms) of Babesia peircei indicated by
arrows. NB: in isolation, this looks like
the malarial (Plasmodium) or other
trophozoite [xlO001.
Malaria and environmental factors
Transmission of malaria usually
will depend on the presence of a definitive host; in our area this is usually
the Cape Sparrow (Passer capensis) but
other local birds, such as robins, sunbirds, and widows may also serve as
hosts. These do not occur on the offshore islands which form the main
breeding grounds of S. demersus. Also,
these islands are too wind-swept for
mosquitoes or flies to survive and
breed. Since both reservoir host and
vector are lacking, the risk of spread in
such areas is minimal.
However, different conditions are
found on Robben Island, and at the
mainland site of Boulders.
Thriving breeding colonies of S.
demersus are found in both locations.
The Robben Island colony was exterminated in the mid-19th century by
human action, but began to re-establish itself about 15 years ago. The
penguins have benefitted from the
island's use as a penal colony and the
resulting minimal human disturbance.
Since Boulders and Robben Island
are protected from winds, and have
lush vegetation, mainland birds, and
areas of stagnant water, the penguins
are at risk for both malaria and
leucocytozoonosis. The two colonies
are being carefully monitored for these
diseases.
-J-J. Brossy

Penguin Conservation - Avian Scientific Advisory Group

Transcription

Similar documents

Ripley`s `14 Aquarium Slime Brochure.indd

DOC Fiordland crested penguin factsheet

pens_pins_flier - Allied Services

The Penguin Class January 31, 2016 What`s happening in our class?

Unit 1

Playful Penguins - Rosedale Curriculum

Pingvinen_EN copy

27 BestFoodLiteratureBook

origin of life mystery origin of life mystery origin of