Genetic analyses in support of conservation efforts for the California condor

International Zoo Yearbook

Volumn 37, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 330-339

  Chemnick, L G ^a   Kumamoto, A T ^a   Ryder, O A ^a  

^a ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGO   (United States)

Author keywords

Avian sexing; California condor; Chromosomal analysis; DNA fingerprinting; Mitochondrial DNA

Indexed keywords

EID: 0344840596     PISSN: 00749664     EISSN: 17481090     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-1090.2000.tb00738.x     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Avise, J. C., Nelson, W. S. & Sibley, C. G. (1994): DNA sequence support for a close phylogenetic relationship between some storks and New World vultures. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 91: 5173–5177.
2. Biederman, B. M. & Lin, C. C. (1982): A leukocyte culture and chromosome preparation technique for avian species. In Vitro 18: 415–418.
3. Brock, M. K. & White, B. N. (1992): Application of DNA fingerprinting to the recovery program of the endangered Puerto Rican parrot. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 89: 11121–11125.
4. Brown, W. M., George, M. & Wilson, A. C. (1979): Rapid evolution of animal mitochondrial DNA. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 76: 1967–1971.
5. Cooper, A., Mourer-Chauvire, C., Chambers, G. K., Von Haeseler, A., Wilson, A. C. & Pääbo, S. (1992): Independent origins of New Zealand moas and kiwis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 89: 8741–8744.
6. DeBoer, L. E. M. (1976): The somatic chromosome complements of 16 species of Falconiformes (Aves) and the karyological relationships of the order. Genetica 46: 77–113.
7. Ellegren, H. (1991): DNA typing of museum birds. Nature 354: 113.
8. Emslie, S. D. (1987): Age and diet of fossil California condors in Grand Canyon, Arizona. Science 237: 768–770.
9. Gentzbittel, L. & Nicolas, P. (1989): A BASIC program to construct evolutionary trees from restriction endonuclease data. Journal of Heredity 80: 254.
10. Geyer, C. J. & Thompson, E. A. (1995): A new approach to the joint estimation of relationship from DNA fingerprint data. In Population management for survival & recovery: analytical methods and strategies in small population conservation: 245–260. Ballou, J. D., Gilpin, M. & Foose, T. J. (Eds). New York: Columbia University Press.
11. Geyer, C. J., Ryder, O. A., Chemnick, L. G. & Thompson, E. A. (1993): Analysis of relatedness in the California condors, from DNA fingerprints. Molecular Biology and Evolution 10: 571–589.
12. Griffiths, R., Daan, S. & Dukstra, C. (1996): Sex identification in birds using two CHD genes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B Biological Sciences 263: 1251–1256.
13. Haig, S. M., Ballou, J. D. & Derrickson, S. R. (1990): Management options for preserving genetic diversity: reintroduction of Guam rails to the wild. Conservation Biology 4: 290–300.
14. Hedges, S. B. & Sibley, C. G. (1994): Molecules vs. morphology in avian evolution: the case of the ‘pelecaniform’ birds. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 91: 9861–9865.
15. IUCN (1996): 1996 IUCN red list of threatened animals. Gland: IUCN.
16. Kiff, L. (1990): To the brink and back. The battle to save the California condor. Terra 28(4): 6–18.
17. Koford, C. (1953): The California condor. Research Report No. 4. New York: National Audubon Society.
18. Kuehler, C. M. (1989): California condor studhook. San Diego: Zoological Society of San Diego.
19. Lawce, H. (1991): Chromosome slide preparation IV. In The ACT cytogenetics laboratory manual (2ndedn): 104–105. Barch, M. J. (Ed.). New York: Raven Press.
20. Longmire, J. L., Maltbie, M., Pavelka, R. W., Smith, L. M., Witte, S. M., Ryder, O. A., Ellsworth, D. L. & Baker, R. J. (1993): Gender identification in birds using microsatellite DNA fingerprint analysis. Auk 110: 378–381.
21. Lynch, M. (1988): Estimation of relatedness by DNA fingerprinting. Molecular Biology and Evolution 5: 584–599.
22. Lynch, M. (1990): The similarity index and DNA fingerprinting. Molecular Biology and Evolution 7: 478–484.
23. Miller, A. H., McMillan, I. I. & McMillan, E. (1965): The current status and welfare of the California condor. Research Report No. 6. New York: National Audubon Society.
24. Morin, P. A. & Woodruff, D. S. (1996): Noninvasive genotyping for vertebrate conservation. In Molecular genetic approaches in conservation: 298–313. Smith, T. B. & Wayne, R. K. (Eds). New York: Oxford University Press.
25. Nei, M. & Li, W. H. (1979): Mathematical model for studying genetic variation in terms of restriction endonucleases. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 76: 5269–5273.
26. Rave, E. H., Fleischer, R. C., Duvall, F. & Black, J. M. (1994): Genetic analyses through DNA fingerprinting of captive populations of Hawaiian geese. Conservation Biology 8: 744–751.
27. Ricklefs, R. E. (Ed.) (1978): Report of the advisory panel on the California condor. National Audubon Society Conservation Report 6: 1–27.
28. Ryder, O. A. & Chemnick, L. G. (1993): Chromosomal and mitochondrial DNA variation in orang utans. Journal of Heredity 84: 405–409.
29. Ryder, O. A., Kuehler, C. M. & Ralls, K. (1993): Genetic management and conservation of the California condor. In 1993 California condor studbook: 12 page appendix. San Diego: Zoologial Society of San Diego.
30. Shields, G. F. & Wilson, A. C. (1987): Calibration of mitochondrial DNA evolution in geese. Journal of Molecular Evolution 24: 212–217.
31. Sibley, C. G. & Ahlquist, J. E. (1990): Diurnal birds of prey: hawks, eagles, old world vultures, harriers, kites, falcons and caracaras, new world vultures or condors. In Phylogeny and classification of birds: a study in molecular evolution: 471–487. New Haven: Yale University Press.
32. Snyder, N. F. R. & Snyder, H. A. (1989): Biology and conservation of the California condor. Current Ornithology 6: 175–267.
33. Toone, W. D. & Risser Jr, A. C. (1988): Captive management of the California condor Gymnogyps californianus. International Zoo Yearbook 27: 50–58.
34. Wallace, M. P. (1990): The California condor: current efforts for its recovery. Endangered Species UPDATE 8(1): 32–35.
35. Wetton, J. H., Carter, R. E., Parkin, D. T. & Walters, D. (1987): Demographic study of a wild house sparrow population by DNA fingerprinting. Nature 327: 147–149.
36. Wilbur, S. R. (1978): The California condor, 1966-76: a look at its past and future. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, North American Fauna 72: 1–136.
37. Wilbur, S. R. (California Condor Recovery Team) (1974): California condor recovery plan. Washington, DC: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
38. Wilbur, S. R. (California Condor Recovery Team) (1977): A contingency plan for preserving the California condor. Washington, DC: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
39. Wiley, J. E. & Meisner, L. F. (1984): Synergistic effect of TPA and T-cell mitogens in nonmammalian vertebrates. In Vitro 20: 932–936.