Endocrinology And Conservation: An Exploration
Endocrine (or hormone assessment) studies can assist biologists in understanding different species’ bodies and stressors, which they can then use to implement species-specific recovery plans. However, there are benefits and limitations of different types of endocrine study techniques and their applications towards conservation. In this study, published in the journal General and Comparative Endocrinology, researchers give an overview of various endocrinology techniques to highlight and recommend non-harmful conservation methods.
Endocrinology studies can take place in a man-made environment or in an animal’s natural habitat. While natural (in-situ) environments are the best place to observe an animal’s true behavior, habitat fragmentation and species rarity makes it difficult to find animals and collect samples from them for hormone analysis. Man-made (ex-situ) studies make it easier to collect samples, but biologists must already have basic knowledge of a species in order to replicate their home environment.
Not surprisingly, these studies are difficult to carry out in most threatened species. Innovations in hormone sampling are now making it easier for scientists to study species without having to remove them from their native environment, and might offer the benefit of studying multiple species at once. This may help biologists understand why some species decline quicker than others.
Animal welfare advocates will be happy to learn that the best sampling methods in endocrinology are ones that disturb animals least. Although blood is the preferred substance for hormone sampling in humans, it’s risky for animals as they may become frightened in the process, which not only injures animals but also skews results. Urine and feces are better for providing hormone samples than blood since they can be collected without the same complications. What’s more, urine and feces offer more of an “average” reading due to the amount of time it spends pooling with other things in animals’ bodies, rather than blood which gets collected at a specific point in time.
The most popular method of analyzing the hormones in a sample relies on producing an antibody to react with a specific hormone. This technique requires an animal to generate the antibodies. The authors point out that this method isn’t very useful for threatened species due to difficulty and expense. They suggest that new, non-invasive research may soon advance the field of threatened-species hormone analysis. Among that new research is:
- genetic analysis of fecal matter, which could provide evolutionary data that could be of particular use, and
- chemosignal (pheromone) detection, because it could help biologists manage the breeding of threatened species in a natural, non-forced manner.
Most importantly, neither of these methods appears to threaten the welfare of the animals being studied. Dogs may even be of assistance in chemosignal detection: some have been trained to identify female hormones in both cows and polar bears (with 97% accuracy of predicting pregnancy in the latter).
Despite the existence of several promising study techniques, no method comes across as a shining star. The authors conclude that, although these methods are promising, “limited resources and animal access may not allow investigators in the field to be at the forefront of these new technologies.” For this field to continue to grow, it will have to adapt current methodologies. Animal advocates should take note: scientists seeking to help threatened species and protect them from extinction – without compromising their welfare – seem worthy of support.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24798579