Geology topics

Nucharin Songsasen

Publications and source records attributed to Nucharin Songsasen.

7 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2023

Egg production and endocrine profiles of female whooping cranes (Grus americana) maintained ex situ are improved in naturalized enclosures

Whooping cranes ( Grus americana ) are naturally seasonal breeders and rely on wetland habitats throughout the annual cycle. However, captive cranes are commonly housed in dry outdoor pens, which may lack key environmental stimuli that in turn compromise reproduction. Our study sought to first, assess seasonal patterns of reproductive hormones in successful versus non-successful bird pairs and second, determine endocrine responses to alterations in enclosure environments. Fecal samples were collected from eight crane pairs year-round for 3 consecutive years, once a week during non-breeding season and three times a week during the breeding season. During Year 1, all pairs were housed in traditional dry pens, whereas during January of Year 2 all pairs were moved to either new dry pens (control, n = 4) or ponded pens (wetland, n = 4) and remained in the same pen until the end of the study. Fecal samples were assessed for gonadal (year-round) and adrenal (breeding season only) hormones. Estrogen and progestagen metabolite concentrations were low during non-breeding season in all females. However, as birds transition into a breeding season, gonadal hormone concentrations significantly increased ( p < 0.001) in laying females but not in non-laying individuals. Androgen metabolite concentrations during breeding seasons were higher ( p < 0.001) in males paired with non-laying females, with no variations observed during non-breeding months and within birds of the same reproductive output. We observed significant effect of enclosure environment on ovarian function of female whooping cranes. Specifically, mean estrogen metabolite concentrations increased after birds were moved from dry pen to wetland enclosures (Year 1: 349.1 ± 83.4 ng/g feces; Year 2: 382.7 ± 82.9 ng/g feces; Year 3: 556.5 ± 85.4 ng/g feces, p = 0.008 and 0.019 res p ectively,), whereas those of the control females remained constant. Further, estrogen concentration assessed during breeding season of Year 3 in females housed in wetland pens was higher than birds housed in a dry pen (556.5 ± 85.4 vs 311.7 ± 85.12 ng/g feces; p = 0.019). The number of eggs laid increased in three of the four pairs housed in the wetland pens, while there was no change in egg production in control birds (9 vs. 2 combined number of eggs produced by all pairs in each respective group in Year 3). Finally, moving birds to an enclosure that mimic natural environment did not impact androgen or glucocorticoid excretion. The findings demonstrate that differences in gonadal hormone production between laying and non-laying whooping crane females exist primarily during the breeding season, and that a more natural environment can have a positive influence on ovarian function in female whooping cranes.

Theriogenology Wild↗

USGS2023

Low estradiol production of non-laying whooping cranes (Grus americana) is associated with the failure of small follicles to enter follicular hierarchy

For endangered species managed ex situ , production of offspring is a key factor to ensure healthy and self-sustaining populations. However, current breeding goals for the whooping crane ( Grus americana ) are impeded by poor reproduction. Our study sought to better understand mechanisms regulating ovarian function in ex situ managed whooping cranes and the regulatory function of the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal (HPG) axis in relation to follicle formation and egg laying. To characterize hormonal regulation of follicular development and ovulation, we collected weekly blood samples from six female whooping cranes during two breeding seasons, for a total of 11 reproductive cycles. The plasma samples were assessed for follicle stimulating hormone, luteinizing hormone, estradiol, and progesterone and the yolk precursors vitellogenin and very low-density lipoprotein. Ultrasonographic examination of the ovary was conducted at the time of blood collection. Preovulatory follicles (>12 mm) were present in laying cycles (n = 6) but absent in non-laying cycles (n = 5). The patterns of plasma hormone and yolk precursor concentrations corresponded to the stage of follicle development. Specifically, gonadotropin and yolk precursors concentrations increased as follicles transitioned from the non-yolky to yolky stage but did not increase further as the follicle advanced to preovulatory and ovulatory stages. Estrogen and progesterone concentrations increased as follicle size increased and reached peak concentrations (P < 0.05) when follicles developed to ovulatory and preovulatory stages, respectively. While overall mean circulating gonadotropin, progesterone, and yolk precursor concentrations did not differ for laying versus non-laying cycles, mean plasma estradiol in laying cycles was significantly higher than that in non-laying cycles. In summary, the findings suggested that disruption of mechanisms regulating follicle recruitment is likely responsible for the oviposition failure of the captive female whooping crane.

General and Comparative Endocrinology↗

USGS2020

Effects of body size on estimation of mammalian area requirements

Accurately quantifying species’ area requirements is a prerequisite for effective area-based conservation. This typically involves collecting tracking data on species of interest and then conducting home-range analyses. Problematically, autocorrelation in tracking data can result in space needs being severely underestimated. Based on the previous work, we hypothesized the magnitude of underestimation varies with body mass, a relationship that could have serious conservation implications. To evaluate this hypothesis for terrestrial mammals, we estimated home-range areas with global positioning system (GPS) locations from 757 individuals across 61 globally distributed mammalian species with body masses ranging from 0.4 to 4000 kg. We then applied block cross-validation to quantify bias in empirical home-range estimates. Area requirements of mammals <10 kg were underestimated by a mean approximately15%, and species weighing approximately100 kg were underestimated by approximately50% on average. Thus, we found area estimation was subject to autocorrelation-induced bias that was worse for large species. Combined with the fact that extinction risk increases as body mass increases, the allometric scaling of bias we observed suggests the most threatened species are also likely to be those with the least accurate home-range estimates. As a correction, we tested whether data thinning or autocorrelation-informed home-range estimation minimized the scaling effect of autocorrelation on area estimates. Data thinning required an approximately93% data loss to achieve statistical independence with 95% confidence and was, therefore, not a viable solution. In contrast, autocorrelation-informed home-range estimation resulted in consistently accurate estimates irrespective of mass. When relating body mass to home range size, we detected that correcting for autocorrelation resulted in a scaling exponent significantly >1, meaning the scaling of the relationship changed substantially at the upper end of the mass spectrum.

Conservation Biology↗

USGS2019

Reproduction and reproductive strategies relevant to management of Whooping Cranes ex situ

Due to the small population size (∼400 birds) and continuing threats to wild Whooping Cranes ( Grus americana ), an ex situ (captive) population is maintained to contribute to the recovery of the species. The goals of the captive breeding program are to provide opportunity for research and birds for reintroduction. However, reproduction among captive birds is far from optimal. Specifically, whooping cranes maintained ex situ experience delayed onset of reproduction as well as low rates of egg production and egg fertility when compared to wild populations. To improve the contribution of the captive population to Whooping Crane recovery, there is a need to (1) advance the understanding about the mechanisms regulating ovarian function and egg production, especially the influence of males (their presence and behavior) on endocrine and reproductive behavior in females, as well as (2) identify the underlying cause(s) of poor reproduction in Whooping Cranes housed ex situ. In this chapter, we summarize current knowledge of Whooping Crane reproduction with a focus on egg production and fertility. We also discuss management strategies, such as environmental management, and reproductive technologies, including artificial insemination and sperm cryopreservation that may benefit captive reproduction, and finish with a discussion of future research priorities.

Book chapter↗

USGS2017

Time within reproductive season, but not age or inbreeding coefficient, influences seminal and sperm quality in the whooping crane (Grus americana)

All living whooping cranes ( Grus americana ) are descended from 16 or fewer birds that remained alive in the early 1940s, a bottleneck that puts the species at potential risk for inbreeding depression. Although AI is commonly used in the management of the captive population of this species, little is known about seminal traits or factors affecting sperm quality in the whooping crane. In the present study, semen samples were collected from 29 adult males (age 3–27 years) during the early (March), mid (April) and late (May) breeding season over 2 consecutive years. The effects of donor age, time within reproductive season and level of inbreeding on seminal characteristics were analysed using regression and information–theoretic model selection. Only time within reproductive season significantly affected seminal traits, with total numbers of spermatozoa and proportions of pleiomorphisms increasing across the season. We conclude that, even with a highly restricted number of founders, there is no discernible influence of inbreeding (at the levels described) on sperm output or quality. Furthermore, although there is variance in seminal quality, the whooping crane produces significant numbers of motile spermatozoa throughout the breeding season, similar to values reported for the greater sandhill crane ( Grus canadensis tabida ).

Reproduction, Fertility and Development↗

USGS2016

Female gonadal hormones and reproductive behaviors as key determinants of successful reproductive output of breeding whooping cranes ( Grus americana )

Reproductive success of endangered whooping cranes ( Grus americana ) maintained ex situ is poor. As part of an effort to identify potential causes of poor reproductive success in a captive colony, we used non-invasive endocrine monitoring to assess gonadal and adrenal steroids of bird pairs with various reproductive outcomes and evaluated the relationships of hormones and behaviors to reproductive performance. Overall, reproductively successful (i.e., egg laying) females had significantly higher mean estrogen levels but lower mean progestogen concentrations than did unsuccessful females. Other hormones, including glucocorticoids and androgens, were not significantly different between successful and unsuccessful individuals. Observations of specific behaviors such as unison calling, marching, and the number of copulation attempts, along with overall time spent performing reproductive behaviors, were significantly higher in successful pairs. Our findings indicate that overall reproductive performance of whooping crane pairs is linked to female gonadal hormone excretion and reproductive behaviors, but not to altered adrenal hormone production.

General and Comparative Endocrinology↗

USGS2014

Chromic and iron oxides as fecal markers to identify individual whooping cranes

The whooping crane ( Grus americana ) is listed as endangered under the IUCN Red List, the United States Endangered Species Act, and the Canadian Species at Risk Act (BirdLife International 2012, CWS and USFWS 2007). A major focus of recovery efforts for this endangered species is reintroduction to establish new populations (CWS and USFWS 2007). Captive populations are critical as a source of individuals for reintroduction efforts and also serve as insurance populations. Currently, there are a total of 157 whooping cranes held in captive breeding centers across North America, with the largest at the USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center (PWRC) in Laurel, Maryland. Birds produced in this facility are currently being released as part of efforts to establish the Eastern Migratory Population (EMP, Urbanek et al. 2005) and in an effort to establish a non-migratory population in Louisiana. In the past decade, PWRC has produced and released annually an average of 18 birds into the wild; however, reproductive performance of birds at this facility is lower than desired. PWRC had a 60% fertility rate for eggs laid from 2000 through 2010 (J. N. Chandler, personal communication, 2011). Furthermore, reproductive onset in this captive population appears to be delayed compared to wild populations. In wild populations, reproductive onset (production of sperm and eggs) normally occurs ~5 years of age in both males and females, ~2 years after initial pair formation occurs (Ellis et al., 1996), while some females in the EMP have laid eggs earlier than 5 years of age (Converse et al. 2011). However, PWRC females in some cases do not start to lay eggs until 7 years of age (Mirande et al. 1996). Currently, the PWRC population consists of a total of 74 whooping cranes, including 22 pairs. Six of these pairs (27%) are consistently infertile (i.e., no production of fertile eggs) and 3 other pairs (14%) have low fertility (30- 45% fertility in eggs laid), which is variable from year to year. Six pairs (27%) are recently formed and have not produced eggs, and so have unknown fertility. This leaves only 7 pairs (33%) which contribute maximally to PWRC’s chick production (J. N. Chandler, personal communication, 2011). Because of the challenges occurring within this captive colony, PWRC and Smithsonian National Zoo have initiated a joint research project to identify potential underlying causes of poor reproduction in captive whooping cranes.

Conference Paper↗