Institution
African Wildlife Foundation
Nonprofit•Washington D.C., District of Columbia, United States•
About: African Wildlife Foundation is a nonprofit organization based out in Washington D.C., District of Columbia, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Wildlife. The organization has 74 authors who have published 97 publications receiving 4749 citations. The organization is also known as: AWF.
Topics: Population, Wildlife, Wildlife conservation, Tourism, Bonobo
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
TL;DR: It is demonstrated that the possession of enhanced discriminatory abilities by the oldest individual in a group can influence the social knowledge of the group as a whole and this superior abilities for social discrimination may result in higher per capita reproductive success for female groups led by older individuals.
Abstract: Despite widespread interest in the evolution of social intelligence, little is known about how wild animals acquire and store information about social companions or whether individuals possessing enhanced social knowledge derive biological fitness benefits. Using playback experiments on African elephants (Loxodonta africana), we demonstrated that the possession of enhanced discriminatory abilities by the oldest individual in a group can influence the social knowledge of the group as a whole. These superior abilities for social discrimination may result in higher per capita reproductive success for female groups led by older individuals. Our findings imply that the removal of older, more experienced individuals, which are often targets for hunters because of their large size, could have serious consequences for endangered populations of advanced social mammals such as elephants and whales.
560 citations
••
University of Leeds1, Ghent University2, Royal Museum for Central Africa3, University College London4, Forestry Commission5, University of York6, Wildlife Conservation Society7, University of Kisangani8, University of Plymouth9, World Wide Fund for Nature10, Norwegian University of Life Sciences11, University of Yaoundé I12, Manchester Metropolitan University13, University of British Columbia14, Center for International Forestry Research15, Bioversity International16, University of Toronto17, University of Stirling18, Forestry Research Institute of Ghana19, Centre de coopération internationale en recherche agronomique pour le développement20, University of Montpellier21, Mbarara University of Science and Technology22, Marien Ngouabi University23, University of Buea24, Duke University25, University of Edinburgh26, Smithsonian Institution27, National Park Service28, University of Cambridge29, Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech30, University of Birmingham31, University of Exeter32, Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute33, Chinese Academy of Sciences34, Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh35, American Museum of Natural History36, African Wildlife Foundation37, University of Bristol38, University of Hong Kong39, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds40, Royal Botanic Gardens41, Environmental Change Institute42, University of the Sunshine Coast43, Fleming College44, Sokoine University of Agriculture45, University of Southampton46, University of Lincoln47, University of Florence48, University of Aberdeen49, Innovate UK50, National University of Singapore51, Washington State University Vancouver52, Yale University53, University of Nottingham54, Université libre de Bruxelles55, Florida International University56, Bangor University57, University of Liberia58
TL;DR: Overall, the uptake of carbon into Earth’s intact tropical forests peaked in the 1990s and independent observations indicating greater recent carbon uptake into the Northern Hemisphere landmass reinforce the conclusion that the intact tropical forest carbon sink has already peaked.
Abstract: Structurally intact tropical forests sequestered about half of the global terrestrial carbon uptake over the 1990s and early 2000s, removing about 15 per cent of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions. Climate-driven vegetation models typically predict that this tropical forest ‘carbon sink’ will continue for decades. Here we assess trends in the carbon sink using 244 structurally intact African tropical forests spanning 11 countries, compare them with 321 published plots from Amazonia and investigate the underlying drivers of the trends. The carbon sink in live aboveground biomass in intact African tropical forests has been stable for the three decades to 2015, at 0.66 tonnes of carbon per hectare per year (95 per cent confidence interval 0.53–0.79), in contrast to the long-term decline in Amazonian forests. Therefore the carbon sink responses of Earth’s two largest expanses of tropical forest have diverged. The difference is largely driven by carbon losses from tree mortality, with no detectable multi-decadal trend in Africa and a long-term increase in Amazonia. Both continents show increasing tree growth, consistent with the expected net effect of rising atmospheric carbon dioxide and air temperature. Despite the past stability of the African carbon sink, our most intensively monitored plots suggest a post-2010 increase in carbon losses, delayed compared to Amazonia, indicating asynchronous carbon sink saturation on the two continents. A statistical model including carbon dioxide, temperature, drought and forest dynamics accounts for the observed trends and indicates a long-term future decline in the African sink, whereas the Amazonian sink continues to weaken rapidly. Overall, the uptake of carbon into Earth’s intact tropical forests peaked in the 1990s. Given that the global terrestrial carbon sink is increasing in size, independent observations indicating greater recent carbon uptake into the Northern Hemisphere landmass reinforce our conclusion that the intact tropical forest carbon sink has already peaked. This saturation and ongoing decline of the tropical forest carbon sink has consequences for policies intended to stabilize Earth’s climate.
395 citations
••
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors investigated how prey preference, location and timing of livestock attacks contributed to the vulnerability of lions, leopards and spotted hyenas to retaliatory killing.
Abstract: The African lion Panthera leo, spotted hyena Crocuta crocuta and leopard Panthera pardus are all killed in retaliation for livestock predation, but each species suffers differently from these impacts due to differences in predatory behavior and cultural attitudes of pastoralists. Using detailed data on livestock predation in the Maasai steppe landscape in Northern Tanzania, I investigated how prey preference, location and timing of livestock attacks contributed to the vulnerability of lions, leopards and spotted hyenas to retaliatory killing. Lions mostly preyed upon adult cattle and donkeys. In contrast, hyenas and leopards primarily killed small stock (goat, sheep and calves) and dogs. Hyenas and leopards mostly attacked livestock at night, whereas lions often attacked grazing livestock during the daytime. These behaviors made lions the most vulnerable to direct retaliatory killing, although some villages specifically targeted hyenas with poison, and the cultural traditions of pastoralists also exacerbate the retaliatory killing of lions. I highlight the complex interactions of social (human) and ecological dimensions of livestock predation and retaliation against predators. Any conservation intervention should strive to address human–carnivore conflicts at the appropriate social scale.
338 citations
••
TL;DR: Female elephants appear to have unusually extensive networks of vocal recognition, which may prove to be typical of long-lived species that have both fluid social systems and the means for long-distance vocal communication.
314 citations
••
Wildlife Conservation Society1, University of Stirling2, Colorado State University3, Save the Elephants4, University of Amsterdam5, University of British Columbia6, World Wide Fund for Nature7, Jane Goodall Institute8, Zoological Society of San Diego9, Zoological Society of London10, University of Liège11, African Wildlife Foundation12
TL;DR: Analysis of the largest survey dataset ever assembled for forest elephants revealed that population size declined by ca.
Abstract: African forest elephants– taxonomically and functionally unique–are being poached at accelerating rates, but we lack rangewide information on the repercussions. Analysis of the largest survey dataset ever assembled for forest elephants (80 footsurveys; covering 13,000 km; 91,600 person-days of fieldwork) revealed that population size declined by ca. 62% between 2002–2011, and the taxon lost 30% of its geographical range. The population is now less than 10% of its potential size, occupying less than 25% of its potential range. High human population density, hunting intensity, absence of law enforcement, poor governance, and proximity to expanding infrastructure are the strongest predictors of decline. To save the remaining African forest elephants, illegal poaching for ivory and encroachment into core elephant habitat must be stopped. In addition, the international demand for ivory, which fuels illegal trade, must be dramatically reduced.
303 citations
Authors
Showing all 75 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Karen McComb | 36 | 62 | 5170 |
Terese B. Hart | 26 | 48 | 4973 |
Jef Dupain | 21 | 37 | 1222 |
Joyce H. Poole | 21 | 32 | 2070 |
Lucy Baker | 20 | 39 | 2406 |
Pritpal S. Soorae | 14 | 37 | 1300 |
Philip Muruthi | 13 | 27 | 1443 |
Ashley Vosper | 7 | 12 | 530 |
P. K. Muoria | 7 | 14 | 220 |
Joanna Elliott | 6 | 7 | 198 |
Soila Sayialel | 6 | 6 | 1207 |
H. Gichohi | 6 | 9 | 285 |
Eugene Rutagarama | 6 | 7 | 194 |
David Williams | 5 | 6 | 77 |
Noah Sitati | 5 | 12 | 76 |