T R A F F I C RhODIS® (RHINO DNA INDEX SYSTEM)
R

E

P

O

R

FEBRUARY 2017

T

Collaborative Action Planning Workshop
Proceedings
Ross McEwing, Nick Ahlers

TRAFFIC REPORTTRAFFIC, the wild­life trade monitoring net­work,is the leading non-governmental organization
working globally on trade in wild animals
and plants in the context of both biodiversity
conservation and sustainable development.
TRAFFIC is a strategic alliance of WWF and
IUCN.
Reprod­uction of material appearing in this reportrequires written­permission fromthe publisher.
The designations of geographical entities inthis publication, and the presentation of thematerial, do not imply the expression of any
opinion whatsoever on the part of TRAFFIC or
its supporting ­organizations con­cern­ing the legal
status of any country, territory, or area, or of its
authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its
frontiers or boundaries.
The views of the authors expressed in thispublication are those of the writers and do notnecessarily reflect those of TRAFFIC, WWF or
IUCN.
Published by TRAFFIC, Cambridge, UK.
© TRAFFIC 2017. Copyright of material
published in this report is vested in TRAFFIC.
ISBN no: 978-1-85850-417-9
UK Registered Charity No. 1076722
This report was made possible through thesupport provided by the Office of Forestry andBiodiversity, Bureau for Economic Growth,
Education and Environment, U.S. Agency forInternational Development, under the terms ofaward number AID-AID-EGEE-IO-13-00002 andWWF African Rhinoceros Programme.
The opinions expressed in this publication arethose of the author and do not necessarily reflect
the view of the U.S. Agency for International
Development or the WWF African Rhinoceros
Programme.
Suggested citation: McEwing, R. and Ahlers,N. (2017). RhODIS®(Rhino DNA index system).
Collaborative Action Planning Workshop
Proceedings. 30 pp. TRAFFIC, Cambridge, UK.
Front cover photograph and credit: Whiterhinoceros Ceratotherium simum adultand calf Southern Africa and East Africa.
© Martin Harvey / WWF

Recovering samples from rhinoceros horn for DNA­extraction and analysis(©Veterinary Genetics Labora­tory)

RhODIS®(RHINO DNA INDEX SYSTEM)
Collaborative Action Planning Workshop
Proceedings© Y.-J. REY-MILLET / WWF

Ross McEwing, Nick Ahlers

Black rhinoceros Diceros bicornis adult and young in East Africa

TABLE OF CONTENTSEXECUTIVE SUMMARYvi

INTRODUCTION

1

Meeting Objective

1

Meeting Participants

1

Meeting Agenda

1

Session 1. Presentations

1

Session 2. Biological sampling and data management

2

Session 3. Developing international collaborations to improve enforcement of illegal
rhinoceros horn trade through increased used of wildlife DNA forensic techniques

4

WORKSHOP ACTIVITIES

5

Why internationalise the RhODIS® system?

5

Requirements to internationalise the RhODIS® system and rhinoceros DNA forensics

7

RECOMMENDATIONS AND ESSENTIAL NEXT STEPS
Additional Comments

ANNEXES1011
12Annex 1: Workshop Programme12

Annex 2: Participants’ List

15

Annex 3: Current capacity of range and non-range states in relation to rhinoceros
DNA testing17

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
ARP..................................................................................................... African Rhinoceros Programme
CITES.........Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and FloraENFSI..................................................................... European Network of Forensic Science Institutes
GEF.............................................................................................................Global Environment Facility
ISFG.....................................................................................International Society of Forensic Genetics
IUCN................................................................. International Union for the Conservation of Nature
KPN........................................................................................................................ Kruger National Park
MOU.................................................................................................. Memorandum of Understanding
NGO.................................................................................................. Non Governmental Organization
SWFS.......................................................................................... Society for Wildlife Forensic Sciences
UNDP.................................................................................United Nations Development Programme
UNODC........................................................................... United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
USAID.............................................................United States Agency for International Development
VGL...................................................................................................... Veterinary Genetics Laboratory
WILDLIFE-TRAPS.........Wildlife Trafficking Response Assessment and Priority Setting Projectiv

LIST OF PARTNERS

Organizers
TRAFFIC - the wildlife trade monitoring network, is the leading non-governmental organization
working globally on trade in wild animals and plants in the context of both biodiversity
conservation and sustainable development. TRAFFIC is a strategic alliance of IUCN and WWF.
University of Pretoria - The Onderstepoort Veterinary Genetics Laboratory at the Faculty of
Veterinary Science, Onderstepoort is a service-driven and self-funding unit and is run on current
and general business principles. It fulfils various roles including an academic support role forpostgraduate students interested in applied veterinary genetics, research of genetic diseases invarious animals and development of tests and protocols that can be applied in the service division.
TRACE - Wildlife Forensics Network is a not for profit organization based in the United Kingdom
but working globally to promote the use of forensic science in wildlife crime prosecutions andwildlife trade monitoring through the delivery of training, capacity building and forensic testdevelopment projects.

Donors

USAID - The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) is responsible for the
majority of overseas development assistance from the United States government, including funding
for international conservation. USAID works to end extreme poverty and promote resilient,democratic societies while advancing security and prosperity for America and the world.
USAID support for the workshop came through the Wildlife Trafficking, Response, Assessment
and Priority Setting (Wildlife-TRAPS) Project. Implemented by TRAFFIC and IUCN, WildlifeTRAPS combats wildlife trafficking through analyses and actions designed to secure atransformation in the level of co-operation among the international community of stakeholders
impacted by illegal wildlife trade between Africa and Asia.
WWF - African Rhinoceros Programme (ARP) coordinates WWF’s investment in rhinoceros
conservation in Africa. It works closely with TRAFFIC, rhinoceros expert groups and WWF’svarious regional programmes and country offices. The ARP provides technical and leadershipsupport to ensure overall coordination of rhinoceros-related projects.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
In addition to the generous support from our donors and partners listed above, we would liketo express sincere thanks to Dr Joseph Okori of WWF for facilitating the workshop along withProfessor Alan Guthrie of the University of Pretoria and Cindy Harper from the Veterinary
Genetics Laboratory (VGL), to Robinah Kapawa from TRAFFIC and Claudette Van Zyl from VGL
for their administrative and logistics support and to Simon Robertson for providing the photosof the workshop and of the field visit. Additional thanks goes to the participants that provided
comments during the compilation of this report.

v

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Wildlife Trafficking Response Assessment, and Priority Setting (Wildlife-TRAPS) project,supported by USAID and implemented by TRAFFIC and IUCN, organised in conjunction with
the WWF African Rhinoceros Programme, University of Pretoria and TRACE Wildlife Forensics
Network, a Collaborative Action Planning (CAP) workshop in Pretoria, South Africa between the
18th and 24th June 2016.
The workshop took place at the Berg en Dal Rest Camp in the Kruger National Park and at theFaculty of Veterinary Science of the University of Pretoria at Onderstepoort, Pretoria. It provided
an opportunity for international scientists to interact and to experience the field conditions related
to rhinoceros crime in South Africa, including the impact of poaching, crime scene samplingstrategy and applied DNA testing methodologies. Delegates were introduced to the RhODIS®
programme and how this could potentially be transferred and utilised on an international
level. Each country presented their respective role and expertise in wildlife DNA forensic crime
investigative techniques and shared their experiences. From an international perspective,
consideration was given to the use of standardised forensic techniques for rhinoceros DNA testing.
This aspect centred on the perceived need to internationalise the RhODIS® programme and toextend cooperative forensic DNA investigation of rhinoceros crime beyond South Africa.
Consensus was reached as to the role DNA forensics plays in the fight against rhinoceros related
crimes and the requirement to better validate the RhODIS® system. Modalities to achieve thisrevolved around enhancing greater collaboration and cooperation between forensic laboratories
and DNA experts from around the world. Law enforcement officials stressed the need to promote
networking in regards to current challenges associated with rhinoceros wildlife crime highlighting
areas for improvement in future case management.
After the five days of workshop discussions the following recommendations were proposed:
1. The analysis from DNA profiling of rhinoceros horn needs to be better utilised as a law
enforcement tool. Currently, the results from analysing seized rhinoceros horn samples are notbeing disseminated effectively to inform trade data analysis or law enforcement investigations
outside of South Africa. This highlights a lack of engagement, or developed network, toproperly disseminate this information in the appropriate format for enforcement agencies ortrade monitoring agencies to actively utilise such data. Efforts should be made to ensure thatRhODIS® data is actively disseminated, where and when appropriate, to relevant monitoringand enforcement organisations and reports made documenting trade patterns to the CITES
Secretariat.
2. An internationally standardised DNA species identification test for all rhinoceros species needs
to be developed. The initial stage of identifying whether a suspected rhinoceros horn is actuallyfrom a rhinoceros, and if so, determining the rhinoceros species, so that the appropriate DNA
profiling panel can be used to ascertain if the profile matches a carcass from the database. A
mitochondrial cytochrome b gene test is the most useful and efforts should be made to develop
a standardised system.
3. The RhODIS DNA system for Black (Diceros bicornis) and White (Ceratotherium simum)
rhinoceros needs further validation. To ensure compliance with the legal systems in countries
other than South Africa, additional validation requirements need to be addressed. Efforts
should be made to rapidly publish the required validation data so the RhODIS® system can beutilised as widely as possible.
4. As a pilot study under a four year GEF-UNDP rhinoceros programme (2012 – 2016), an
Environmental Forensic Section at the South Africa Police was established to develop police
capacity for wildlife DNA forensic testing. A decision as to whether this section will bemaintained, and to what extent it will manage the DNA testing, logistics and dissemination ofrhinoceros DNA testing, is key to ongoing international testing and dissemination.

vi

5. A DNA profiling system for the Greater One Horned rhinoceros (Rhinoceros unicornis),also known as the Indian rhinoceros, needs to be developed. As poaching and illegal trade
is common in this species, and with a differing sentencing response in relation to animals
poached within and outside national parks, the development of a DNA based individual
identification technique could assist with enforcement operation in range countries of thisspecies.
6. A mechanism to expedite the international transfer of samples from CITES-listed species
for enforcement testing purposes needs to be developed. The inherent complexity of moving
samples internationally for enforcement testing purposes presents challenges when DNA
testing needs to be carried out rapidly. Efforts should be made to work with CITES to develop
mechanisms where certain sample types can be fast tracked through the CITES process for the
purposes of enhancing an illegal wildlife trade investigation.
7. Other forensic techniques to aid enforcement of the illegal rhinoceros horn trade requireevaluation. Although DNA can be a powerful technique in wildlife crime investigation thetechnique can also be narrow in scope. Additional forensic techniques that can provide more
information in relation to the perpetrators of crime should be investigated to add additional
tools for enforcement officers to address illegal rhinoceros horn trade.

vii

INTRODUCTION
Meeting Objective
The aim of the workshop was to promote enhanced collaboration and future cooperation
between laboratories that provide forensic DNA testing of rhinoceros and support wildlife crime
investigation in their respective countries and regions. Additionally, one of the initial category
winners of the USAID ‘Wildlife Crime Technology Challenge’, the Veterinary Genetics Laboratory(VGL) at the University of Pretoria was seeking mechanisms to internationalise the RhODIS® DNA
marker system for individual profiling of rhinoceros.

Meeting Participants
To enable as fulsome and inclusive discussions as possible, delegates with specific enforcement or
DNA technical expertise in this area were invited from rhinoceros range countries and non-range
countries identified as key transit or consumer countries for rhinoceros horn. Delegates attended
from South Africa, Kenya, Botswana, Namibia, India, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, Viet Nam,
Hong Kong, Korea, United Kingdom, Netherlands, Czech Republic and Australia, with additional
representatives from TRACE, TRAFFIC, UNODC, USAID, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, and
the World Bank. A full list of the participants is shown in Annex 1.

Figure 1: Meeting participant group photograph at Kruger National Park(©Veterinary Genetics Laboratory)

Meeting Agenda
The meeting was divided into three sessions over five days (Annex II):
1. Presentation session from relevant experts in the field.
2. DNA Sampling and Data Management Session.
3. Workshop session to identify international issues relating to wildlife DNA forensics.

Session 1. Presentations
The presentation session was split into two elements, the first being technical capacity presentations
from rhinoceros range countries and non-range countries highlighting their current wildlife
forensic DNA testing capabilities, and recent examples of rhinoceros-related casework where
relevant (Annex III); the second session provided enforcement and forensic experts the opportunity
to present on their work in this field.
Wildlife DNA Forensics laboratory capacity presentations were given by Kenya Wildlife Service,
Police Forensic Laboratory (Botswana), Ministry of Environment and Tourism (Namibia), Wildlife

TRAFFIC report: RhODIS® (Rhino DNA Index System) Collaborative Action Planning Workshop Proceedings1

Institute of India, Eijkman Institute (Indonesia), Department of Wildlife and National Parks(Malaysia), Department of National Parks (Thailand), Hong Kong University / WWF (Hong Kong),
National Institute of Biological Resources (Korea), Institute of Ecology & Biological Research(Vietnam), Charles University (Czech Republic), Australian Centre for Wildlife Genomics, and theNetherlands Forensic Institute.
Enforcement and rhinoceros DNA specific presentations were given by:
1. Nick Ahlers Project Leader of the Wildlife TRAPS Project, TRAFFIC. Background andoverview of international wildlife trade.
2. Professor Adrian Linacre, Flinders University, Australia. Background and overview of wildlife
DNA testing for forensic purposes and current trends.
3. Dr Cindy Harper, Director, Veterinary Genetics Laboratory, South Africa. RhODIS® andeRhODIS™.
4. Ms Frances Craigie, Chief Director Enforcement, Dept. Environmental Affairs. CITES issues
and rhinoceros horn.
5. Dr Lucy Webster, National Wildlife DNA Forensic Laboratory, SASA, UK The use ofrhinoceros DNA profiling in Europe to prevent zoo and rhinoceros horn thefts.
6. Dr Greta Frankham, Australian Centre for Wildlife Genomics. The development of rapid
rhinoceros DNA species ID and its application in Vietnam.
7. Dr Ross McEwing, Director, TRACE Wildlife Forensics Network, UK. The challenges andbenefits of international wildlife forensic cooperation.

Session 2. Biological sampling and data management
Session 2 was divided into two components. The first component was a demonstration of theprocedures and protocols developed by South African enforcement agencies for the collectionof biological samples from stockpiled rhinoceros horn. The sampling was undertaken using the
bespoke software Android App eRhODIS® developed by the Veterinary Genetics Laboratory which
provides a basis for instruction, standard protocol for collection, and a platform for recording

Figure 2: Demonstration of rhinoceros
stockpile procedures and theeRhODIS®App (©Simon Robertson)

2

TRAFFIC report: RhODIS® (Rhino DNA Index System) Collaborative Action Planning Workshop Proceedings

contemporaneously, metadata from a sample in a secure way to ensure the integrity of thebiological samples as evidence, collected with a full chain of custody.
All international laboratory delegates were then provided with an opportunity, under direction,
to take a sample from rhinoceros horn following the methodology developed by the Veterinary
Genetics Laboratory; a practical element that could mimic sampling in their own country fromseizures of suspected rhinoceros horn.
The second component for this session focused on collecting suitable biological samples from thefield from a poached rhinoceros carcass. Given the frequency of rhinoceros poaching in Kruger
National Park (an average of just under 3 animals per day) a suitable carcass (from a double
rhinoceros poaching incident) was identified and the area was secured and forensically processedin advance to give all meeting delegates access and allow them to fully experience the challengesof the field. International laboratory delegates were again given the opportunity to carry out the
sampling from the rhinoceros carcass and use the eRhODIS® Forensic App developed to be usedin conjunction with DNA sampling kits to ensure the continuity of the evidence from a legal
perspective. eRhODIS™ was developed as an adjunct for RhODIS® to aid in the collection of samples
and information relevant to the RhODIS® project and is already in use in Namibia and Kenya.

Figure 3: Poached rhinoceros briefing(©Simon Robertson)

Figure 4: One of the poached rhinos(©Simon Robertson)

Figure 5: Tissue sample from rhinoceros
carcass (©Simon Robertson)

Figure 6: Ensuring chain of custody(©Simon Robertson)

TRAFFIC report: RhODIS® (Rhino DNA Index System) Collaborative Action Planning Workshop Proceedings

3Session 3. Developing international collaborations toimprove enforcement of illegal rhinoceros horn tradethrough increased used of wildlife DNA forensic
techniques
Background to the RhODIS® system.
RhODIS® is based on a set of DNA markers (microsatellites) originally developed for ecologicalresearch purposes1 that, when combined, produce a DNA ‘profile’ from an individual. The
uniqueness of that DNA profile, i.e. the likelihood that two individual DNA profiles are identical,
is determined by the frequency of each variant (allele) of a DNA marker in a ‘population’ with thefrequency of variants being established by DNA profiling a sufficient number of individuals fromthat ‘population’ which are expected to represent the population as a whole. The RhODIS® system
is similar to other DNA profiling systems for individual identification used in a forensic context forother species2.
RhODIS® can therefore be powerful at identifying ‘linkages’ between any two or more rhinoceros
samples from an investigation, e.g. rhinoceros horn and an animal carcass; blood stained clothing
and an animal carcass etc., by means of DNA profiling the biological samples and evaluating the
likelihood that those biological samples are derived from the same individual.
The RhODIS® system incorporates a chain of custody procedure beginning at the scene of a crime,
or evidence recovery point, and ending with a laboratory report identifying linkages between
evidence items when appropriate.
Only by ensuring that a stringent chain of evidence exists, a robust set of DNA markers are
utilised and a balanced interpretation of the data is reported, should DNA evidence be used withconfidence in a legal framework.
The RhODIS® system has been used to generate evidence for prosecutions in South Africa that have
led to convictions and custodial sentences. However, data on the number of cases where the system
has been used is currently lacking; a not uncommon problem in the wildlife forensic field due to a
disconnect between the prosecution department and laboratory service provider. This disconnect
is often compounded when the service provider is not an agency of the government leading theinvestigation.

1 C.A. Scott, Microsatellite variability in four contemporary rhinoceros species: implications for conservation, MSc Dis-

sertation, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada, 2008.
J. Cunningham, E.H. Harley, C. O’Ryan, Isolation and characterization of microsatellite loci in Black rhinoceros (Diceros
bicornis) Electrophoresis, 20 (1999), pp. 1778–1780.
S.M. Brown, B.A. Houlden, Isolation and characterization of microsatellite markers in the Black rhinoceros (Diceros bicornis) Mol. Ecol., 8 (1999), pp. 1559–1561.
A. Florescu, J.A. Davila, C. Scott, P. Fernando, K. Kellner, J.C. Morales, D. Melnick, P.T. Boag, P. Van Coeverden De Groot,
Polymorphic microsatellites in White rhinoceros Mol. Ecol. Notes, 3 (2003), pp. 344–345.
C. Scott, T. Foose, J.C. Morales, P. Fernando, D.J. Melnick, P.T. Boag, J.A. Davila, P.J. Van Coeverden De Groot, Optimization of novel polymorphic microsatellites in the endangered Sumatran rhinoceros (Dicerorhinus sumatrensis) Mol. Ecol.
Notes, 4 (2004), pp. 194–196.
L. Nielsen, D. Meehan-Meola, A. Kilbourn, A. Alcivar-Warren, Characterization of microsatellite loci in the Black rhinoceros (Diceros bicornis) and White rhinoceros (Ceratotherium simum): their use for cross-species amplification anddifferentiation between the two species Conserv. Gen., 9 (2008), pp. 239–242.
2 N. Dawnay, R. Ogden, R.S. Thorpe, L.C. Pope, D.A. Dawson, R. McEwing, A forensic STR profiling system for the Eurasian badger: a framework for developing profiling systems for wildlife species Forensic Sci. Int. Genet., 2 (2008), pp. 47–53.

4

TRAFFIC report: RhODIS® (Rhino DNA Index System) Collaborative Action Planning Workshop Proceedings

WORKSHOP ACTIVITIES
Why internationalise the RhODIS® system?
The concept of internationalization of the RhODIS® system involves identifying other countries
around the world that could utilise the markers, protocols and systems developed by the Veterinary
Genetics Laboratory with the aim of standardising testing and better enforcing the illegal trade inrhinoceros horns.
Five possible drivers for internationalising the RhODIS® system were identified and discussed:•

Transit / consumer countries carrying out rhinoceros horn seizures provide additional
evidence-based support for prosecutions back in South Africa.

In this scenario, countries would use the RhODIS® system to generate and provide DNA profile
data from seized rhinoceros horns to South Africa, assuming this data could be legally accepted. As
the seizure country would need to commit resources to enable this DNA profiling, such a scenario
relies on an altruistic relationship which would in reality be difficult to implement and maintain.
Additionally, it would seem unlikely that South Africa would try and implement extradition of
those suspects involved in countries where seizures have taken place, particularly as enforcement
actions should already be initiated in the country of seizure in relation to illegal trade offences.
•

Transit / consumer countries implementing rhinoceros horn seizures to provide evidence tosupport prosecutions in their own country.

In this scenario, an additional evidence component would be produced that allowed a seizedrhinoceros horn to be DNA profiled in another country, and where that DNA profile ‘matched’
a poaching carcass in a central database, this evidence would add weight to a prosecution in
the country of seizure. Such a scenario would be effective in Black and White rhinoceros range
countries where it would be analogous to the current South African system. However outside ofBlack and White range countries, such individual matching evidence is unnecessary and of little
relevance to a prosecution where the prosecution aim is simply the identification of an illegally
traded species.
•

Agencies involved in monitoring and investigating transnational criminal networks.

In this scenario, DNA profiles from seized rhinoceros horns and data linking to poachedindividuals would be shared quickly with international organisations with a mandate to collectevidence of transnational illegal trade. Such data would then be used to profile criminal networks
and initiate operations to disrupt the illegal trade. While there was general consensus that such adriver was potentially one of the most important uses of DNA profiling, it was acknowledged that,
other than within the NGO community, such as TRAFFIC monitoring the illegal trade, there is nocentral coordination of law enforcement activities from a transnational perspective to incorporate
this data at this time.
•

Stockpile / seized rhinoceros horn management and auditing

In this scenario, DNA profiling is used by countries to monitor their seized rhinoceros horn or any
stockpiles or other collections, e.g. museums / zoos, they hold to ensure those specimens are notlaundered into the illegal trade. It was agreed that DNA registration systems for rhinoceros horn,similar to the system used in South Africa (Presentation 4) or Europe (Presentation 5) were useful
but likely only where large collections of rhinoceros horn justify implementation.

TRAFFIC report: RhODIS® (Rhino DNA Index System) Collaborative Action Planning Workshop Proceedings5•For the provision of data on trade routes.

In this scenario, DNA profiling from seized rhinoceros horns provides data, where it was able to belinked to a poached carcass, on the trade routes for illegal shipments of rhinoceros horn. Althoughsuch a system is currently encouraged through CITES, no data has been presented on trade routes
from this process to date.
Therefore, as a tool for law enforcement, the internationalization of the current RhODIS® system
would principally be to address national law enforcement within Black and White rhinoceros
range countries outside South Africa, and as a tool for monitoring trade routes of illegal rhinoceros
horn. Aspirationally, the system should be used to add information to enhance the profiling,and subsequent enforcement action, of individuals and criminal networks involved in the illegal
rhinoceros horn trade, assuming central coordination of this activity could be initiated. A new
DNA profiling system developed for the Greater One Horned rhinoceros, following the design of
the RhODIS® system, would also be beneficial.
One important consideration is the cost / benefit of internationalizing the RhODIS® system, basedon the above law enforcement drivers, against the current system where biological samples are sent
to South Africa for DNA profiling. From 2009 until March 2014 4, only 10 rhinoceros horns wereseized across eight non-range countries (Europe and USA); 61 rhinoceros horns across six transit/
consumer countries in Asia (>50% in China, >26% Vietnam); and 77 rhinoceros horns seized inrange countries (>68% from South Africa).
With such low numbers of individual seizures across countries, the argument for resourcing,developing capacity and maintaining the RhODIS® system in countries other than South Africa
does not seem to be strong. Developing the RhODIS® system in China and Vietnam, both
recognised transit and consumer countries for rhinoceros horn, could be justified. However, thelack of any identified central DNA testing laboratory in China (although DNA testing seems to be
progressing in Hong Kong) and the limited capacity of the current Government mandated DNA
testing laboratory in Vietnam limits implementation in these countries.
The development of a regional DNA testing facility 5 which could implement the RhODIS® system
for neighbouring countries in a region lacking capacity, for example either Thailand or Malaysia
acting as a testing hub in South-east Asia, could be an option. However, the same administrative
burden with respect to transnational movement of samples currently exists whether samples aresent regionally or internationally to South Africa.
A simple solution to the drive for internationalization of the RhODIS® system could be theenhancement of the current DNA profiling in South Africa for rhinoceros, and its establishment
as a global hub. Despite being the simplest and most cost-effective approach, it would require
collaborative and coordinated engagement from South Africa, ensuring: i. that DNA testing was
carried out to acceptable international standards; ii. that mechanisms for international sample
transfer were simplified to expedite testing; and iii. that access to background DNA frequency
data and carcass DNA profile data was accessible to, and therefore able to be interpreted by third
country experts for legal presentation.
4 T. Milliken, Illegal trade in ivory and rhinoceros horn: an assessment report to improve law enforcement under the

Wildlife TRAPS Project (2014) USAID and TRAFFIC.
5 R. Ogden, Forensic science, genetics and wildlife biology: getting the right mix for a wildlife DNA forensics lab. Forensic
Sci. Med. Pathology, 6(3) (2010): 172-179.

6

TRAFFIC report: RhODIS® (Rhino DNA Index System) Collaborative Action Planning Workshop Proceedings

Requirements to internationalise the RhODIS® system
and rhinoceros DNA forensics
The current RhODIS® system is specifically designed to DNA profile Black and White rhinoceros
as it was established in South Africa, a range country for both species. However, at an international
level, the illegal trade in rhinoceros horn also extends to Greater One-Horned rhinoceros andhistorically Javan (Rhinoceros sondaicus) and Sumatran (Dicerorhinus sumatrensis) rhinoceros
which may still be traded illegally at a very low level. RhODIS® is able to distinguish Black fromWhite rhinoceros based on fixed allelic differences but unable to distinguish other rhinoceros
species. There was general agreement during the meeting that the development of a standardised
DNA species identification test was the priority need from the international community where therequirement in any investigation is to determine whether a product is of rhinoceros origin, and to
identify the species of rhinoceros to ascertain the likelihood of legality or otherwise. The consensus
was that such a test should be a mitochondrial DNA Cytochrome b gene test, where the primers
selected amplify a short fragment which could provide sufficient phylogenetic resolution while
ensuring amplification from old material where the DNA would likely be fragmented. Work by
the Australia Museums Laboratory (Presentation 6) highlighted their research in developing andtesting new short fragment cytochrome b primer combinations specifically for rhinoceros species
identification following DNA sequencing. It was agreed that, subject to some additional datarequirements, these new primers should form the basis of a standardised species identification testfor rhinoceros material.
The RhODIS® system has been used in legal cases in South Africa and therefore fulfils the legal
requirements of that country. However, there were concerns raised at the workshop that the levelof DNA marker validation was not sufficiently stringent for some countries to utilise this system
as legal evidence (Presentation 4 & 5). It was agreed to develop a validation plan for RhODIS® thatwould fulfil the highest level of validation requirements so no country would have any concerns
over the use of the system. This validation plan would address all recommendations developedby the Society for Wildlife Forensics (SWFS) 6, European Network of Forensic Science Institutes(ENFSI) 7 and the International Society of Forensic Genetics (ISFG) 8.
The issue of DNA quality was raised as a range of different extraction techniques for rhinoceros
horn DNA were utilised by the international scientific delegates to the meeting. It was agreed thatan example, but not obligatory, protocol should be developed to suggest the best procedure forextracting high yield, high quantity DNA from rhinoceros horn. Cost and availability of certain
DNA extraction kits were the limiting factor in agreeing to develop a Standard Operating Protocol
specifically for DNA extraction. Additional DNA extraction methodologies are currently being
tested to evaluate their suitability with rhinoceros horn using chelex extractions (Presentation 6)
and direct PCR (Presentation 2).
Assessing the quality of the DNA was deemed of high importance if DNA samples were to be sent
to other laboratories around the world for DNA profiling. DNA profiling, unlike mtDNA genesequencing, requires a higher yield of DNA to ensure successful and correct genotyping. Going to
the effort of sending DNA samples without prior evaluation of the quality and quantity of DNA

6 SWGWILD Standards and Guidelines (Version 2.0-Accepted by SWGWILD December 19, 2012).
7 Best Practice Manual for the Application of Molecular Methods for the Forensic Examination of Non-Human BiologicalTraces. ENFSI-BPM-APS-01 Version 01 (2015).
8 Linacre, A., Gusmão, L., Hecht, W., Hellmann, A.P., Mayr, W.R. ISFG: Recommendations regarding the use of non-human (animal) DNA in forensic genetic investigations. Forensic Sci. Int.: Genet. 2011;5:501–505.

TRAFFIC report: RhODIS® (Rhino DNA Index System) Collaborative Action Planning Workshop Proceedings

7being sent was considered pointless. A basic real-time PCR test was suggested as the simplest andmost cost-effective DNA quality assessment method where DNA samples are amplified using arhinoceros specific nuclear DNA target longer than the largest DNA profiling marker, and are
run in parallel to an upper level concentration control sample and a lower level concentration
control sample. Successful amplification of a DNA sample being tested, assessed by SYBR detection
and subsequent melt curve product assessment as falling between those two controls, provides
confidence that the DNA sample is of sufficient quality and quantity to undergo DNA profiling.
A similar DNA quality assessment system developed for forest elephants was discussed earlier(Presentation 7).
The movement of biological samples between countries for the purposes of DNA testing was
regarded as one of the main constraints to effective international collaborative approaches to
DNA testing. There are two key issues that require addressing: the hazardous nature of biologicalsamples; and the administrative burdens of CITES permitting.
Biological samples contain pathogens that can endanger human or animal health and therefore theinternational movements of biological material are restricted and closely controlled. For rhinoceros
tissue or horn samples, such biological material would be classed as a ‘Diagnostic Specimen’by the International Air Transporters Association (IATA) and require specific packaging andlabelling. Individual countries have their own legislation and permitting procedures for allowing
the importation of animal products. Purified, and treated, DNA extracts are likely to be easier totransport internationally, and more likely to be granted an import permit, if even required. DNA islikely to have been extracted from seized suspected rhino horn as part of the identification process,therefore assuming that the DNA extract meets the quality control criteria suggested above, itwould be more appropriate to prioritise the transfer of DNA samples over rhinoceros horn samples,particularly when issues of lost rhinoceros horn samples during transportation had alreadybeen raised (Presentation 7). For South Africa, a certified master veterinary import permit must
accompany all rhinoceros biological samples being sent in addition to a health certificate completed
by the veterinary authority of the sending country.
CITES permits are required for all biological material, with the exception of faecal / urine samples,from all five extant rhinoceros species in respect to international transfer. Therefore, for thetransfer of a single rhinoceros horn / DNA sample, the following applications and permits may berequired: draft CITES import permit, CITES export permit, CITES import permit — assuming thesample is transferred directly between only two countries. The differences between the efficiency
of different CITES Management and Scientific Authorities around the world is significant, and thetime period to complete a permitting process for a sample transfer between two countries can beconsiderable (e.g. months) and therefore impede any active enforcement opportunities based on the
results of DNA testing.
To alleviate the administrative and permitting burden on the scientific research community,
CITES has implemented a ‘Scientific Institution Status’ where specific sample types of CITES-listed
species from specific locations can be moved internationally without CITES import and export
permits where both parties are registered with CITES, therefore expediting scientific research.
However, the current CITES text covering this exemption is overly prescriptive of the specimensthat can be transferred 9. While some countries, e.g. United Kingdom, after lobbying (Presentation7), have taken a more pragmatic view of this text 10, most countries still adhere strictly to the text as
9 Resolution Conf. 11.15 (Rev. CoP12).
10 General Guidance Note for The Use of Labels for Non-Commercial Loans by Scientific Institutions, Organisations orIndividuals. GN16 April (2008) United Kingdom Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA).

8

TRAFFIC report: RhODIS® (Rhino DNA Index System) Collaborative Action Planning Workshop Proceedingswritten and therefore this system is not particularly suitable for the transfer of enforcement related
samples.
There has been an increasing reliance on forensic techniques to support enforcement andmonitoring of illegal wildlife trade, but for the information produced by those tests to be relevant,it needs to be produced in a timely manner as dictated by the national laws in the country of
seizure (or source country). The current systems that allow for the transfer of biological samples
from CITES-listed species for forensic testing are often not effective for these time sensitive
requirements.
Such sample transfers need to be rapid, auditable and reportable to CITES and perhaps be based on
the transfer of samples between CITES registered ‘Forensic Testing Laboratories’ in a similar way to
the Scientific Institution Status for academic researchers.
The requirement for rapid dissemination of results from testing was highlighted as an issue as there
seemed to be a delay in getting access to rhinoceros horn samples to test, additionally there wasan additional delay, or lack of clear protocol, in reporting the results of testing back to the country
providing the samples.
This was highlighted (Presentation 7) in a case where Malaysia had provided 13 seized rhinoceros
horn samples for DNA profiling to South Africa yet, despite the results matching White rhinoceros
poached in South Africa, this information had not been reported back to the relevant Malaysian
Government Authorities, despite the data being shared amongst African enforcement and NGO
organisations. This lack of reporting is a key issue and shows a disconnect between the expectationsof countries providing samples for testing, and resourcing that provision, and the current DNA
testing laboratory in South Africa, that if not addressed, is likely to result in a lack of commitment
or motivation to send future samples for testing.
There was a discussion around the reporting format of DNA profiling with some countries ina position to accept forensic reports generated by other countries, but most countries not able
to accept the report as formal evidence in a prosecution. A case was highlighted back in 2011
(Presentation 7) where the DNA profiling of two White rhinoceros samples was undertaken in
South Africa at the VGL laboratory, however the analysis of the results and evaluation of thesubsequent ‘match’ was undertaken in the prosecuting country with a successful outcome. The
need to explore the possibilities and options for international acceptance of results and data
produced in other countries is key to the internationalization of RhODIS® as a law enforcement tool
for prosecution.
Central to the acceptance of reports as evidence in a prosecution from an international perspective
was the general agreement that all laboratories undertaking forensic DNA testing should be
operating and be compliant with, but preferably accredited by, a Quality Assurance programme, forexample ISO17025. Three of the wildlife forensic laboratories present at the meeting were accredited
as ISO17025-compliant, and it was recommended that all laboratories need to be working toward
these standards to ensure their laboratory and work are managed in a professional and quality
assured way.
Although the majority of discussions focused around Black and White rhinoceros, there was ageneral consensus that a DNA profiling system is required for Greater One-Horned rhinoceros andthat the development of such a system should harness the positive processes and tools developedby the RhODIS® system. It should also take into account the discussions from this workshop
identifying some of the processes that should be addressed to make any DNA profiling system
for Greater One-Horned rhinoceros a more comprehensive and internationally accepted test, an
important consideration given the multiple range countries for this species.
TRAFFIC report: RhODIS® (Rhino DNA Index System) Collaborative Action Planning Workshop Proceedings

9

RECOMMENDATIONS AND ESSENTIAL NEXT STEPSAll of the delegates attending the workshop agreed that the illegal trade, historical or present, inrhinoceros horn was a significant threat to the long-term survival of all five rhinoceros species.
Supporting enforcement action through wildlife forensic testing was recognised as a usefulcontribution to tackling the illegal trade but the following recommendations were identified asnecessary actions to ensure best use of wildlife forensic techniques.
1. The analysis from DNA profiling of rhinoceros horn needs to be better utilised as a law
enforcement tool. Currently, the results from analysing seized rhinoceros horn samples are notbeing disseminated effectively to inform trade data analysis or law enforcement investigations
outside of South Africa. This highlights a lack of engagement, or developed network, toproperly disseminate this information in the appropriate format for enforcement agencies ortrade monitoring agencies to actively utilise such data. Efforts should be made to ensure thatRhODIS® data is actively disseminated, where and when appropriate, to relevant monitoringand enforcement organisations and reports made documenting trade patterns to the CITES
Secretariat.
2. An internationally standardised DNA species identification test for all rhinoceros species needs
to be developed. The initial stage of identifying whether a suspected rhinoceros horn is actuallyfrom a rhinoceros, and if so, determining the rhinoceros species, so that the appropriate DNA
profiling panel can be used to ascertain if the profile matches a carcass from the database. A
mitochondrial cytochrome b gene test is the most useful and efforts should be made to develop
a standardised system.
3. The RhODIS DNA system for Black and White rhinoceros needs further validation. To ensurecompliance with the legal systems in countries other than South Africa, additional validation
requirements need to be addressed. Efforts should be made to rapidly publish the required
validation data so the RhODIS® system can be utilised as widely as possible.
4. As a pilot study under a four year GEF-UNDP rhinoceros programme (2012 – 2016), an
Environmental Forensic Section at the South Africa Police was established to develop police
capacity for wildlife DNA forensic testing. A decision as to whether this section will bemaintained, and to what extent it will manage the DNA testing, logistics and dissemination ofrhinoceros DNA testing, is key to ongoing international testing and dissemination.
5. A DNA profiling system for the Greater One Horned rhinoceros, also known as the Indianrhinoceros, needs to be developed. As poaching and illegal trade is common in this species,
and with a differing sentencing response in relation to animals poached within and outside
national parks, the development of a DNA based individual identification technique could
assist with enforcement operation in range countries of this species.
6. A mechanism to expedite the international transfer of samples from CITES-listed species
for enforcement testing purposes needs to be developed. The inherent complexity of moving
samples internationally for enforcement testing purposes presents challenges when DNA
testing needs to be carried out rapidly. Efforts should be made to work with CITES to develop
mechanisms where certain sample types can be fast tracked through the CITES process for the
purposes of enhancing an illegal wildlife trade investigation.
7. Other forensic techniques to aid enforcement of the illegal rhinoceros horn trade requireevaluation. Although DNA can be a powerful technique in wildlife crime investigation thetechnique can also be narrow in scope. Additional forensic techniques that can provide more
information in relation to the perpetrators of crime should be investigated to add additional
tools for enforcement officers to address illegal rhinoceros horn trade.

TRAFFIC report: RhODIS® (Rhino DNA Index System) Collaborative Action Planning Workshop Proceedings

10Additional Comments
Three additional issues were raised at the meeting to further help law enforcement efforts to combat
illegal trade in rhinoceros horn.
1. The development of a photographic guide to rhinoceros horn to aid with identification fromvery small fragments of horn. Such small fragments have been used to produce full DNA
profiles by VGL but there was difficulty in separating rhinoceros horn fragments from other,possibly inhibiting, organic matter.
2. While DNA isolated from rhinoceros horn is a powerful technique, additional forensic
techniques such as human fingerprint recovery and human touch DNA should not be ignored
as they may also provide valuable information on persons involved in the illegal trade.
3. The commercial production of synthetic rhinoceros horn was raised as a concern as there
remains uncertainty as to the production methods, or how such products could be separated
from real rhinoceros horn, and therefore whether these products could cause law enforcement
identification challenges.

11

TRAFFIC report: RhODIS® (Rhino DNA Index System) Collaborative Action Planning Workshop Proceedings

ANNEXES
Annex 1: Workshop ProgrammeTime
Throughout Day
Before 10:00
Day 1
10:00 – 15:00
15:00 – 16:00
16:00 – 16:30
16:30 – 20:30
Day 2
07:30 – 08:30
08:30 – 08:45
08:45 – 09:05
09:05 – 09:45
09:45 – 10:00
10:00 – 10:15
10:15 – 12:30
12:30 – 13:30
13:30 – 14:00
14:00 – 14:40
14:40 – 15:00
15:00 – 15:25
15:25 – 15:40
15:40 – 16:00

Activity
Arrival of delegates
Arrival of remaining delegates
Travel to Kruger National Park (KNP) by Road and arrival at Berg en
Dal Camp
Break
Welcome and Introductions – Prof Alan GuthrieGame Drive followed by Welcome Braai
Breakfast
Welcome and Overview of Workshop Agenda - Dr Joseph Okori
Background and overview of International Wildlife Trade - Nick Ahlers- TRAFFIC
Background and overview of wildlife DNA testing for forensic purposes and current trends - Prof Adrian Linacre
Delegate Laboratory Presentations
Coffee Break
Delegate Laboratory Presentations Continued
Lunch
Delegate Laboratory Presentations Continued
RhODIS®and eRhODIS™ - Cindy Harper
CITES issues and rhinoceros horn - Frances Craigie
The use of rhinoceros DNA profiling in Europe to prevent zoo andrhinoceros horn thefts. - Dr Lucy Webster
Tea Break

16:20 – 16:35

Presentation on the development of rapid rhinoceros DNA species ID
and its application in Vietnam. - Dr Greta Frankham
The challenges and benefits of international wildlife forensic cooperation. - Dr Ross McEwing
Break

16:35 – 18:00

Possible Game Drive

19:00

Dinner

16:00 – 16:20

Day 3
06:30 – 08:30

Travel to Skukuza Camp, KNP
08:30 - 09:30
Short background to rhinoceros poaching problem, efforts and strategy in KNP and KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) and Asia (India and Nepal
Representatives

TRAFFIC report: RhODIS® (Rhino DNA Index System) Collaborative Action Planning Workshop Proceedings

12

Time
09:30 – 14:00
14:00 – 15:00

Activity
Visit a rhinoceros carcass and field sampling for DNA, use of samplingkits
Break/ Late Lunch at Skukuza Camp

15:00 – 17:00

Travel back to Berg en Dal Camp

19:00

DinnerDay 4
07:30 – 08:30

Breakfast

08:30- 16:00

Travel back to Pretoria with stop at Pilgrims Rest (TBD)

16:00 – 17:00
17:00 – 17:30

Settle into accommodation at the Visiting Scientists Apartments, University of Pretoria
Introduce workshop items to be discussed on Thursday

19:00

DinnerDay 5
07:30 – 09:00

Breakfast

09:00 – 09:15

Overview of the day and technical working groups

09:15 – 10:00(includes plenary
feedback session)

10:45 – 11:15

Activity 1: Establish requirements DNA support for domestic PROSECUTION – relating to rhinoceros samples
Breakout groups –a.
Rhinoceros range statesb.
Non range states
Activity 2: Do we as wildlife DNA forensic scientists have sufficiently
robust DNA assays to address PROSECUTION questions.
Breakout groups –a.
All DNA technical delegates
Activity 3: Do we as monitoring / intelligence gathering agencies haverequirements to capture DNA data from rhinoceros material?
Breakout groups –a.
All non DNA technical delegates
Plenary feedback from Activity 2 & 3

11:15 – 11:45

Coffee Break

11:45 – 12:30

12:30 – 13:30

Plenary Activity 4. What are the barriers for countries in providing
specific DNA data from seizures to monitoring / intelligence gathering
agencies?
Lunch

13:30 – 15:00
Plenary
15:00 – 15:15

Activity 5: What are the work packages to be developed resulting fromthe workshop?
Tea Break

15:15 – 16:15
Plenary
16:15 – 16:30

Activity 6: Do these work packages align with existing donor funding/ activities
Key Summaries from Group Discussions and Next Steps

16:30 – 18:30

Tour of RhODIS Lab- suggestion Southeast Asia delegates go first

19:00

Dinner

10:00 – 10:45

10:00 – 10:45

13

TRAFFIC report: RhODIS® (Rhino DNA Index System) Collaborative Action Planning Workshop Proceedings

Time
Day 6

Activity

07:30 – 09:00

Breakfast

09:00 – 12:00

Remaining delegates tour RhODIS lab
Southeast Asia Delegates take tour of Professor Antoinette’s lab at Pretoria Zoo for discussion on MOU for sharing DNA sequence data
Lunch

12:00 – 13:00
Afternoon/
Evening

Delegates depart

TRAFFIC report: RhODIS® (Rhino DNA Index System) Collaborative Action Planning Workshop Proceedings14Annex 2: Participants’ List
Name
Jorge Rios
Simon Robertson
Ed Newcomer

Country
USA
USA/UK
Botswana

Institution
UNODC
WORK BANK GROUPUS Fish and Wildlife

Major Steve Roets

South Africa

Col Johan Jooste

South Africa

Lt Francois Vemaak

South Africa

Ken ChanVicki Sheng
Jumin Jun

Hong Kong
Hong Kong
Korea

Kyle Ewart

Australia

Dr Greta Frankham

Australia

Dr Phuong Trang
Dr The Dang tat
Jessica Wiludjaja
Dr Kanitia Ovouthan

VietnamVietnamIndonesia
ThailandMs Kitichaya Penchart

ThailandDr Jeffrine Rovie

Malaysia

Frankie Sitam

Malaysia

Dr Magora
Mr Waale
Lucy Webster
Moses Otiende

Botswana
Botswana
United Kingdom
Kenya

South African Police
Services
South African Police
Services
South African Police
Services
WWF Hong Kong
Hong Kong University
Wildlife Genetic Resources
CentreAustralian Centre for
Wildlife Genomics
Australian Centre for
Wildlife Genomics
IEBR CITES SA
IEBR CITES SA
Eijkman InstituteDepartment of National
Parks, Thailand
Department of National
Parks, Thailand
Department of Wildlife andNational Parks, Malaysia
Department of Wildlife andNational Parks, Malaysia
Botswana Police Service

Linus Kariuki
Prof George Owiti

Kenya
Kenya

Prof Adrian Linacre
Dr Cindy Harper
Prof. Alan Guthrie

Australia
South Africa
South Africa

15

Scottish Agriculture (SASA)
Kenya Wildlife Services
Forensic Laboratory
Kenya Wildlife Services
University of NairobiFaculty of Veterinary
Medicine
Flinders University Australia
University of Pretoria
University of Pretoria

TRAFFIC report: RhODIS® (Rhino DNA Index System) Collaborative Action Planning Workshop Proceedings

Name
Dr Samrat Mondol
Nick Ahlers
Dr Ross McEwing

Country
India
South Africa
United Kingdom

Dr Richard Emslie

South Africa

Rod Potter
Dr Joseph Okori

South Africa
South Africa

Pavla Rihova

CZECH REPUBLICDr Daniel Vanek

CZECH REPUBLIC

Dr Irene Krupper

Netherlands

Frances Craigie

South Africa

Sonja De Klerk

South Africa

Dr Carlos Lopes Pereira
Chantel Louw

Mozambique
Namibia

Birgit Kotting

Namibia

Dr Rob Ogden

United Kingdom

Institution
Wildlife Institute of India
TRAFFICTRACE Wildlife Forensics
Network
IUCN Africa Rhinoceros
Specialist GroupKZNWWF African Rhinoceros
Programme
Czech Environmental
Inspectorate
DIRECTOR FORENSICDNA SERVICE
Netherlands Forensics
Institute
Ministry of Environmental
Affairs
South African Police
Services
Mozambique government
Ministry of Environment
and Tourism
Ministry of Environment
and Tourism
Society for Wildlife Forensic
Science

TRAFFIC report: RhODIS® (Rhino DNA Index System) Collaborative Action Planning Workshop Proceedings16Annex 3: Current capacity of range and non-range states in relation to rhinoceros DNA
testing
Country

SpeciesSouth Africa

Range
state
Y

Lab
Type
U&G

Sp. ID

W,B

Central
Lab
Y

Kenya

Y

W,B

Y

G

Y

Botswana

Y

W,B

N

G

Y

Namibia

Y

W,B

N

India

Y

I

Y

17

G

Y

Y

Geo.
originY

Indiv.
ID
Y

Has
capacityHas
capacityHas
capacityHas
capacity

TRAFFIC report: RhODIS® (Rhino DNA Index System) Collaborative Action Planning Workshop Proceedings

Comments
RhODIS started here, eRhODIS developed to
improve collection process; only Black and Whiterhinoceros at this stage
DNA evidence accepted in court; Adopted RhODIS,
send samples to VGL; MOU between University of
Pretoria and Kenya to protect data
Lab in Gabarone has limited but developing
capacity for wildlife crime – all samples sent to
NZG in South Africa. Challenge of moving samples
within Botswana due to foot-and-mouth disease in
the NW where most of the crimes occur and lab in
the NE (not in foot-and-mouth area); when samples
are sent to SA, send staff to learn
Send all to SA; delays with permits (SA side); havea human lab, would like to expand to wildlife;
also need to develop capacity within the police forwildlife crime
Approved RhODIS system, funding for next 3
years this will add geographic origin and Indiv. ID
testing that will be useful for legal cases

Country
Indonesia

Range
state
Y

Species

Malaysia

N

Y

G

Y

Has
capacityHas
capacity

Thailand

N

Y

G

Y

Has
capacityHas
capacity

Hong Kong

N

N

U

Y

Korea

N

Y

G

Y

Has
capacityHas
capacity

Vietnam

N

Y

G

Y

Czech Republic

N

N

U

Y

Has
capacityHas
capacity

Australia

N

U

Y

Has
capacityHas
capacityJ, S

Central
Lab
Y

Lab
Type
G

Sp. IDY

Geo.
originHas
capacity

Indiv.
ID
Has
capacity

Comments

Major transit country. Well developed wildlife
forensic laboratory capacity to do STR, SNPs andDNA sequencing
Transit country. Has capacity to do STRs forgeographic origin and individual ID
Global epicentre for wildlife trade – gateway toChinese market. Centralised lab facility needed.
Currently results only used for intelligencegathering, not in court
Involved in forensic cases, but no recent rhinoceros
cases so far
Want to develop capacity and knowledge for
geographic origin/subpopulation testing
Centre of illegal wildlife trade in Europe; Forensic
DNA testing lab at University. Has sent rhinoceros
samples to VGL – result used for intelligencegathering only – report not recognised in Czech
court.
ISO17025 certified lab for molecular diagnostic
services; accredited tissue bank; lots of research andoutreach

Only had one international rhinoceros case so far
and it was water buffalo
Need genetic database to support conservation
strategies (STRs and mtDNA)

TRAFFIC report: RhODIS® (Rhino DNA Index System) Collaborative Action Planning Workshop Proceedings

18

Country
United Kingdom

Range
state
N

Netherlands

N

19

Species

Central
Lab
Y

Lab
Type
G

Sp. ID

Y

G

Y

Y

Geo.
originHas
capacity

Indiv.
ID
Y

Has
capacityHas
capacity

TRAFFIC report: RhODIS® (Rhino DNA Index System) Collaborative Action Planning Workshop Proceedings

Comments
Working with museum and zoo samples on Black,
White and Greater One Horned rhinoceros usingsame markers as RhODIS
Capacity development with Botswana; also do
aging of rhinoceros horn

FEBRUARY 2017

TRAFFIC, the wildlife trade monitoring network,is the leading non-governmental organization
working globally on trade in wild animals andplants in the context of both biodiversity
conservation and sustainable development.
For further information contact:
TRAFFIC Headquarters OfficeDavid Attenborough Building
Pembroke Street
Cambridge CB23QZ UK
Telephone: (44) 1223277427
E-mail: traffic@traffic.org
Website: www.traffic.org

UK Registered Charity No. 1076722,
Registered Limited Company No. 3785518.

This document was publishedwith the kind support ofis a strategic alliance of