DOI: 10.5061/dryad.58ff4
title: Data from: Pedigree analysis reveals a generational decline in reproductive success of captive Tasmanian devil (Sarcophilus harrisii): implications for captive management of threatened species

description: Captive breeding programs are an increasingly popular tool to augment the
 conservation of threatened wild populations. Many programs keep detailed
 pedigrees, which are used to prescribe breeding targets to meet
 demographic and genetic goals. Annual breeding targets are based on
 previous productivity, but do not account for changes in reproductive
 success that may occur over generations in captivity and which may impair
 the ability of a program to meet its goals. We utilise a large studbook
 from the Tasmanian devil (Sarcophilus harrisii) captive breeding program
 to investigate biological, genetic and environmental factors that affect
 variation in reproductive success among individuals and over generations
 of captive breeding. Reproductive success declined with increasing
 generations in captivity: wild-born females had a 56.5% chance of
 producing a litter compared to a 2.8% chance for generation 5 captive-born
 females (N = 182) and when they did, wild-born females produced more
 offspring (3.1 joeys, 95% CI: 2.76 - 3.38, compared to 2.7 joeys, 95% CI:
 2.55 - 2.90, in captive-born females [N = 105]). Reproductive success also
 declined as dam age at first breeding increased. Our results reveal a
 conflict with the widely-cited conservation strategy to limit opportunity
 for selection by extending generation length through delaying
 reproduction, as captive breeding programs that delay female breeding with
 this goal in mind risk reduced productivity. Our data demonstrate the
 benefit of pedigree analysis to identify biological processes that reveal
 crucial trade-offs with conservation best-practice.
description: All females breeding
 successYear and site of
 breeding recommendation; dam age, origin (C = captive-born, W =
 wild-born), generation, inbreeding coefficient (F); management (I =
 intensive site, F = free-range site) and breeding success (1 =
 successfully produced offspring, 0 = did not produce offspring) for all
 females included in the analysis of breeding success.All females litter
 sizeYear and site of
 breeding recommendation; dam age, origin (C = captive-born, W =
 wild-born), generation, inbreeding coefficient (F); management (I =
 intensive site, F = free-range site); and litter size coded as a
 two-column matrix of successes (no. offspring produced) and failures (4 –
 successes, see Methods) for all females included in the analysis of litter
 size.Intensive pairs breeding
 successYear and site of
 breeding recommendation; age, origin (C = captive-born, W = wild-born),
 generation, and inbreeding coefficient (F) of the sire and dam; number of
 years since the site first held the species and number of holdings of
 devils at the site in the year of the breeding recommendation; breeding
 success (1 = successfully producing offspring, 0 = did not produce
 offspring) for pairs housed at intensive sites.Intensive pairs litter
 sizeYear and site of
 breeding recommendation; age, origin (C = captive-born, W = wild-born),
 generation, and inbreeding coefficient (F) of the sire and dam; number of
 years since the site first held the species and number of holdings of
 devils at the site in the year of the breeding recommendation; and litter
 size coded as a two-column matrix of successes (no. offspring produced)
 and failures (4 - successes, see Methods) for pairs housed at intensive
 sites.