The global decline of cheetah Acinonyx jubatus and what it means for conservation

Sarah M. Durant, Nicholas Mitchell, Rosemary Groom, Nathalie Pettorelli, Audrey Ipavec, Andrew P. Jacobson, Rosie Woodroffe, Monika Böhm, Luke T. B. Hunter, Matthew S. Becker, Femke Broekhuis, Sultana Bashir, Leah Andresen, Ortwin Aschenborn, Mohammed Beddiaf, Farid Belbachir, Amel Belbachir-Bazi, Ali Berbash, Iracelma Brandao de Matos Machado, Christine Breitenmoser, Monica Chege, Deon Cilliers, Harriet Davies-Mostert, Amy J. Dickman, Fabiano Ezekiel, Mohammad S. Farhadinia, Paul Funston, Philipp Henschel, Jane Horgan, Hans H. de Iongh, Houman Jowkar, Rebecca Klein, Peter Andrew Lindsey, Laurie Marker, Kelly Marnewick, Joerg Melzheimer, Johnathan Merkle, Jassiel M'soka, Maurus Msuha, Helen O'Neill, Megan Parker, Gianetta Purchase, Samaila Sahailou, Yohanna Saidu, Abdoulkarim Samna, Anne Schmidt-Küntzel, Eda Selebatso, Etotépé A. Sogbohossou, Alaaeldin Soultan, Emma Stone, Esther van der Meer, Rudie van Vuuren, Mary Wykstra, and Kim Young-Overton
PNAS January 17, 2017 114 (3) 528-533; published ahead of print December 27, 2016 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1611122114

  1. Edited by Hugh P. Possingham, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia, and approved November 21, 2016 (received for review July 8, 2016)

See related content:

Article Figures & SI

Figures

  • Fig. 1.
    Fig. 1.

    Known cheetah distribution in (A) Africa and (B) Asia. Gray shading denotes historical range, and red shading shows the range where cheetah are known to be resident. Boundaries of PAs under IUCN categories I–IV are marked in blue.

  • Fig. 2.
    Fig. 2.

    Scenario modeling of a population of cheetah living on unprotected and protected lands. Starting population is 200 individuals distributed at a varying proportion between protected and unprotected lands (x axis). Multiplicative growth rate (lambda) inside PAs is 1.0, but outside PAs, it is allowed to vary from this rate down to 0.8. Graphs show estimated extinction rates under three migration scenarios: (A) no migration between protected and unprotected lands, (B) medium migration rate between protected and unprotected lands of 0.05 and SD of 0.025, and (C) high migration rate of 0.1 and SD of 0.05. Results are reported from 1,000 simulations over 50 y.

  • Fig. 3.
    Fig. 3.

    Simulated (A) population trajectories over three generations (15 y) of the global cheetah population and (B) sensitivity analysis to changes in the growth rate within PAs. Starting population was the current total estimated global population size of 7,000 individuals, with 33% of the population on protected lands (Table 1). The dashed lines depict results from a multiplicative growth rate (lambda) of 0.9 on unprotected lands, and the solid lines show 0.8. Migration rate was set at 0.05 with SD of 0.025. Results are reported from 1,000 simulations, and all other parameters of the model are as described for Fig. 2. The gray dotted lines depict the 50% threshold for uplisting to endangered status using the IUCN Red List criterion A3b [a population size reduction of ≥50% projected or suspected to be met within the next three generations based on an index of abundance (28)].

  • Fig. S1.
    Fig. S1.

    Simulated population trajectories over three generations (15 y) for the global cheetah population under different migration rates. Starting population was the current total estimated population size of 7,000 individuals, with 33% of the population on protected lands (Table 1). The dashed lines depict results from a multiplicative growth rate (lambda) of 0.9 on unprotected lands, and the solid lines show 0.8. Migration rates between protected and unprotected lands were set at (A) 0.0 and (B) 0.1 with an SD of 0.05. Results are reported from 1,000 simulations, and all other parameters of the model are as described in Fig. 2. The gray dotted lines depict the 50% threshold for uplisting to endangered status as required by the IUCN Red List criterion A3b.

  • Fig. S2.
    Fig. S2.

    Simulated population trajectories over three generations (15 y) for the global cheetah population with different positive growth rates on protected lands. Starting population was the current total estimated population size of 7,000 individuals, with 33% of the population on protected lands (Table 1). The dashed lines depict results from a multiplicative growth rate (lambda) of 0.9 on unprotected lands, and the solid lines show 0.8. Migration rates between protected and unprotected lands were set at 0.05 with an SD of 0.025. Mean lambda values on protected land were set at (A) 1.025 and (B) 1.05. Results are reported from 1,000 simulations, and all other parameters of the model are as described in Fig. 2. The gray dotted lines depict the 50% threshold for uplisting to endangered status as required by the IUCN Red List criterion A3b.

  • Fig. 4.
    Fig. 4.

    Decision tree for threat assessment of protection-reliant species.

Tables

  • Table 1.

    Summary of known cheetah distributional range and populations

    Area nameCountriesResident range (km2)Population sizeOverall increase/stable/decrease*Resident range in PAsRange in PAs (%)Population size in PAsPopulation in PAs (%)
    Africa
     Southern Africa six-country polygonAngola/Botswana/Mozambique/Namibia/South Africa/Zambia1,212,1794,021↓283,85123.41,04125.9
     MoxicoAngola25,71726?00.000.0
     Pandmatenga/Hwange/Victoria FallsBotswana/Zimbabwe25,92650↓15,55160.02958.0
     BanhineMozambique7,26610?00.000.0
     Malilangwe/Save/GonarezhouMozambique/Zimbabwe9,92246↔4,75747.91941.3
     KafueZambia26,22265?22,18584.65584.6
     LiuwaZambia3,17020↑ or ↔2,92192.11890.0
     Bubyana, Nuanetsi, and Bubye ConservanciesZimbabwe8,81640↓00.000.0
     Zambezi valleyZimbabwe3,61212↓2,10258.2758.3
     MatusadonaZimbabwe1,4223↓1,422100.03100.0
     Midlands Rhino ConservancyZimbabwe3184↓00.000.0
      Subtotal southern Africa1,324,5704,297332,78925.11,17227.3
     AfarEthiopia4,48011↓1,09224.4327.3
     Blen-AfarEthiopia8,17020↓1,85622.7525.0
     OgadenEthiopia12,60532↓00.000.0
     Yangudi RassaEthiopia3,0468↓3,046100.08100.0
     Kenya/Ethiopia/South SudanEthiopia/Kenya/South Sudan191,180191?37,95319.93819.9
     South TurkanaKenya3,58036?1,11731.21130.6
     Kidepo/southern South Sudan/northwest KenyaKenya/South Sudan/Uganda6,69419?1,42221.2421.1
     Serengeti/Mara/Tsavo/Laikipia/SamburuKenya/Tanzania280,1141,362↓49,70517.766448.8
     Badingilo NPSouth Sudan8,51785?4,74155.74755.3
     Radom NPSouth Sudan6,82168?00.000.0
     Southern NPSouth Sudan14,680147?10,86374.010974.1
     Ruaha ecosystemTanzania30,820200↔25,55182.916683.0
     Maasai SteppeTanzania20,40951↓3,75518.4917.6
     Katavi-UgallaTanzania23,95560?10,47543.72643.3
      Subtotal eastern Africa615,0712,290151,57624.61,09047.6
     Adrar des Ifoghas/Ahaggar/Ajjer and MaliAlgeria/Mali762,871191?98,86713.02513.0
     WAPBenin/Burkina Faso/Niger25,34525?20,92382.62182.6
     CAR/ChadCAR/Chad238,234238?44,39618.64418.6
     Termit MassifNiger2,8201?2,820100.01100.0
     Air and TénéréNiger8,0522?8,052100.02100.0
      Subtotal western, central, and northern Africa1,037,322457175,05816.99320.3
       Total Africa2,976,9637,044659,42322.22,35533.4
    Asia
     Southern landscapeIran107,56620↔4115838.3N/AN/A
     Northern landscapeIran33,44522↓1807754.04N/AN/A
     KavirIran5,8561↓5,856100.0N/AN/A
      Total Asia146,8674365,09144.3N/AN/A
        Total global3,123,8307,087724,51423.22,355†33.4†

    • Historical distributional range for cheetah totals 33,056,767 km2, comprising 23,340,522-km2 African range and 9,716,245-km2 Asian range (Fig. 1). CAR, Central African Republic; N/A, not applicable; NP, National Park; WAP, W, Arly and Pendjari protected area complex; ↓, decrease; ↑, increase; ↔, stable.

    • ↵* Estimates of trend apply to the entire polygon; thus, for example, populations may increase at specific sites, although there is an overall decrease across the polygon.

    • ↵† Does not include Iranian cheetah.

  • Table S1.

    Total population and number of immigrants into the long-term study population of cheetah in the Serengeti National Park (42)

    YearFemale population sizeNo. of female immigrantsImmigration females, %Male population sizeNo. of male immigrantsImmigration males, %Total population sizeTotal no. of immigrantsImmigration total, %
    199137513.5117529.41541018.52
    19923313.0313323.084648.70
    19933425.8818422.2252611.54
    19943912.561100.005012.00
    19953912.5616318.755547.27
    19963612.7817211.765335.66
    19974436.822300.006734.48
    19984400.0028621.437268.33
    19994636.521900.006534.62
    20005823.452328.708144.94
    20015235.7718422.2270710.00
    20024524.4419210.536446.25
    20034025.0020420.0060610.00
    20043800.002314.356111.64
    20054200.0018211.116023.33
    20064748.5122313.6469710.14
    20074000.002129.526123.28
    20083200.0019315.795135.88
    20093500.0028310.716334.76
    20103326.0622418.1855610.91
    20113126.452114.765235.77
     Mean % immigration3.9713.157.05
     SD3.518.443.93

    • The population is depicted as the number of adult cheetah (>2 y old) and the number of adolescent or adult immigrants that were independent of their mothers.

Back to top
Article Alerts
Email Article
Citation Tools
Request Permissions
The global decline of cheetah
Sarah M. Durant, Nicholas Mitchell, Rosemary Groom, Nathalie Pettorelli, Audrey Ipavec, Andrew P. Jacobson, Rosie Woodroffe, Monika Böhm, Luke T. B. Hunter, Matthew S. Becker, Femke Broekhuis, Sultana Bashir, Leah Andresen, Ortwin Aschenborn, Mohammed Beddiaf, Farid Belbachir, Amel Belbachir-Bazi, Ali Berbash, Iracelma Brandao de Matos Machado, Christine Breitenmoser, Monica Chege, Deon Cilliers, Harriet Davies-Mostert, Amy J. Dickman, Fabiano Ezekiel, Mohammad S. Farhadinia, Paul Funston, Philipp Henschel, Jane Horgan, Hans H. de Iongh, Houman Jowkar, Rebecca Klein, Peter Andrew Lindsey, Laurie Marker, Kelly Marnewick, Joerg Melzheimer, Johnathan Merkle, Jassiel M'soka, Maurus Msuha, Helen O'Neill, Megan Parker, Gianetta Purchase, Samaila Sahailou, Yohanna Saidu, Abdoulkarim Samna, Anne Schmidt-Küntzel, Eda Selebatso, Etotépé A. Sogbohossou, Alaaeldin Soultan, Emma Stone, Esther van der Meer, Rudie van Vuuren, Mary Wykstra, Kim Young-Overton
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Jan 2017, 114 (3) 528-533; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1611122114
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: 116 (8)
Current Issue

Submit

Jump to section

You May Also be Interested in

Nonmonogamous strawberry poison frog (Oophaga pumilio). Image courtesy of Yusan Yang (University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh).
Putative signature of monogamy
A study suggests a putative gene-expression hallmark common to monogamous male vertebrates of some species, namely cichlid fishes, dendrobatid frogs, passeroid songbirds, common voles, and deer mice, and identifies 24 candidate genes potentially associated with monogamy.
Image courtesy of Yusan Yang (University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh).
Active lifestyles. Image courtesy of Pixabay/MabelAmber.
Meaningful life tied to healthy aging
Physical and social well-being in old age are linked to self-assessments of life worth, and a spectrum of behavioral, economic, health, and social variables may influence whether aging individuals believe they are leading meaningful lives.
Image courtesy of Pixabay/MabelAmber.