Bridging the Research Gap between Live Collections in Zoos and Preserved Collections in Natural History Museums

Abstract

Zoos and natural history museums are both collections-based institutions with important missions in biodiversity research and education. Animals in zoos are a repository and living record of the world's biodiversity, whereas natural history museums are a permanent historical record of snapshots of biodiversity in time. Surprisingly, despite significant overlap in institutional missions, formal partnerships between these institution types are infrequent. Life history information, pedigrees, and medical records maintained at zoos should be seen as complementary to historical records of morphology, genetics, and distribution kept at museums. Through examining both institution types, we synthesize the benefits and challenges of cross-institutional exchanges and propose actions to increase the dialog between zoos and museums. With a growing recognition of the importance of collections to the advancement of scientific research and discovery, a transformational impact could be made with long-term investments in connecting the institutions that are caretakers of living and preserved animals.

Keywords: aquariums; biodiversity; biological collections; natural history collections; zoos.

Figure 1.

Zoos and museums can maintain robust sharing networks across the United States. The Yale Peabody Museum of Natural History has received specimens from zoos across the US (network shown in orange), whereas the Oklahoma City Zoo has shared samples and specimens with universities and museums (network shown in blue). Both zoos and museums can maintain robust local and country-wide networks.

Figure 2.

An Asian elephant from the Oklahoma City Zoo passed away from unknown causes (global accession no. 21,517,980). After the Museum of Osteology (also in Oklahoma) prepared the specimen as a skeleton and found affected and deformed molars, that diagnosis was determined to be the cause of death. The zoo now uses new dental monitoring techniques on its elephants because of this interaction with the museum. Photograph: Jennifer D'Agostino.

Figure 3.

One example of a collections management system that can connect living and preserved specimen databases is the Arctos Collection Management system, a web-based multi-institutional collection management platform that currently handles thousands of records of specimens and biosamples from zoo–museum collaborations. Arctos museum records can be reciprocally linked to any external URL, creating the potential to form direct links with zoo databases such as ZIMS. Linking data between museum collection records and zoo databases will allow tracking of samples and their usage over the lifetime of individuals and beyond across multiple facilities and institutions. Data approved for public access can be searched through the main Arctos portal at https://arctos.database.museum and through biodiversity aggregators such as GBIF, enabling sample, project, and trait-based queries to extend the value of these samples and data for future research. Image: Mariel Campbell.

Figure 4.

Since 2010, the Sedgwick County Zoo (SCZ) has partnered with the Yale Peabody Museum of Natural History to provide materials for use in a wide range of scientific studies including CT scanning, morphology studies and genome sequencing. SCZ has contributed over 770 specimens and samples to the Museum, including tissues and carcasses representing taxa from Gymnophiona to Proboscidea, and hopes to broaden communication with other potential partners to ensure maximum use of SCZ's resources. To date, specimens and tissue samples that the Zoo donated to the Museum have been used in more than 22 research projects and in university courses. Several SCZ specimens were scanned as part of the openVertebrate (oVert) Thematic Collections Network (NSF grant no. DBI-1,701,714), including YPM HERA 23,166 (Potamotyphlus kaupii), which is one of two specimens of the species (each from SCZ) used to fill in a vital taxonomic gap in the oVert sampling. Scan data and reconstructions are now available via MorphoSource for use by researchers and educators globally (https://doi.org/10.17602/M2/M389815, https://doi.org/10.17602/M2/M389823). Image reconstruction: Jaimi A. Gray. The image is a rendering of a 3D reconstruction created from CT scan of specimen YPM HERA 23,166. CT scanning done at Nanoscale Research Facility at the University of Florida, with a GE phoenix v|tome|x m 240 micro-CT scanner, and was funded by oVert TCN (NSF grant no. DBI-1,701,714). Segmentation and rendering performed using VG Studio Max (version 3.5.1).

Figure 5.

Patricia Brennan has worked with dozens of collaborators from farms to zoos to acquire specimens that died in captivity and whose bodies are ultimately preserved at museums for posterity, with Brennan facilitating that exchange after she completes her research. These include specimens of snake hemipenes (Nerodia rhombifer; M1) that are inflated with vaseline (M2) and then made into 3D models (M3). Specimens such as these require careful postmortem handling of animals, including rapid preservation. The connections and collaborations necessary to obtain such specimens have not been easy to establish, particularly as it is not always clear whom to contact for this kind of work at these facilities and this collaborative work is not usually part of the research mission of these facilities. Photograph: Bernard Brennan. 3D Images: Genesis Lara Granados and Juliet Greenwood.