Reveals that management strategies impact glucocorticoid levels more than parasite load in elephant populations, suggesting improved conservation approaches.
In wildlife conservation, understanding the factors influencing physiological stress is essential for promoting the health and stability of managed populations. Glucocorticoids are widely used as stress biomarkers and provide valuable insights into animal well‐being. Parasitic infections can elevate glucocorticoid concentrations, positioning parasites as potential physiological stressors. However, few studies have investigated relationships between parasite load and faecal glucocorticoid metabolite (fGCM) concentrations in wild mammals exposed to varying environmental and anthropogenic disturbances associated with contrasting landscape‐level management strategies. In this study, we investigated drivers of fGCM concentrations in managed South African elephant populations across 19 conservation areas with contrasting management strategies and environmental conditions. Specifically, we tested whether gastrointestinal parasite load correlates positively with fGCM concentrations. Contrary to our expectations, no such correlation was found. Instead, elevated fGCM concentrations were associated with smaller conservation areas, increased human exposure from self‐driving tourism, and lower food resource availability, the latter especially when elephant density is high. These results reveal that conservation management strategies, especially in fenced conservation areas, significantly influence stress‐related biomarker levels in African elephants, overshadowing individual health factors such as parasite load. Our study underscores the importance of multifaceted approaches to assessing stress perceived by wildlife, considering both environmental and anthropogenic factors. This research highlights the need for nuanced management policies that address the complex interplay of stressors, advancing landscape‐level conservation strategies applicable across taxa in managed habitats.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lacomme et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: