DNA left by large carnivores at livestock kill sites could help in human-wildlife conflict: Study

For wildlife managers and conservationists, the method adds a reliable, evidence-based tool to help address predator-livestock conflict while contributing to long-term predator monitoring. Representational Pic/File

In a recent study published in Biological Conservation, researchers from Prof. Uma Ramakrishnan's group at the National Centre for Biological Sciences (NCBS), Bengaluru, have shown that trace DNA left by large carnivores at livestock kill sites can be used to reliably identify individual predators.

The interesting part is that this approach offers a powerful tool to effectively manage human-wildlife conflict and understand predator behaviour and ecology.

In Photos: Helicopter on way to Gangotri crashes in Uttarakhand, six dead

13 minutes agoPHOTO GALLERY

"In communities that live in proximity to large carnivores, livestock depredation might cause conservation challenges. A systematic understanding of individuals involved in conflict is a critical first step towards a solution," said Ramakrishnan, senior author of the study.

Around the world, managing human-wildlife conflict often involves relocating or removing the suspected predator. Typically, forest departments rely on field signs like pugmarks, scat, or claw marks to identify the animal involved. However, these signs can be ambiguous, and removing the non-target individual may disturb carnivore populations and sometimes further intensify conflict situations. More reliable and robust genetic identification of predators could be an effective strategy for conflict resolution.

Researchers at NCBS, in collaboration with Panthera and the Madhya Pradesh Forest Department, investigated 198 kill sites across two of Central India's key tiger habitats: Kanha and Bandhavgarh Tiger Reserves. At each site, researchers collected non-invasive genetic samples - saliva, scat, and shed hair - as potential sources of predator DNA.

Using genetic tools based on Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs), they identified individual tigers present at these kill sites. Shed hair samples were the most effective for individual identification, followed closely by saliva and scat. Overall, tigers were successfully identified at 85% of the kill sites, with species-level identification exceeding 95% across all sample types.

To assess each tiger's likely involvement in a kill, the team developed a classification framework based on the type and location of genetic evidence. Each case was categorised as a "true predator" (high confidence), "circumstantial predator" (medium confidence), or "predator uncertain" (low confidence). Out of the 198 cases studied, 72 were classified with high confidence, 34 with medium confidence, and 49 with low confidence.

"Genetic samples are often the only true evidence of a predation event and are therefore vital. While identification is possible, there remains some possibility of misidentification, especially when multiple individuals are present at the kill site. That's why it's important to assign confidence levels in identification. We hope that such a classification scheme will help better represent the level of confidence provided by the genetic tools and support evidence-based conflict management," said Himanshu Chhattani, lead author of the study.

For wildlife managers and conservationists, this method adds a reliable, evidence-based tool to help address predator-livestock conflict while contributing to long-term predator monitoring, benefiting both local communities and wildlife conservation efforts.

"As we celebrate the success of tiger recovery, the growing challenge of human-tiger conflict demands urgent attention. To address this effectively, interventions must be grounded in scientific evidence and rigorous methodologies. The genetic approaches outlined in this paper offer a reliable means of identifying individuals involved in conflicts, paving the way for more informed and strategic resolutions," said Sanjay Shukla, former Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Madhya Pradesh.