242 • Technologies To Maintain Biological Diversity 



logical institutions worldwide. One goal in the 

 database development was to address the prob- 

 lem of inbreeding among species within zoos. 

 ISIS acts as a computerized matching service, 

 helping zoos around the world identify other 

 institutions that have distinct bloodlines in 

 breeding populations of a particular wild ani- 

 mal (14). Other goals include identifying cap- 

 tive management problems, monitoring the cap- 

 tive status of some 2,500 species, and providing 

 information to managers. It appears that ISIS 

 is widely used by zoological institutions and 

 therefore makes important contributions to 

 maintaining genetic diversity. 



A large number of zoos are not involved with 

 the SSP or ISIS, yet still provide offsite main- 

 tenance of selected wild animal species. These 

 institutions may support populations of locally 

 endemic wild animals or include individuals 

 of internationally rare species. Maintenance of 

 a diversity of species or of individuals within 

 a species is generally not an objective at these 

 institutions, however. 



Much of the work undertaken by zoos to pre- 

 serve species involves internationally endan- 

 gered ones, with less attention given to threat- 

 ened and endangered species found in the 

 United States. The focus on species from else- 

 where in the world or exotic animals is due, 

 in part, to the degree of endangerment of these 

 animals. Those that are critically endangered 

 in the United States, such as the California con- 

 dor or the black-footed ferret, are also the fo- 

 cus of active captive breeding programs at U.S. 

 zoos (8,36). Compared with zoos, most aquar- 

 iums accord the maintenance of aquatic spe- 

 cies diversity a low priority. Almost no work 

 has been done at U.S. aquariums to maintain 

 the diversity of species found in U.S. waters 

 (38). When they need specimens, they gener- 

 ally collect them from the wild (37). 



Fairly large collections of breeding wild ani- 

 mals are maintained by individuals. In many 

 cases, these people establish societies around 

 a particular species or group of species to ex- 

 change information and breeding stock among 

 society members. Their efforts range from the 

 small-scale activities of individuals that breed 



exotic birds or reptiles to the management of 

 large herds of Asian and African antelope spe- 

 cies by Texas game ranchers. (For further dis- 

 cussion, see ref. 59.) 



Microbial Resource Programs 



No U.S. institution or institutional mecha- 

 nism addresses the preservation of microbial 

 diversity. Numerous collections of micro- J 

 organisms exist in the United States in both the " 

 public and private sectors. Most were estab- 

 lished to study a particular taxonomic group 

 of micro-organisms, and they represent detailed 

 sampling within that group. Several hundred 

 specialized working collections of microbial 

 germplasm are part of the basic and applied 

 research programs of scientists working in both 

 the public and private sectors (7). 



Federal Institutions 



The largest public microbial culture collec- 

 tion in the United States is the Northern Re- 

 gional Research Laboratory (NRRL) collection 

 held by USDA's Agricultural Research Serv- 

 ice. It is an archival collection with a taxonom- 

 ically broad range of micro-organisms stored 

 for long-term preservation. NRRL does not pub- 

 lish a catalog of its holdings and does not en- 

 courage general distribution of the germplasm 

 it holds, in part because of the high cost of 

 distribution. No moderately sized collections 

 (3,000 to 10,000 accessions) of micro-organisms 

 function as national repositories or resource 

 collections for a range of microbial classes (24). 



Several collections supported by the U.S. Gov- 

 ernment are devoted to assembling microbial 

 strains within a particular taxonomic group. 

 The largest of these is held by the Neisseria 

 Reference Laboratory of the U.S. Public Health 

 Service. Similar taxonomically specific collec- 

 tions supported by USDA, such as the cereal 

 rust collections at the Universities of Minnesota 

 and Kansas, distribute microbial germplasm on 

 request, but they generally do not catalog their 

 holdings (24). 



Like many scientific institutions, organiza- 

 tions holding culture collections are currently 



