Bluebuck

Rarer in museums than previously thought

“Also running on the high mountains are many kinds of wild bucks and goats, such as gemsbok, blue bucks, pied bucks, roe bucks, klipspringers, ibexes, wild bucks,” it says in Johann Schreyer’s Neue Ost-Indianische Reisz-Beschreibung from 1681. This is the first time that “blue bucks” appear in the literature. Almost one hundred years later, the first drawing was published that showed a bluebuck from head to hoof. The depiction by natural scientist Jean Nicolas Sebastien Allamand appeared in 1778 in Comte de Buffon’s Histoire Naturelle.

A few short descriptions from the 17th and 18th centuries, four stuffed specimens in museums (in Vienna, Stockholm, Leiden, and Paris), some horns and skull fragments, and three illustrations are considered the only evidence for the existence of the bluebuck.

For a study (2021) by the University of Potsdam, scientists genetically examined ten of 16 alleged bluebuck museum specimens, with the result that only four of them can actually be assigned to the bluebuck. The hides in Vienna and Stockholm are bluebucks, and the skull fragments in Leiden and the horns in Uppsala are also from the bluebuck. Four skulls in Berlin, Leiden, Glasgow, and Paris that were once attributed to the bluebuck belong either to the roan antelope (Hippotragus equinus) or the sable antelope (H. niger). The same applies to two pairs of horns in Cape Town and St Andrews. So far, it appears that there is not a single completely preserved skull of a bluebuck.

The bluebuck is therefore even rarer in museums than previously thought. However, the researchers point out that there could still be four additional potential remains of the bluebuck: two skulls in Berlin, a pair of horns in London, and a skull or pair of horns in Brussels. Tests still have to be carried out for these, however. In addition, the two hides in Paris and Leiden that were made into life reconstructions are also considered to belong to the species; this was shown by earlier investigations.

Bluebuck – fact sheet

alternative names	Blue antelope, Blaubok, Bloubok, Blaauwbok, Blawebock
scientific names	Hippotragus leucophaeus, Antilope leucophaeus, Egocerus leucophaea, Oryx leucophaeus, Cerophorus leucophaeus, Hippotragus glauca, Cemas glaucus, Bubalis leucophaea, Antilope leucophaea, Capra leucophaea, Hippotragus capensis
original range	South Africa
time of extinction	1799 or 1800
causes of extinction	Hunting, habitat loss
IUCN status	extinct

Colonization as a cause of extinction—despite the small population size

Today it is assumed that the bluebuck was the first antelope species to be hunted to extinction by European settlers. However, the bluebuck was already quite rare and found only in a small range when Europeans came to Africa and discovered it in the 17th century.

This is also confirmed by the Potsdam study (2021): in the genetic analyses, the scientists found that the mitochondrial DNA of the museum specimens points to low genetic diversity among the mothers. That also means that the number of bluebucks must already have been limited.

A new study from Potsdam (2024) shows that the low genetic diversity and population size of the bluebuck had in fact persisted for many millennia, and that the species was adapted to this long-term small population size. Normally, low genetic diversity is regarded as a disadvantage because it leads to a reduction in the fitness and adaptability of a species, but not so in the bluebuck: the researchers could detect no inbreeding and hardly any harmful mutations.

Species can therefore survive for a long time with a small population size, as long as they are not exposed to rapid disturbances. Consequently, the sudden human impact during the European colonization of southern Africa played the central role in the extinction of the bluebuck. The fact that there were so few specimens only accelerated its extinction.

At the beginning of colonization in the 17th century, the bluebuck’s range comprised only the region between Caledon, Swellendam, and Bredasdorp in southwestern South Africa. Fossil remains from the Pleistocene and Holocene as well as rock art suggest, however, that the range of the bluebuck must once have been much larger, although it still included only the south coast of South Africa.

Barely studied while still alive

Biologist Richard G. Klein put it succinctly in 1987 in The extinct Blue Antelope: the bluebuck died out before “qualified scientists could observe living animals of this species”. Knowledge of the animal species is indeed limited. Only the first mention of the species in 1681 and a few descriptions were written at a time when the bluebuck still existed. Even most of the illustrations created in the 18th century are based on stuffed museum specimens.

The German zoologist Peter Simon Pallas described the bluebuck scientifically as Antilope leucophaeus in 1776, likewise on the basis of different museum specimens. The coat of the bluebuck was described by contemporaries as gray with a bluish shimmer. That is how the species got its name. The fact that bluebucks in museums appear more gray could be because the coat turns gray post mortem. This phenomenon is also known from the blue wildebeest (Connochaetes taurinus) and the nilgai antelope (Boselaphus tragocamelus). In the course of the Potsdam study from 2024, incidentally, two genes were identified in the bluebuck genome that may be responsible for the species’ blue coat color.

Like the roan antelope and the sable antelope, the bluebuck belongs to the genus of horse antelopes or horsebucks (Hippotragus). For a time, it was considered a subspecies of the sable antelope, but genetic studies showed that it is a separate species. The bluebuck was smaller than other antelopes in its genus. Of the four existing stuffed bluebucks, the largest specimen has a shoulder height of 119 centimeters. Its horns were slightly longer than 56 centimeters.

An investigation (2013) by paleozoologist J. Tyler Faith showed that bluebucks were grazers and therefore preferred grassland as habitat. This is also confirmed by fossil remains, which were found mainly where other grazing antelopes also live. Richard G. Klein had already found in 1976, during a study of South Cape fossils, that bluebucks preferred a very similar habitat to African buffalo (Syncerus caffer) and reedbucks (Redunca).

The first large African mammal to go extinct in historical times

The bluebuck was probably the first large African mammal to go extinct in historical times – but not the last. It was followed in 1883 by the quagga. What is certain is that the last bluebucks were killed by European settlers on pleasure hunts. What is also certain is that the blue-shimmering antelopes were already rare at that time, which means there must have been further causes contributing to the disappearance of the species. In addition to overhunting, habitat loss due to overgrazing and food competition with livestock certainly also caused declining population numbers.

In addition, climatic changes and the associated change in sea level could have had effects on the bluebuck population. However, this is contradicted by an investigation in the journal Molecular Biology and Evolution (2022), according to which bluebucks were able to cope with climatic changes of the past 10,000 years despite their small population size. For the study, the researchers examined the DNA of a 9,950-year-old bluebuck tooth.

According to a study (2011) by John S. Compton, a low sea level facilitates the migration of large mammals. At the beginning of the Holocene, however, the sea level rose, which presumably led to the fragmentation of bluebuck populations and to reduced resilience in the animals. Populations in resource-rich areas such as the Cape Floral region in the Western Cape may then have survived, while others in regions with little grassland may not have.

Records by the German biologist Hinrich Lichtenstein indicate that the last bluebuck was shot in Swellendam in 1799 or 1800. In 1990, South African zoologist Brian D. Colohan questioned this and refers to an eyewitness report from 1853 that mentions a “bastard gemsbok” near the town of Bethlehem, Free State. Colohan considers the sighting to have been a bluebuck – more than 50 years after the last animals were shot. The IUCN and most other scientists accept the extinction date given by Lichtenstein.

De-extinction: Can the bluebuck return?

The US company Colossal Biosciences announced in late April 2026 that it aims to partially recreate the bluebuck using modern genetic technologies. The approach is based on extracting DNA from preserved museum specimens and combining it with the genetic material of closely related living species.

The primary genetic foundation for this effort is the roan antelope, a living relative of the bluebuck. By making targeted changes to specific genes, scientists aim to reproduce key traits such as coat color and body structure. The resulting embryo would then be carried by a roan antelope surrogate.

Scientifically, however, this approach does not constitute a true “resurrection.” What would be created is not an original bluebuck, but a genetically modified animal that resembles it in certain physical aspects. Behavior, ecological role, and species-specific adaptations cannot be reconstructed in this way.

There is also a more fundamental issue, already evident from the bluebuck’s history: the species did not go extinct due to genetic weakness, but as a result of human impact—primarily hunting and habitat loss. These factors persist in many parts of South Africa to this day.

Even if it becomes possible to create a bluebuck-like animal, a crucial question remains: where would it live? The original grassland habitats of southwestern South Africa have largely been transformed or lost. A suitable environment in which such an animal could sustainably survive is not readily apparent.

Supporters argue that the technologies developed through such projects could also benefit the conservation of living antelope species. Critics, however, view de-extinction primarily as a costly experiment whose practical value for conservation remains uncertain.

In the end, the key question is not whether the bluebuck can be technically reconstructed, but whether such a reconstruction makes sense under today’s ecological conditions.

---