Sterilization as an alternative strategy to control wildlife diseases: bovine tuberculosis in European badgers as a case study
Abstract Sterilization has rarely been considered as an alternative to culling or vaccination to control wildlife diseases. Disease control by sterilization, as by culling, has most promise when the host'ss ability for compensatory growth following the removal of density-dependent inhibitions i...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
1998 |
|---|
| Umfang: |
19 |
|---|
| Reproduktion: |
Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
in: Biodiversity and conservation - 1992, 7(1998) vom: Juni, Seite 705-723 |
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:7 ; year:1998 ; month:06 ; pages:705-723 ; extent:19 |
| Links: |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
NLEJ193195267 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLEJ193195267 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230506092134.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 070526s1998 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLEJ193195267 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Sterilization as an alternative strategy to control wildlife diseases: bovine tuberculosis in European badgers as a case study |
| 264 | 1 | |c 1998 | |
| 300 | |a 19 | ||
| 336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b z |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zu |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Abstract Sterilization has rarely been considered as an alternative to culling or vaccination to control wildlife diseases. Disease control by sterilization, as by culling, has most promise when the host'ss ability for compensatory growth following the removal of density-dependent inhibitions is limited, and when moderate reductions in population density cause disproportionately large reductions in disease prevalence, or even eliminate the disease. For many host/disease examples this will not be the case and vaccination may have overwhelming advantages or may be the only practical option. The impact of sterilization on host density and disease prevalence will develop relatively slowly because sterilization can prevent the recruitment of only one age-cohort at a time. Moreover, unless there is vertical transmission, this age-cohort will consist only of susceptibles. Culling, on the contrary, removes infected as well as susceptible animals. However, for certain disease/host examples, the r elative effectiveness of the different control strategies may be altered considerably if their variable effects on the probability of disease transmission are taken into account. Social perturbation or stress could render certain culling strategies ineffective or even counter-productive. Depending on how disease dynamics are influenced by the host'ss age-structure and reproductive investment, fertility control could offer epidemiological advantages that have been ignored by most disease/host models. We illustrate some of these principles by investigating the theoretical and practical feasibility of an hypothetical sterilization campaign to control bovine tuberculosis in badgers (and hence cattle) in Britain. | ||
| 533 | |f Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 | ||
| 700 | 1 | |a Tuyttens, F. A. M. |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Macdonald, D. W. |4 oth | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i in |t Biodiversity and conservation |d 1992 |g 7(1998) vom: Juni, Seite 705-723 |w (DE-627)NLEJ188991573 |w (DE-600)2000787-5 |x 1572-9710 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:7 |g year:1998 |g month:06 |g pages:705-723 |g extent:19 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1008830418123 |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a ZDB-1-SOJ | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NL_ARTICLE | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 7 |j 1998 |c 6 |h 705-723 |g 19 | ||
| matchkey_str |
article:15729710:1998----::trlztoaaatraietaeyootowllfdsaebvntbruoii |
|---|---|
| hierarchy_sort_str |
1998 |
| publishDate |
1998 |
| allfields |
(DE-627)NLEJ193195267 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Sterilization as an alternative strategy to control wildlife diseases: bovine tuberculosis in European badgers as a case study 1998 19 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Abstract Sterilization has rarely been considered as an alternative to culling or vaccination to control wildlife diseases. Disease control by sterilization, as by culling, has most promise when the host'ss ability for compensatory growth following the removal of density-dependent inhibitions is limited, and when moderate reductions in population density cause disproportionately large reductions in disease prevalence, or even eliminate the disease. For many host/disease examples this will not be the case and vaccination may have overwhelming advantages or may be the only practical option. The impact of sterilization on host density and disease prevalence will develop relatively slowly because sterilization can prevent the recruitment of only one age-cohort at a time. Moreover, unless there is vertical transmission, this age-cohort will consist only of susceptibles. Culling, on the contrary, removes infected as well as susceptible animals. However, for certain disease/host examples, the r elative effectiveness of the different control strategies may be altered considerably if their variable effects on the probability of disease transmission are taken into account. Social perturbation or stress could render certain culling strategies ineffective or even counter-productive. Depending on how disease dynamics are influenced by the host'ss age-structure and reproductive investment, fertility control could offer epidemiological advantages that have been ignored by most disease/host models. We illustrate some of these principles by investigating the theoretical and practical feasibility of an hypothetical sterilization campaign to control bovine tuberculosis in badgers (and hence cattle) in Britain. Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 Tuyttens, F. A. M. oth Macdonald, D. W. oth in Biodiversity and conservation 1992 7(1998) vom: Juni, Seite 705-723 (DE-627)NLEJ188991573 (DE-600)2000787-5 1572-9710 nnns volume:7 year:1998 month:06 pages:705-723 extent:19 http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1008830418123 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-SOJ GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 7 1998 6 705-723 19 |
| spelling |
(DE-627)NLEJ193195267 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Sterilization as an alternative strategy to control wildlife diseases: bovine tuberculosis in European badgers as a case study 1998 19 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Abstract Sterilization has rarely been considered as an alternative to culling or vaccination to control wildlife diseases. Disease control by sterilization, as by culling, has most promise when the host'ss ability for compensatory growth following the removal of density-dependent inhibitions is limited, and when moderate reductions in population density cause disproportionately large reductions in disease prevalence, or even eliminate the disease. For many host/disease examples this will not be the case and vaccination may have overwhelming advantages or may be the only practical option. The impact of sterilization on host density and disease prevalence will develop relatively slowly because sterilization can prevent the recruitment of only one age-cohort at a time. Moreover, unless there is vertical transmission, this age-cohort will consist only of susceptibles. Culling, on the contrary, removes infected as well as susceptible animals. However, for certain disease/host examples, the r elative effectiveness of the different control strategies may be altered considerably if their variable effects on the probability of disease transmission are taken into account. Social perturbation or stress could render certain culling strategies ineffective or even counter-productive. Depending on how disease dynamics are influenced by the host'ss age-structure and reproductive investment, fertility control could offer epidemiological advantages that have been ignored by most disease/host models. We illustrate some of these principles by investigating the theoretical and practical feasibility of an hypothetical sterilization campaign to control bovine tuberculosis in badgers (and hence cattle) in Britain. Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 Tuyttens, F. A. M. oth Macdonald, D. W. oth in Biodiversity and conservation 1992 7(1998) vom: Juni, Seite 705-723 (DE-627)NLEJ188991573 (DE-600)2000787-5 1572-9710 nnns volume:7 year:1998 month:06 pages:705-723 extent:19 http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1008830418123 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-SOJ GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 7 1998 6 705-723 19 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
(DE-627)NLEJ193195267 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Sterilization as an alternative strategy to control wildlife diseases: bovine tuberculosis in European badgers as a case study 1998 19 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Abstract Sterilization has rarely been considered as an alternative to culling or vaccination to control wildlife diseases. Disease control by sterilization, as by culling, has most promise when the host'ss ability for compensatory growth following the removal of density-dependent inhibitions is limited, and when moderate reductions in population density cause disproportionately large reductions in disease prevalence, or even eliminate the disease. For many host/disease examples this will not be the case and vaccination may have overwhelming advantages or may be the only practical option. The impact of sterilization on host density and disease prevalence will develop relatively slowly because sterilization can prevent the recruitment of only one age-cohort at a time. Moreover, unless there is vertical transmission, this age-cohort will consist only of susceptibles. Culling, on the contrary, removes infected as well as susceptible animals. However, for certain disease/host examples, the r elative effectiveness of the different control strategies may be altered considerably if their variable effects on the probability of disease transmission are taken into account. Social perturbation or stress could render certain culling strategies ineffective or even counter-productive. Depending on how disease dynamics are influenced by the host'ss age-structure and reproductive investment, fertility control could offer epidemiological advantages that have been ignored by most disease/host models. We illustrate some of these principles by investigating the theoretical and practical feasibility of an hypothetical sterilization campaign to control bovine tuberculosis in badgers (and hence cattle) in Britain. Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 Tuyttens, F. A. M. oth Macdonald, D. W. oth in Biodiversity and conservation 1992 7(1998) vom: Juni, Seite 705-723 (DE-627)NLEJ188991573 (DE-600)2000787-5 1572-9710 nnns volume:7 year:1998 month:06 pages:705-723 extent:19 http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1008830418123 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-SOJ GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 7 1998 6 705-723 19 |
| allfieldsGer |
(DE-627)NLEJ193195267 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Sterilization as an alternative strategy to control wildlife diseases: bovine tuberculosis in European badgers as a case study 1998 19 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Abstract Sterilization has rarely been considered as an alternative to culling or vaccination to control wildlife diseases. Disease control by sterilization, as by culling, has most promise when the host'ss ability for compensatory growth following the removal of density-dependent inhibitions is limited, and when moderate reductions in population density cause disproportionately large reductions in disease prevalence, or even eliminate the disease. For many host/disease examples this will not be the case and vaccination may have overwhelming advantages or may be the only practical option. The impact of sterilization on host density and disease prevalence will develop relatively slowly because sterilization can prevent the recruitment of only one age-cohort at a time. Moreover, unless there is vertical transmission, this age-cohort will consist only of susceptibles. Culling, on the contrary, removes infected as well as susceptible animals. However, for certain disease/host examples, the r elative effectiveness of the different control strategies may be altered considerably if their variable effects on the probability of disease transmission are taken into account. Social perturbation or stress could render certain culling strategies ineffective or even counter-productive. Depending on how disease dynamics are influenced by the host'ss age-structure and reproductive investment, fertility control could offer epidemiological advantages that have been ignored by most disease/host models. We illustrate some of these principles by investigating the theoretical and practical feasibility of an hypothetical sterilization campaign to control bovine tuberculosis in badgers (and hence cattle) in Britain. Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 Tuyttens, F. A. M. oth Macdonald, D. W. oth in Biodiversity and conservation 1992 7(1998) vom: Juni, Seite 705-723 (DE-627)NLEJ188991573 (DE-600)2000787-5 1572-9710 nnns volume:7 year:1998 month:06 pages:705-723 extent:19 http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1008830418123 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-SOJ GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 7 1998 6 705-723 19 |
| allfieldsSound |
(DE-627)NLEJ193195267 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Sterilization as an alternative strategy to control wildlife diseases: bovine tuberculosis in European badgers as a case study 1998 19 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier Abstract Sterilization has rarely been considered as an alternative to culling or vaccination to control wildlife diseases. Disease control by sterilization, as by culling, has most promise when the host'ss ability for compensatory growth following the removal of density-dependent inhibitions is limited, and when moderate reductions in population density cause disproportionately large reductions in disease prevalence, or even eliminate the disease. For many host/disease examples this will not be the case and vaccination may have overwhelming advantages or may be the only practical option. The impact of sterilization on host density and disease prevalence will develop relatively slowly because sterilization can prevent the recruitment of only one age-cohort at a time. Moreover, unless there is vertical transmission, this age-cohort will consist only of susceptibles. Culling, on the contrary, removes infected as well as susceptible animals. However, for certain disease/host examples, the r elative effectiveness of the different control strategies may be altered considerably if their variable effects on the probability of disease transmission are taken into account. Social perturbation or stress could render certain culling strategies ineffective or even counter-productive. Depending on how disease dynamics are influenced by the host'ss age-structure and reproductive investment, fertility control could offer epidemiological advantages that have been ignored by most disease/host models. We illustrate some of these principles by investigating the theoretical and practical feasibility of an hypothetical sterilization campaign to control bovine tuberculosis in badgers (and hence cattle) in Britain. Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 Tuyttens, F. A. M. oth Macdonald, D. W. oth in Biodiversity and conservation 1992 7(1998) vom: Juni, Seite 705-723 (DE-627)NLEJ188991573 (DE-600)2000787-5 1572-9710 nnns volume:7 year:1998 month:06 pages:705-723 extent:19 http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1008830418123 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-SOJ GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 7 1998 6 705-723 19 |
| language |
English |
| source |
in Biodiversity and conservation 7(1998) vom: Juni, Seite 705-723 volume:7 year:1998 month:06 pages:705-723 extent:19 |
| sourceStr |
in Biodiversity and conservation 7(1998) vom: Juni, Seite 705-723 volume:7 year:1998 month:06 pages:705-723 extent:19 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Biodiversity and conservation |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Tuyttens, F. A. M. @@oth@@ Macdonald, D. W. @@oth@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
1998-06-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
NLEJ188991573 |
| id |
NLEJ193195267 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">NLEJ193195267</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230506092134.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">070526s1998 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)NLEJ193195267</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Sterilization as an alternative strategy to control wildlife diseases: bovine tuberculosis in European badgers as a case study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">1998</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">19</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Sterilization has rarely been considered as an alternative to culling or vaccination to control wildlife diseases. Disease control by sterilization, as by culling, has most promise when the host'ss ability for compensatory growth following the removal of density-dependent inhibitions is limited, and when moderate reductions in population density cause disproportionately large reductions in disease prevalence, or even eliminate the disease. For many host/disease examples this will not be the case and vaccination may have overwhelming advantages or may be the only practical option. The impact of sterilization on host density and disease prevalence will develop relatively slowly because sterilization can prevent the recruitment of only one age-cohort at a time. Moreover, unless there is vertical transmission, this age-cohort will consist only of susceptibles. Culling, on the contrary, removes infected as well as susceptible animals. However, for certain disease/host examples, the r elative effectiveness of the different control strategies may be altered considerably if their variable effects on the probability of disease transmission are taken into account. Social perturbation or stress could render certain culling strategies ineffective or even counter-productive. Depending on how disease dynamics are influenced by the host'ss age-structure and reproductive investment, fertility control could offer epidemiological advantages that have been ignored by most disease/host models. We illustrate some of these principles by investigating the theoretical and practical feasibility of an hypothetical sterilization campaign to control bovine tuberculosis in badgers (and hence cattle) in Britain.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="533" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="f">Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Tuyttens, F. A. M.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Macdonald, D. W.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">in</subfield><subfield code="t">Biodiversity and conservation</subfield><subfield code="d">1992</subfield><subfield code="g">7(1998) vom: Juni, Seite 705-723</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)NLEJ188991573</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2000787-5</subfield><subfield code="x">1572-9710</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:7</subfield><subfield code="g">year:1998</subfield><subfield code="g">month:06</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:705-723</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:19</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1008830418123</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-1-SOJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_NL_ARTICLE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">7</subfield><subfield code="j">1998</subfield><subfield code="c">6</subfield><subfield code="h">705-723</subfield><subfield code="g">19</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| series2 |
Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002 |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)NLEJ188991573 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| collection |
NL |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
1572-9710 |
| topic_title |
Sterilization as an alternative strategy to control wildlife diseases: bovine tuberculosis in European badgers as a case study |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
zu |
| author2_variant |
f a m t fam famt d w m dw dwm |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Biodiversity and conservation |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
NLEJ188991573 |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Biodiversity and conservation |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)NLEJ188991573 (DE-600)2000787-5 |
| title |
Sterilization as an alternative strategy to control wildlife diseases: bovine tuberculosis in European badgers as a case study |
| spellingShingle |
Sterilization as an alternative strategy to control wildlife diseases: bovine tuberculosis in European badgers as a case study |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)NLEJ193195267 |
| title_full |
Sterilization as an alternative strategy to control wildlife diseases: bovine tuberculosis in European badgers as a case study |
| journal |
Biodiversity and conservation |
| journalStr |
Biodiversity and conservation |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
1998 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
| container_start_page |
705 |
| container_volume |
7 |
| physical |
19 |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| title_sort |
sterilization as an alternative strategy to control wildlife diseases: bovine tuberculosis in european badgers as a case study |
| title_auth |
Sterilization as an alternative strategy to control wildlife diseases: bovine tuberculosis in European badgers as a case study |
| abstract |
Abstract Sterilization has rarely been considered as an alternative to culling or vaccination to control wildlife diseases. Disease control by sterilization, as by culling, has most promise when the host'ss ability for compensatory growth following the removal of density-dependent inhibitions is limited, and when moderate reductions in population density cause disproportionately large reductions in disease prevalence, or even eliminate the disease. For many host/disease examples this will not be the case and vaccination may have overwhelming advantages or may be the only practical option. The impact of sterilization on host density and disease prevalence will develop relatively slowly because sterilization can prevent the recruitment of only one age-cohort at a time. Moreover, unless there is vertical transmission, this age-cohort will consist only of susceptibles. Culling, on the contrary, removes infected as well as susceptible animals. However, for certain disease/host examples, the r elative effectiveness of the different control strategies may be altered considerably if their variable effects on the probability of disease transmission are taken into account. Social perturbation or stress could render certain culling strategies ineffective or even counter-productive. Depending on how disease dynamics are influenced by the host'ss age-structure and reproductive investment, fertility control could offer epidemiological advantages that have been ignored by most disease/host models. We illustrate some of these principles by investigating the theoretical and practical feasibility of an hypothetical sterilization campaign to control bovine tuberculosis in badgers (and hence cattle) in Britain. |
| abstractGer |
Abstract Sterilization has rarely been considered as an alternative to culling or vaccination to control wildlife diseases. Disease control by sterilization, as by culling, has most promise when the host'ss ability for compensatory growth following the removal of density-dependent inhibitions is limited, and when moderate reductions in population density cause disproportionately large reductions in disease prevalence, or even eliminate the disease. For many host/disease examples this will not be the case and vaccination may have overwhelming advantages or may be the only practical option. The impact of sterilization on host density and disease prevalence will develop relatively slowly because sterilization can prevent the recruitment of only one age-cohort at a time. Moreover, unless there is vertical transmission, this age-cohort will consist only of susceptibles. Culling, on the contrary, removes infected as well as susceptible animals. However, for certain disease/host examples, the r elative effectiveness of the different control strategies may be altered considerably if their variable effects on the probability of disease transmission are taken into account. Social perturbation or stress could render certain culling strategies ineffective or even counter-productive. Depending on how disease dynamics are influenced by the host'ss age-structure and reproductive investment, fertility control could offer epidemiological advantages that have been ignored by most disease/host models. We illustrate some of these principles by investigating the theoretical and practical feasibility of an hypothetical sterilization campaign to control bovine tuberculosis in badgers (and hence cattle) in Britain. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Abstract Sterilization has rarely been considered as an alternative to culling or vaccination to control wildlife diseases. Disease control by sterilization, as by culling, has most promise when the host'ss ability for compensatory growth following the removal of density-dependent inhibitions is limited, and when moderate reductions in population density cause disproportionately large reductions in disease prevalence, or even eliminate the disease. For many host/disease examples this will not be the case and vaccination may have overwhelming advantages or may be the only practical option. The impact of sterilization on host density and disease prevalence will develop relatively slowly because sterilization can prevent the recruitment of only one age-cohort at a time. Moreover, unless there is vertical transmission, this age-cohort will consist only of susceptibles. Culling, on the contrary, removes infected as well as susceptible animals. However, for certain disease/host examples, the r elative effectiveness of the different control strategies may be altered considerably if their variable effects on the probability of disease transmission are taken into account. Social perturbation or stress could render certain culling strategies ineffective or even counter-productive. Depending on how disease dynamics are influenced by the host'ss age-structure and reproductive investment, fertility control could offer epidemiological advantages that have been ignored by most disease/host models. We illustrate some of these principles by investigating the theoretical and practical feasibility of an hypothetical sterilization campaign to control bovine tuberculosis in badgers (and hence cattle) in Britain. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-SOJ GBV_NL_ARTICLE |
| title_short |
Sterilization as an alternative strategy to control wildlife diseases: bovine tuberculosis in European badgers as a case study |
| url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1008830418123 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Tuyttens, F. A. M. Macdonald, D. W. |
| author2Str |
Tuyttens, F. A. M. Macdonald, D. W. |
| ppnlink |
NLEJ188991573 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
z |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| author2_role |
oth oth |
| up_date |
2024-07-06T10:12:52.116Z |
| _version_ |
1803824159383355392 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">NLEJ193195267</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230506092134.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">070526s1998 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)NLEJ193195267</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Sterilization as an alternative strategy to control wildlife diseases: bovine tuberculosis in European badgers as a case study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">1998</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">19</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Sterilization has rarely been considered as an alternative to culling or vaccination to control wildlife diseases. Disease control by sterilization, as by culling, has most promise when the host'ss ability for compensatory growth following the removal of density-dependent inhibitions is limited, and when moderate reductions in population density cause disproportionately large reductions in disease prevalence, or even eliminate the disease. For many host/disease examples this will not be the case and vaccination may have overwhelming advantages or may be the only practical option. The impact of sterilization on host density and disease prevalence will develop relatively slowly because sterilization can prevent the recruitment of only one age-cohort at a time. Moreover, unless there is vertical transmission, this age-cohort will consist only of susceptibles. Culling, on the contrary, removes infected as well as susceptible animals. However, for certain disease/host examples, the r elative effectiveness of the different control strategies may be altered considerably if their variable effects on the probability of disease transmission are taken into account. Social perturbation or stress could render certain culling strategies ineffective or even counter-productive. Depending on how disease dynamics are influenced by the host'ss age-structure and reproductive investment, fertility control could offer epidemiological advantages that have been ignored by most disease/host models. We illustrate some of these principles by investigating the theoretical and practical feasibility of an hypothetical sterilization campaign to control bovine tuberculosis in badgers (and hence cattle) in Britain.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="533" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="f">Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2002</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Tuyttens, F. A. M.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Macdonald, D. W.</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">in</subfield><subfield code="t">Biodiversity and conservation</subfield><subfield code="d">1992</subfield><subfield code="g">7(1998) vom: Juni, Seite 705-723</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)NLEJ188991573</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2000787-5</subfield><subfield code="x">1572-9710</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:7</subfield><subfield code="g">year:1998</subfield><subfield code="g">month:06</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:705-723</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:19</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1008830418123</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-1-SOJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_NL_ARTICLE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">7</subfield><subfield code="j">1998</subfield><subfield code="c">6</subfield><subfield code="h">705-723</subfield><subfield code="g">19</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.401602 |