Cargando…

Importance of health assessments for conservation in noncaptive wildlife

Wildlife health assessments help identify populations at risk of starvation, disease, and decline from anthropogenic impacts on natural habitats. We conducted an overview of available health assessment studies in noncaptive vertebrates and devised a framework to strategically integrate health assess...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kophamel, Sara, Illing, Björn, Ariel, Ellen, Difalco, Morgan, Skerratt, Lee F., Hamann, Mark, Ward, Leigh C., Méndez, Diana, Munns, Suzanne L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9291856/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33634525
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13724
_version_ 1784749229595426816
author Kophamel, Sara
Illing, Björn
Ariel, Ellen
Difalco, Morgan
Skerratt, Lee F.
Hamann, Mark
Ward, Leigh C.
Méndez, Diana
Munns, Suzanne L.
author_facet Kophamel, Sara
Illing, Björn
Ariel, Ellen
Difalco, Morgan
Skerratt, Lee F.
Hamann, Mark
Ward, Leigh C.
Méndez, Diana
Munns, Suzanne L.
author_sort Kophamel, Sara
collection PubMed
description Wildlife health assessments help identify populations at risk of starvation, disease, and decline from anthropogenic impacts on natural habitats. We conducted an overview of available health assessment studies in noncaptive vertebrates and devised a framework to strategically integrate health assessments in population monitoring. Using a systematic approach, we performed a thorough assessment of studies examining multiple health parameters of noncaptive vertebrate species from 1982 to 2020 (n = 261 studies). We quantified trends in study design and diagnostic methods across taxa with generalized linear models, bibliometric analyses, and visual representations of study location versus biodiversity hotspots. Only 35% of studies involved international or cross‐border collaboration. Countries with both high and threatened biodiversity were greatly underrepresented. Species that were not listed as threatened on the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List represented 49% of assessed species, a trend likely associated with the regional focus of most studies. We strongly suggest following wildlife health assessment protocols when planning a study and using statistically adequate sample sizes for studies establishing reference ranges. Across all taxa blood analysis (89%), body composition assessments (81%), physical examination (72%), and fecal analyses (24% of studies) were the most common methods. A conceptual framework to improve design and standardize wildlife health assessments includes guidelines on the experimental design, data acquisition and analysis, and species conservation planning and management implications. Integrating a physiological and ecological understanding of species resilience toward threatening processes will enable informed decision making regarding the conservation of threatened species.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9291856
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92918562022-07-20 Importance of health assessments for conservation in noncaptive wildlife Kophamel, Sara Illing, Björn Ariel, Ellen Difalco, Morgan Skerratt, Lee F. Hamann, Mark Ward, Leigh C. Méndez, Diana Munns, Suzanne L. Conserv Biol Reviews Wildlife health assessments help identify populations at risk of starvation, disease, and decline from anthropogenic impacts on natural habitats. We conducted an overview of available health assessment studies in noncaptive vertebrates and devised a framework to strategically integrate health assessments in population monitoring. Using a systematic approach, we performed a thorough assessment of studies examining multiple health parameters of noncaptive vertebrate species from 1982 to 2020 (n = 261 studies). We quantified trends in study design and diagnostic methods across taxa with generalized linear models, bibliometric analyses, and visual representations of study location versus biodiversity hotspots. Only 35% of studies involved international or cross‐border collaboration. Countries with both high and threatened biodiversity were greatly underrepresented. Species that were not listed as threatened on the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List represented 49% of assessed species, a trend likely associated with the regional focus of most studies. We strongly suggest following wildlife health assessment protocols when planning a study and using statistically adequate sample sizes for studies establishing reference ranges. Across all taxa blood analysis (89%), body composition assessments (81%), physical examination (72%), and fecal analyses (24% of studies) were the most common methods. A conceptual framework to improve design and standardize wildlife health assessments includes guidelines on the experimental design, data acquisition and analysis, and species conservation planning and management implications. Integrating a physiological and ecological understanding of species resilience toward threatening processes will enable informed decision making regarding the conservation of threatened species. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-05-11 2022-02 /pmc/articles/PMC9291856/ /pubmed/33634525 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13724 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Conservation Biology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Reviews
Kophamel, Sara
Illing, Björn
Ariel, Ellen
Difalco, Morgan
Skerratt, Lee F.
Hamann, Mark
Ward, Leigh C.
Méndez, Diana
Munns, Suzanne L.
Importance of health assessments for conservation in noncaptive wildlife
title Importance of health assessments for conservation in noncaptive wildlife
title_full Importance of health assessments for conservation in noncaptive wildlife
title_fullStr Importance of health assessments for conservation in noncaptive wildlife
title_full_unstemmed Importance of health assessments for conservation in noncaptive wildlife
title_short Importance of health assessments for conservation in noncaptive wildlife
title_sort importance of health assessments for conservation in noncaptive wildlife
topic Reviews
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9291856/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33634525
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13724
work_keys_str_mv AT kophamelsara importanceofhealthassessmentsforconservationinnoncaptivewildlife
AT illingbjorn importanceofhealthassessmentsforconservationinnoncaptivewildlife
AT arielellen importanceofhealthassessmentsforconservationinnoncaptivewildlife
AT difalcomorgan importanceofhealthassessmentsforconservationinnoncaptivewildlife
AT skerrattleef importanceofhealthassessmentsforconservationinnoncaptivewildlife
AT hamannmark importanceofhealthassessmentsforconservationinnoncaptivewildlife
AT wardleighc importanceofhealthassessmentsforconservationinnoncaptivewildlife
AT mendezdiana importanceofhealthassessmentsforconservationinnoncaptivewildlife
AT munnssuzannel importanceofhealthassessmentsforconservationinnoncaptivewildlife