An Investigation of the Cause of Wild Turkey Mortality in Mississippi

Thiemann, Rachel; Dalton, Martha Frances; Rose, Heidi H.; Baughman, Brittany; Butler, Adam; Adcock, Kayla G.; Nemeth, Nicole M.; Armour, Natalie

doi:10.1637/aviandiseases-d-22-00007

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In approximately 28% of the birds infected with LPDV, REV or both in our study, pox was also detected, often manifesting as grossly nodular skin disease of the head and neck. Similarly, in Mississippi, some Wild Turkeys that had LPDV and REV coinfection (n¼8), LPDV only (n¼8) and REV only (n¼2) also had pox (Thiemann et al 2022). In general, Wild Turkeys with LPDV and/or REV were in poor overall health, as indicated by poor nutritional condition, multiple pathogen infections, or both.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, skin was not routinely evaluated via histopathology unless gross lesions were observed, and no gross skin lesions were observed in any REV-only–infected turkeys. Infections with LPDV and REV are suspected to cause immunosuppression in Wild Turkeys, which may have indirect health effects, including predisposing to secondary or exacerbating concurrent infections, such as with avian poxvirus (Alger et al 2015; Thiemann et al 2022). In approximately 28% of the birds infected with LPDV, REV or both in our study, pox was also detected, often manifesting as grossly nodular skin disease of the head and neck.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Lymphoproliferative Disease Virus and Reticuloendotheliosis Virus Detection and Disease in Wild Turkeys (Meleagris Gallopavo)

Adcock,

Berghaus,

Goodwin

et al. 2024

Journal of Wildlife Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lymphoproliferative Disease Virus and Reticuloendotheliosis Virus Detection and Disease in Wild Turkeys (Meleagris Gallopavo)

Adcock,

Berghaus,

Goodwin

et al. 2024

Journal of Wildlife Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reticuloendotheliosis and Lymphoproliferative Disease

Dunn

2024

Turkey Diseases and Disorders Volume 2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adaptive protocols identify sources of post-capture mortality in radio-marked wild turkeys

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context Stress or injury resulting from capture and marking of animals is a potential cause of mortality following release. Multiple methods have been developed to identify sources of post-capture mortality, but these are most often applied following completion of field work to identify an appropriate censor window for other analyses. Aims Following unacceptable levels of post-capture mortality (13 of 53) in radio-marked individuals in the first year of a larger wild turkey research project in Maine, USA, we assessed post-capture survival as data became available to inform proactive changes to capture protocols, with the goals of improving animal welfare and data quality. Methods We evaluated potential sources of post-capture mortality related to the capture and marking process, individual characteristics of the turkey, and local weather conditions. We then used results from the preliminary analysis to inform adaptive changes to capture protocols in subsequent years and confirmed the effectiveness of these changes through a final analysis. Key results We found that greater handling time was positively correlated with increased post-capture survival, possibly in response to releasing turkeys in larger groups to facilitate regrouping. We also found that transmitter style impacted post-capture survival, such that female turkeys fitted with backpack-style transmitters experienced a survival rate of 0.787 (0.677–0.861 95% CI), compared with 0.903 (0.538–0.976 95% CI) for those fitted with a necklace transmitter, although adjustments to the fit of backpack transmitters appeared to help mitigate such issues. Conclusions Following informed adjustments to our capture protocols, we observed a dramatic increase in post-capture survival such that no mortalities were experienced in the first 30 days post capture in the final year of our study (n = 65). Although our estimated censor window was similar to other studies (~10 days), differences in effects of external stressors further the need for adaptive capture protocols because local stressors and risks may vary according to climate and ecosystem characteristics such as predator communities and habitat type. Implications We recommend that when possible, investigators continuously assess their protocols throughout the capture process and adapt accordingly to limit negative repercussions of capture and handling to wildlife.

show abstract

An Investigation of the Cause of Wild Turkey Mortality in Mississippi

Cited by 3 publications

References 17 publications

Lymphoproliferative Disease Virus and Reticuloendotheliosis Virus Detection and Disease in Wild Turkeys (Meleagris Gallopavo)

Lymphoproliferative Disease Virus and Reticuloendotheliosis Virus Detection and Disease in Wild Turkeys (Meleagris Gallopavo)

Reticuloendotheliosis and Lymphoproliferative Disease

Adaptive protocols identify sources of post-capture mortality in radio-marked wild turkeys

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About