Postmortem Findings in Bustards in the United Arab Emirates

Bailey, Tom; Nicholls, P.K.; Samour, Jaime; Naldo, Jesus L.; Wernery, U.; Howlett, J. C.

doi:10.2307/1592224

Cited by 29 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While researchers often assume that the benefits of information gained outweigh the potential risk to individual animals, the impacts are not always quantified (Wilson & McMahon 2006). Some methods such as blood and diet sampling in birds (Carlisle & Holberton 2006;Brown & Brown 2009;Voss, Shutler, & Werner 2010), branding and tagging in seals (McMahon, van den Hoff, & Burton 2005;Baker & Johanos 2006) and radiotelemetry in mammals and birds (Kock et al 1987;Bailey et al 1996;Del Giudice et al 2005;Arnemo et al 2006;Barron, Brawn, & Weatherhead 2010) have been scrutinized carefully to determine potential effects on survival, reproduction and behaviour, whereas other methods such as the use of mist nets to capture wild birds have rarely been evaluated (Wilson & McMahon 2006;Jennings et al 2009). Procedures that affect the welfare of animals raise ethical considerations and can compromise research objectives by introducing bias into data collection and should be considered when interpreting results (Dugger et al 2006;Wilson & McMahon 2006;Saraux et al 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How safe is mist netting? evaluating the risk of injury and mortality to birds

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary1. The capture of birds using mist nets is a widely utilized technique for monitoring avian populations. While the method is assumed to be safe, very few studies have addressed how frequently injuries and mortalities occur and the associated risks have not been formally evaluated. 2. We quantified the rates of mortality and injury at 22 banding organizations in the United States and Canada and used capture data from five organizations to determine what kinds of incidents occur most frequently. Analyses focused on passerines and near-passerines, but other groups were included. We evaluated whether body mass, age, sex, mist net mesh size, month and time of day or frequency of capture are related to the risk or type of incident. We also compared the recapture histories over time between birds that were injured and those that were never injured for 16 species. 3. The average rate of injury was 0AE59%, while mortality was 0AE23%. Birds captured frequently were less at risk to incident. Body mass was positively correlated with incident and larger birds were at greater risk to predation, leg injuries, broken legs, internal bleeding and cuts, while smaller birds were more prone to stress, tangling-related injuries and wing strain. Rates of incident varied among species, with some at greater risk than others. We found no evidence for increased mortality over time of injured birds compared with uninjured birds. 4. We provide the first comprehensive evaluation of the risks associated with mist netting. Our results indicate that (1) injury and mortality rates below one percent can be achieved during mist netting and (2) injured birds are likely to survive in comparable numbers to uninjured birds after release. While overall risks are low, this study identified vulnerable species and traits that may increase a bird's susceptibility to incident that should be considered in banding protocols aimed at minimizing injury and mortality. Projects using mist nets should monitor their performance and compare their results to those of other organizations.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How safe is mist netting? evaluating the risk of injury and mortality to birds

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Email: pshsurfer@hotmail.com Observed declines in this species are thought to be a combination both of habitat degradation through overgrazing by domestic animals and overhunting. Recognition of the decline of this quarry species led to the development of captive breeding and research centers for houbara bustards in Saudi Arabia [Saint Jalme et al, 1996] and within the UAE [Bailey et al, 1996]. To redress the decline of the nominate species in Morocco, a captive breeding program was instigated at the International Foundation for Conservation and Development of Wildlife (IFCDW), which is based near Agadir in western Morocco.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cryopreservation of houbara semen: A pilot study

Hartley

Dawson²,

Lindsay³

et al. 1999

Zoo Biol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Observations from the Middle East (Bailey et al ., 1996; Ostrowski et al ., 1996) show that bacterial diseases are important causes of morbidity and mortality of captive houbara bustards ( Chlamydotis undulata ). The antimicrobial and pharmacokinetic properties of enrofloxacin indicate that it might have marked advantages for use in bustards.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pharmacokinetics of enrofloxacin after intravenous, intramuscular and oral administration in houbara bustard (Chlamydotis undulata macqueenii)

Bailey¹,

Sheen²,

Silvanose³

et al. 1998

Vet Pharm & Therapeutics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The in-vitro activity of enrofloxacin against 117 strains of bacteria isolated from bustards was determined. Minimum inhibitory concentrations for 72% of the Proteus spp., E. coli, Salmonella spp. and Klebsiella spp. (n = 61) and for 48% of the Streptococci spp. and Staphylococci spp. (n = 31) were < or = 0.5 microg/mL. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of 76% of Pseudomonas spp. (n = 25) was < or = 2 microg/mL. Fourteen strains were resistant to concentrations > or = 128 microg/mL. The elimination half-lives (t1/2 elim beta) (mean +/- SEM) of 10 mg/kg enrofloxacin in eight houbara bustards (Chlamydotis undulata) were 6.80 +/- 0.79, 6.39 +/- 1.49 and 5.63 +/- 0.54 h after oral (p.o.), intramuscular (i.m.) and intravenous (i.v.) administration, respectively. Enrofloxacin was rapidly absorbed from the bustard gastro-intestinal tract and maximum plasma concentrations of 1.84 +/- 0.16 microg/mL were achieved after 0.66 +/- 0.05 h. Maximum plasma concentration after i.m. administration of 10 mg/kg was 2.75 +/- 0.11 microg/mL at 1.72 +/- 0.19 h. Maximum plasma concentration after i.m. administration of 15 mg/kg in two birds was 4.86 microg/mL. Bioavailability was 97.3 +/- 13.7% and 62.7 +/- 11.1% after i.m. and oral administration, respectively. Plasma concentrations of enrofloxacin > or = 0.5 microg/mL were maintained for at least 12 h for all routes at 10 mg/kg and for 24 h after i.m. administration at 15 mg/kg. Plasma enrofloxacin concentrations were monitored during the first 3 days of treatment in five houbara bustards and kori bustards (Ardeotis kori) with bacterial infections receiving a single daily i.m. injection of 10 mg/kg for 3 days. The mean plasma enrofloxacin concentrations in the clinical cases at 27 and 51 h (3.69 and 3.86 microg/mL) and at 48 h (0.70 microg/mL) were significantly higher compared with the 3 h and 24 h time intervals from clinically normal birds. The maximum plasma concentration (Cmax)/MIC ratio was ranked i.v. (10/mg/kg) > i.m. (15 mg/kg) > i.m. (10 mg/kg) > oral (10 mg/kg), but it was only higher than 8:1 for i.v. and i.m. administrations of enrofloxacin at 10 mg/kg and 15 mg/kg, respectively, against a low MIC (0.5 microg/mL). A dosage regimen of 10 mg/kg repeated every 12 h, or 15 mg/kg repeated every 24 h, would be expected to give blood concentrations above 0. 5 microg/mL and hence provide therapeutic response in the bustard against a wide range of bacterial infections.

show abstract

Postmortem Findings in Bustards in the United Arab Emirates

Cited by 29 publications

References 5 publications

How safe is mist netting? evaluating the risk of injury and mortality to birds

How safe is mist netting? evaluating the risk of injury and mortality to birds

Cryopreservation of houbara semen: A pilot study

Pharmacokinetics of enrofloxacin after intravenous, intramuscular and oral administration in houbara bustard (Chlamydotis undulata macqueenii)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About