Trap-effectiveness and response to tiletamine-zolazepam and medetomidine anaesthesia in Eurasian wild boar captured with cage and corral traps

José Barasona,Joaquín Vicente,Christian Gortázar,Beatriz Beltrán-Beck,Jorge López-Olvera

doi:10.1186/1746-6148-9-107

José Barasona, Joaquín Vicente + Show 3 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-6148-9-107

Copy DOI

Abstract

BackgroundCapture, handling and chemical restraint are basic techniques often needed for research or management purposes. The aim of this study was testing a combination of tiletamine-zolazepam (TZ) (3 mg/kg) and medetomidine (M) (0.05 mg/kg) on Eurasian wild boar (Sus scrofa). A total of 77 free-ranging wild boar were captured by means of portable cages and corral traps and then anaesthetized with intramuscular darts using a blowpipe. The individual response to chemical immobilization was characterized using anaesthetic, clinical, and serum biochemical variables. After the procedure, 14 of these wild boar were monitored for 20 days using GPS-GSM collars.ResultsPre-release mortality during capture and handling (6.5%) was associated with severe trauma in corral traps. Capture specificity for wild boar was 96.3% and trapping effort was 16.5 days per captured wild boar. Mean induction period was 4.5 ± 2.2 min, hypnosis period enabling effective handling was 61.6 ± 25.4 min, and recovery period was 12.8 ± 12.1 min. No heart or respiratory failure due to added stress occurred and post-release monitoring by GPS-devices revealed no mortality due to anaesthesia. According to the best statistical model obtained, the main factor driving anaesthetic efficacy and stress indicators is trap type.ConclusionsBoth cage and corral traps are efficient methods to capture wild boar. Cage traps are safer, as demonstrated by mortality rates as well as anaesthetic, physiological, and serum biochemical responses. This anaesthetic protocol is useful for prolonged handling of wild boar and allows sampling and collecting data for ecological and epidemiological studies.

Highlights

Capture, handling and chemical restraint are basic techniques often needed for research or management purposes
Capture and either physical or chemical immobilization of wild boar convey risks of mortality, but chemical immobilization is usually required for handling [13,14,15,16,17]. Different factors, such as capture method, previous human-induced stress and environmental conditions may affect the efficacy of chemical restraint [18,19] and induce severe stress [14,17,19]
The aims of this study were (1) to evaluate the efficiency and safety of a combination of TZ and M in freeranging wild boar captured by means of cage and corral traps; and (2) to determine the factors affecting the anaesthetic and physiological individual response to chemical immobilization of wild boar physically captured with cage and corral-traps, using anaesthetic, clinical, and serum biochemical variables

Summary

Introduction

Capture, handling and chemical restraint are basic techniques often needed for research or management purposes. Social sensitivity regarding environmental issues, animal health and animal welfare has increased worldwide [1,2] These issues must be addressed when implementing research and management of wild ungulates [3,4], which usually include trapping free ranging animals. Capture and either physical or chemical immobilization of wild boar convey risks of mortality, but chemical immobilization is usually required for handling [13,14,15,16,17] Different factors, such as capture method, previous human-induced stress and environmental conditions may affect the efficacy of chemical restraint [18,19] and induce severe stress [14,17,19]

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion