Browsing by Author "Collins T"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

Marine mammal conservation: over the horizon
(Inter-Research, 2021-03-25) Nelms SE; Alfaro-Shigueto J; Arnould JPY; Avila IC; Nash SB; Campbell E; Carter MID; Collins T; Currey RJC; Domit C; Franco-Trecu V; Fuentes MMPB; Gilman E; Harcourt RG; Hines EM; Hoelze AR; Hooker SK; Johnston DW; Kelkar N; Kiszka JJ; Laidre KL; Mangel JC; Marsh H; Maxwe SM; Onoufriou AB; Palacios DM; Pierce GJ; Ponnampalam LS; Porter LJ; Russell DJF; Stockin KA; Sutaria D; Wambiji N; Weir CR; Wilson B; Godley BJ; McMahon C
Marine mammals can play important ecological roles in aquatic ecosystems, and their presence can be key to community structure and function. Consequently, marine mammals are often considered indicators of ecosystem health and flagship species. Yet, historical population declines caused by exploitation, and additional current threats, such as climate change, fisheries bycatch, pollution and maritime development, continue to impact many marine mammal species, and at least 25% are classified as threatened (Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable) on the IUCN Red List. Conversely, some species have experienced population increases/recoveries in recent decades, reflecting management interventions, and are heralded as conservation successes. To continue these successes and reverse the downward trajectories of at-risk species, it is necessary to evaluate the threats faced by marine mammals and the conservation mechanisms available to address them. Additionally, there is a need to identify evidence-based priorities of both research and conservation needs across a range of settings and taxa. To that effect we: (1) outline the key threats to marine mammals and their impacts, identify the associated knowledge gaps and recommend actions needed; (2) discuss the merits and downfalls of established and emerging conservation mechanisms; (3) outline the application of research and monitoring techniques; and (4) highlight particular taxa/populations that are in urgent need of focus.
Objective measures for the assessment of post-operative pain in Bos indicus Bull calves following castration
(MDPI AG, 2017-09) Musk GC; Jacobsen S; Hyndman TH; Lehmann HS; Tuke SJ; Collins T; Gleerup KB; Johnson CB; Laurence M
The aim of the study was to assess pain in Bos indicus bull calves following surgical castration. Forty-two animals were randomised to four groups: no castration (NC, n = 6); castration with pre-operative lidocaine (CL, n = 12); castration with pre-operative meloxicam (CM, n = 12); and, castration alone (C, n = 12). Bodyweight was measured regularly and pedometers provided data on activity and rest from day -7 (7 days prior to surgery) to 13. Blood was collected for the measurement of serum amyloid A (SAA), haptoglobin, fibrinogen, and iron on days 0, 3 and 6. Bodyweight and pedometry data were analysed with a mixed effect model. The blood results were analysed with repeated measure one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). There was no treatment effect on bodyweight or activity. The duration of rest was greatest in the CM group and lowest in the C group. There was a significant increase in the concentrations of SAA, haptoglobin, and fibrinogen in all of the groups from day 0 to 3. Iron concentrations were not different at the time points it was measured. The results of this study suggest that animals rest for longer periods after the pre-operative administration of meloxicam. The other objective assessments measured in this study were not able to consistently differentiate between treatment groups.
Vulnerability of marine megafauna to global at-sea anthropogenic threats
(Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology, 2025-11-14) VanCompernolle M; Morris J; Calich HJ; Rodríguez JP; Marley SA; Pearce JR; Abrahms B; Abrantes K; Afonso AS; Aguilar A; Agyekumhene A; Akamatsu T; Åkesson S; Alawa NG; Alfaro-Shigueto J; Anderson RC; Anker-Nilssen T; Arata JA; Araujo G; Arostegui MC; Arrizabalaga H; Arrowsmith LM; Auger-Méthé M; Avila IC; Bailleul F; Barker J; Barlow DR; Barnett A; Barrios-Garrido H; Baylis AMM; Bearzi G; Bejder L; Belda EJ; Benson SR; Berumen ML; Bestley S; Bezerra NPA; Blaison AV; Boehme L; Bograd SJ; Abimbola BD; Bond ME; Borrell A; Bouchet PJ; Boveng P; Braulik G; Braun CD; Brodie S; Bugoni L; Bustamante C; Campana SE; Cárdenas-Alayza S; Carmichael RH; Carroll G; Carter MID; Ceia FR; Cerchio S; Ferreira LC; Chambault P; Chapple TK; Charvet P; Chavez EJ; Chevallier D; Chiaradia A; Chilvers BL; Cimino MA; Clark BL; Clarke CR; Clay TA; Cloyed CS; Cochran JEM; Collins T; Cortes E; Cuevas E; Curnick DJ; Dann P; de Bruyn PJN; de Vos A; Derville S; Dias MP; Diaz-Lopez B; Dodge KL; Dove ADM; Doyle TK; Drymon JM; Dudgeon CL; Dutton PH; Ellenberg U; Elwen SH; Emmerson L; Eniang EA; Espinoza M; Esteban N; Mul E; Fadely BS; Fayet AL; Feare C; Ferguson SH; Feyrer LJ; Finucci B; Florko KRN; Fontes J; Fortuna CM; Fossette S; Fouda L; Frere E; Fuentes MMPB; Gallagher AJ; Borboroglu PG; Garrigue C; Gauffier P; Gennari E; Genov T; Germanov ES; Giménez J; Godfrey MH; Godley BJ; Goldsworthy SD; Gollock M; González Carman V; Gownaris NJ; Grecian WJ; Guzman HM; Hamann M; Hammerschlag N; Hansen ES; Harris MP; Hastie G; Haulsee DE; Hazen EL; Heide-Jørgensen MP; Hieb EE; Higdon JW; Hindell MA; Hinke JT; Hoenner X; Hofmeyr GJG; Holmes BJ; Hoyt E; Huckstadt LA; Hussey NE; Huveneers C; Irvine LG; Jabado RW; Jacoby DMP; Jaeger A; Jagielski PM; Jessopp M; Jewell OJD; Jiménez Alvarado D; Jordan LKB; Jorgensen SJ; Kahn B; Karamanlidis AA; Kato A; Keith-Diagne LW; Kiani MS; Kiszka JJ; Kock AA; Kopf RK; Kuhn C; Kyne PM; Laidre KL; Lana FO; Lander ME; Le Corre M; Lee OA; Leeney RH; Levengood AL; Levenson JJ; Libertelli M; Liu K-M; Lopez Mendilaharsu M; Loveridge A; Lowe CG; Lynch HJ; Macena BCL; Mackay AI
Marine megafauna species are affected by a wide range of anthropogenic threats. To evaluate the risk of such threats, species’ vulnerability to each threat must first be determined. We build on the existing threats classification scheme and ranking system of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species by assessing the vulnerability of 256 marine megafauna species to 23 at-sea threats. The threats we considered included individual fishing gear types, climate-change-related subthreats not previously assessed, and threats associated with coastal impacts and maritime disturbances. Our ratings resulted in 70 species having high vulnerability (v > 0.778 out of 1) to at least 1 threat, primarily drifting longlines, temperature extremes, or fixed gear. These 3 threats were also considered to have the most severe effects (i.e., steepest population declines). Overall, temperature extremes and plastics and other solid waste were rated as affecting the largest proportion of populations. Penguins, pinnipeds, and polar bears had the highest vulnerability to temperature extremes. Bony fishes had the highest vulnerability to drifting longlines and plastics and other solid waste; pelagic cetaceans to 4 maritime disturbance threats; elasmobranchs to 5 fishing threats; and flying birds to drifting longlines and 2 maritime disturbance threats. Sirenians and turtles had the highest vulnerability to at least one threat from all 4 categories. Despite not necessarily having severe effects for most taxonomic groups, temperature extremes were rated among the top threats for all taxa except bony fishes. The vulnerability scores we provide are an important first step in estimating the risk of threats to marine megafauna. Importantly, they help differentiate scope from severity, which is key to identifying threats that should be prioritized for mitigation.