Nalbuphine, medetomidine, and azaperone use in free-ranging American black bears and mountain lions in Wyoming

IF 1.9 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 ECOLOGY
Brie Hashem, Peach Van Wick, Samantha E. Allen
{"title":"Nalbuphine, medetomidine, and azaperone use in free-ranging American black bears and mountain lions in Wyoming","authors":"Brie Hashem,&nbsp;Peach Van Wick,&nbsp;Samantha E. Allen","doi":"10.1002/jwmg.22658","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Safe and effective chemical immobilization is a necessary component of large carnivore management and research, but laws regulating controlled substances can limit the use of many drugs by non-veterinary personnel. NalMed-A (40 mg/mL nalbuphine HCl, 10 mg/mL medetomidine HCl, 10 mg/mL azaperone tartrate) is a non-controlled drug combination used to immobilize a number of free-ranging species, but there are limited published reports of its usage by non-veterinary personnel when immobilizing American black bears (<i>Ursus americanus</i>) and mountain lions (<i>Puma concolor</i>). Additionally, there are some safety concerns regarding anecdotal reports of spontaneous arousals occurring in large carnivores immobilized with NalMed-A. We performed a retrospective analysis of capture forms for free-ranging black bears (<i>n</i> = 34) and mountain lions (<i>n</i> = 7) immobilized with NalMed-A by non-veterinary personnel across Wyoming, USA, in 2017 and 2019–2024. Induction (<i>x̅</i> ± SE) was 10.74 ± 1.16 minutes for black bears (<i>n</i> = 34) and 7.14 ± 1.60 for mountain lions (<i>n</i> = 7). Reversal was 14.21 ± 1.51 minutes for black bears (<i>n</i> = 28) and 10.00 ± 1.26 minutes for mountain lions (<i>n</i> = 5). We used non-parametric tests (Kruskal-Wallis, Wilcoxon rank sum) and odds ratios to examine the effect of certain parameters on induction times, redoses, and spontaneous arousals in black bears. Median induction time for black bears injected in their hind leg or rump was greater than for black bears injected in their shoulder (<i>n</i> = 34, <i>W</i> = 79.5, <i>P</i> = 0.045). Six black bears (18%) experienced spontaneous arousals. We recommend avoiding the hind leg and rump for dart placement in bears, and using hobbles and a muzzle for large carnivores when using NalMed-A in a free-ranging setting because of the risk of spontaneous arousals.</p>","PeriodicalId":17504,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Wildlife Management","volume":"88 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Wildlife Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jwmg.22658","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Safe and effective chemical immobilization is a necessary component of large carnivore management and research, but laws regulating controlled substances can limit the use of many drugs by non-veterinary personnel. NalMed-A (40 mg/mL nalbuphine HCl, 10 mg/mL medetomidine HCl, 10 mg/mL azaperone tartrate) is a non-controlled drug combination used to immobilize a number of free-ranging species, but there are limited published reports of its usage by non-veterinary personnel when immobilizing American black bears (Ursus americanus) and mountain lions (Puma concolor). Additionally, there are some safety concerns regarding anecdotal reports of spontaneous arousals occurring in large carnivores immobilized with NalMed-A. We performed a retrospective analysis of capture forms for free-ranging black bears (n = 34) and mountain lions (n = 7) immobilized with NalMed-A by non-veterinary personnel across Wyoming, USA, in 2017 and 2019–2024. Induction ( ± SE) was 10.74 ± 1.16 minutes for black bears (n = 34) and 7.14 ± 1.60 for mountain lions (n = 7). Reversal was 14.21 ± 1.51 minutes for black bears (n = 28) and 10.00 ± 1.26 minutes for mountain lions (n = 5). We used non-parametric tests (Kruskal-Wallis, Wilcoxon rank sum) and odds ratios to examine the effect of certain parameters on induction times, redoses, and spontaneous arousals in black bears. Median induction time for black bears injected in their hind leg or rump was greater than for black bears injected in their shoulder (n = 34, W = 79.5, P = 0.045). Six black bears (18%) experienced spontaneous arousals. We recommend avoiding the hind leg and rump for dart placement in bears, and using hobbles and a muzzle for large carnivores when using NalMed-A in a free-ranging setting because of the risk of spontaneous arousals.

Abstract Image

怀俄明州散养美洲黑熊和山狮使用纳布啡、美托咪定和氮丙酮的情况
安全有效的化学固定是大型食肉动物管理和研究的必要组成部分,但管制药物的法律会限制非兽医人员使用许多药物。NalMed-A(40 毫克/毫升盐酸纳布啡、10 毫克/毫升盐酸美托咪定、10 毫克/毫升酒石酸氮丙酮)是一种非管制药物组合,可用于固定许多自由活动的物种,但关于非兽医人员在固定美洲黑熊(Ursus americanus)和山狮(Puma concolor)时使用这种药物的公开报道很有限。此外,使用 NalMed-A 固定的大型食肉动物出现自发唤醒的轶事报道也存在一些安全隐患。我们对美国怀俄明州非兽医人员在 2017 年和 2019-2024 年使用 NalMed-A 固定的散养黑熊(n = 34)和山狮(n = 7)的捕获表进行了回顾性分析。黑熊(34 头)的诱导时间(x̅ ± SE)为 10.74 ± 1.16 分钟,山狮(7 头)的诱导时间为 7.14 ± 1.60 分钟。黑熊的逆转时间为 14.21 ± 1.51 分钟(n = 28),山狮为 10.00 ± 1.26 分钟(n = 5)。我们使用非参数检验(Kruskal-Wallis、Wilcoxon 秩和)和几率比来研究某些参数对黑熊诱导时间、复吸和自发唤醒的影响。后腿或臀部注射的黑熊诱导时间中位数大于肩部注射的黑熊(n = 34,W = 79.5,P = 0.045)。六头黑熊(18%)出现了自发唤醒。由于自发唤醒的风险,我们建议避免在黑熊的后腿和臀部放置飞镖,并建议在自由放养环境中使用 NalMed-A 时为大型食肉动物使用滚轮和口套。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Wildlife Management
Journal of Wildlife Management 环境科学-动物学
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
13.00%
发文量
188
审稿时长
9-24 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Wildlife Management publishes manuscripts containing information from original research that contributes to basic wildlife science. Suitable topics include investigations into the biology and ecology of wildlife and their habitats that has direct or indirect implications for wildlife management and conservation. This includes basic information on wildlife habitat use, reproduction, genetics, demographics, viability, predator-prey relationships, space-use, movements, behavior, and physiology; but within the context of contemporary management and conservation issues such that the knowledge may ultimately be useful to wildlife practitioners. Also considered are theoretical and conceptual aspects of wildlife science, including development of new approaches to quantitative analyses, modeling of wildlife populations and habitats, and other topics that are germane to advancing wildlife science. Limited reviews or meta analyses will be considered if they provide a meaningful new synthesis or perspective on an appropriate subject. Direct evaluation of management practices or policies should be sent to the Wildlife Society Bulletin, as should papers reporting new tools or techniques. However, papers that report new tools or techniques, or effects of management practices, within the context of a broader study investigating basic wildlife biology and ecology will be considered by The Journal of Wildlife Management. Book reviews of relevant topics in basic wildlife research and biology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信