Search

The only pesticide currently registered for mongoose control is a product developed for rats that consists of a hard-cereal bait block. Although the active ingredient (diphacinone) is known to be highly effective for mongoose, previous studies indicate that carnivorous and omnivorous mongooses do not readily consume the hard bait matrix designed for gnawing rodents. A palatable bait matrix with a consistency more appropriate to mongoose dentition and feeding behavior will be required to develop a more effective mongoose pesticide. We evaluated the acceptance and consumption of nontoxic versions of four candidate bait matrices: FOXECUTE® and FOXSHIELD® (Animal Control Technologies, Australia; ACTA); HOGGONE® (ACTA); and a potted pork shoulder loaf containing artificial dead mouse scent developed by WS-NWRC as a bait for invasive brown treesnakes (hereafter ‘BTS bait’). We offered test groups of six mongooses one of the candidate bait matrices alongside dry dog kibble dog food as a challenge diet for five days. Because the potential active ingredients para-aminopropiophenone and sodium nitrite require accumulation of the toxicant within a relatively brief period of time to affect lethal toxicity before they are metabolized, we conditioned mongooses to feeding within only a four-hour window rather than slowly sampling the bait throughout the day. We estimated rate and amount of consumption through review of time-lapse photography of feeding trials and measured total consumption by weighing uneaten portions of bait. From the first day offered, most mongooses readily consumed ample amounts of all four bait matrices and consumed almost no challenge diet. Overall, consumption was highest and most consistent with the BTS bait. Although this trial did not clearly discriminate an optimal bait matrix, this result is highly encouraging in that we have multiple palatable options. The final selection will be based on other characteristics of the bait matrix such as longevity in the field, compatibility with the selected toxicant, and ease of manufacture, storage, and use. We provide an overview of some of these characteristics for each candidate bait type.

The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), enacted in 1947 and amended in 1972, 1978, and 1988, established federal regulation of pesticides in order to protect human and environmental health. FIFRA has been under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) since the EPA’s inception in 1970. Although FIFRA requires EPA to consider the benefits of a pesticide’s use, EPA must ensure that the pesticide is used without posing unreasonable adverse effects to human health or the environment. Furthermore, the Endangered Species Act (ESA), enacted in 1973, requires federal agencies to protect species vulnerable to extinction without consideration of costs. The amendments to FIFRA in 1972, 1978, 1988, and 1996 mandated the EPA review and reevaluate the eligibility of older pesticide products for reregistration under the updated FIFRA standard, while also complying with the new environmental laws of the 1970s. Today EPA’s goal is to review existing pesticide product registrations at least every 15 years under “Registration Review.” To meet their responsibilities under the ESA, EPA is initiating consultations with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) during the Registration Review process. The first pesticide active ingredients to advance to consultations under Registration Review are those in gas cartridge products. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) holds two gas cartridge product registrations. As a federal agency, APHIS also must comply with the ESA and consults with the USFWS on wildlife damage management activities, including tools such as pesticide products. This discussion presents APHIS’ unique ground view as a federal agency navigating the EPA’s ESA consultations during the Registration Review process, and describes the mitigation measures and their impacts on APHIS Wildlife Services’ activities.

Products developed for vertebrate animals, including toxicants, repellents, contraceptives, vaccines, drugs, antimicrobials, diagnostic kits, and some devices, are regulated under a suite of federal laws. Authorization for the production, sale, and use of these products is primarily controlled by three federal agencies: the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Office of Pesticide Programs, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Center for Veterinary Medicine, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). Furthermore, regulatory oversight of these products extends to research activities conducted during their development. However, determining the regulatory jurisdiction of new products can be confusing for researchers and product developers. In fact, the same product could be regulated under different laws and by more than one agency depending on its intended target population, function, product claims, and route of administration. Adding to this complexity, EPA, FDA, and APHIS have reached a series of formal and informal agreements on which agency will have primary oversight for a number of novel product types that do not clearly fall into established product categories. Here, we present a decision support tool that helps researchers and product developers identify the regulatory jurisdiction of new products, allowing them to comply with federal laws and consult with the appropriate agency early in the research and development phase. Such consultations ensure that resources are spent on studies that satisfy agency-specific data requirements for product registration, approval, and licensing.

Context. Prairie dogs (Cynomys spp.) are rodents enjoyed by some humans; yet, they cause crop and property damage, and carry zoonotic disease. Non-lethal control of prairie dogs is of interest in urban/suburban settings. The injectable immunocontraceptive vaccine GonaCon (active ingredient is gonadotropin-releasing hormone [GnRH]) has been shown to be effective at reducing fertility in equine and deer, and is a US EPA-registered vaccine for use in these ungulate species. Aims. To conduct a replicated field study to test efficacy of GonaCon in black-tailed prairie dogs(C. ludovicianus), and if found to be efficacious, to help facilitate the EPA registration of this product for prairie dog management in urban/suburban areas. Methods. Prairie dogs were live-trapped in October–December 2018 in three treatment and three controlsites. Every captured female ≥660 g wasinjected with 0.4 mL of either GonaCon (0.032% w/w GnRH) at treatment sites or a sham vaccine (absent of GnRH) at control sites. Juveniles and adults were counted at all six sites to establish juvenile:adult (ratio) and juvenile density in May–June 2019 (determining initial GonaCon effectiveness) and 2020 (determining persistence of contraception). Key results. In 2019, the juvenile:adult ratio was significantly reduced (P = 0.0022) in GonaCon (mean ± s.e.: 0.23 ± 0.01) relative to the sham (1.10 ± 0.58) sites. Juvenile density was three times greater in sham than GonaCon sites. In 2020, GonaCon sites produced equal offspring to nearby sham sites. Conclusions. GonaCon is highly effective during the first year(2019) but not in the second year(2020) if only a small area (0.6–2.8 ha) orsmall proportion of females in a colony is treated, such as was undertaken in this study. Implications. In 2022, GonaCon− Prairie Dogs was EPA-registered. Treating whole colonies of prairie dogs at once is favoured; yet, if small or partial colony treatment is desired, then annual GonaCon treatment may be needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We conducted research to develop a safe and effective toxic bait to control the small Indian mongoose (Urva auropunctata), an invasive vertebrate predator impacting the survival of native species in Hawai'i and in other parts of the world. A preserved fish-based bait product was found to be highly palatable to mongooses in cage trials and subsequent formulations with diphacinone (0.005%) showed promise as an efficacious toxic bait for mongooses. This product is intended for future use to control mongooses in conservation and urban areas, and as a biosecurity tool at ports of entry to address accidental introductions into mongoose-free areas. Anticipated delivery of this toxic bait is in tamper-proof bait stations. We designed three prototype bait stations constructed with polyvinyl chloride (PVC) drainage pipes and evaluated their performance in enclosure trials with wild-caught mongooses and in field trials with free-ranging mongooses. A commercially available tamper-resistant rodenticide bait station was also used for comparison to the prototypes in our trials. The goal was to develop a bait station that is readily used by mongooses, allows for bait consumption in place, prevents removal of bait, and restricts access to nontarget animals. We used a non-toxic formulation of the fish-based bait product and monitored bait station use, visitation rates, bait uptake, and spillage. All four bait station types were used by mongooses in the laboratory, and one PVC bait station design and the commercial bait station exhibited multiple mongoose visitations with minimal bait spillage in the field. We did not record any significant nontarget species interactions with the bait during the field trials. The PVC bait station design and commercial bait station are approved methods of bait delivery in the subsequent field efficacy trials under an Experimental Use Permit for the upcoming registration of "Fish-based Bait for Mongooses" with the Environmental Protection Agency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Invasive birds cause damage to economies, natural resources, and human safety across the globe. In the United States, rock doves (Columba livia), Eurasian collared doves (Streptopelia decaocto), rose-ringed parakeets (Psittacula krameri), monk parakeets (Myiopsitta monachus), common mynas (Acridotheres tristis), European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris), and house sparrows (Passer domesticus) are among the invasive and often harmful small-bodied birds inhabiting periurban habitats. The destructive nature of these species warrants a review of methods to reduce or eradicate populations along with methods to reduce damage when population eradication cannot be achieved. We reviewed damage management literature from these species' native and introduced ranges. Additionally, we used the behavior and ecology of these species to inform tool recommendations and potential efficacy under various damage scenarios, while being sensitive to cultural preferences and location of implementation (residential, commercial, and agricultural). Although this review focuses on invasive birds in the United States, it is applicable to other pest species across the globe. Our review highlights areas where research is needed to validate promising damage management methods (lethal control, fertility control, habitat modification, exclusionary methods, frightening devices, and chemical repellents). Where birds are invasive, integrated pest management techniques should focus on eradication or population reduction (toxicants, shooting, and trapping) to keep populations at levels where nonlethal tools can reduce damage. We acknowledge the efficacy of an eradication campaign depends on biological, environmental, and economic factors, along with social license for lethal removal. We recommend integrated pest management strategies including lethal and nonlethal tools specific to the damage problem. Sustained efforts to reduce invasive populations should be used along with integrated deterrent strategies for short-term damage relief. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Phenotypic plasticity is the capacity for an individual genotype to produce different phenotypes in response to environmental variation (1). Most traits are plastic, but the degree to which plasticity is adaptive or non-adaptive depends on whether environmentally induced phenotypes are closer or further away from the local optimum (2-4). Existing theories make conflicting predictions about whether plasticity constrains or facilitates adaptive evolution (4-12). Debate persists because few empirical studies have tested the relationship between initial plasticity and subsequent adaptive evolution in natural populations. Here we show that the direction of plasticity in gene expression is generally opposite to the direction of adaptive evolution. We experimentally transplanted Trinidadian guppies (Poecilia reticulata) adapted to living with cichlid predators to cichlid-free streams, and tested for evolutionary divergence in brain gene expression patterns after three to four generations. We find 135 transcripts that evolved parallel changes in expression within the replicated introduction populations. These changes are in the same direction exhibited in a native cichlid-free population, suggesting rapid adaptive evolution. We find 89% of these transcripts exhibited non-adaptive plastic changes in expression when the source population was reared in the absence of predators, as they are in the opposite direction to the evolved changes. By contrast, the remaining transcripts exhibiting adaptive plasticity show reduced population divergence. Furthermore, the most plastic transcripts in the source population evolved reduced plasticity in the introduction populations, suggesting strong selection against non-adaptive plasticity. These results support models predicting that adaptive plasticity constrains evolution (6-8), whereas non-adaptive plasticity potentiates evolution by increasing the strength of directional selection (11,12). The role of non-adaptive plasticity in evolution has received relatively little attention; however, our results suggest that it may be an important mechanism that predicts evolutionary responses to new environments., A long-standing problem in evolutionary biology is to understand the relationship between environmentally induced variation observed within a generation, and genetically-based evolutionary changes between generations (1-5). It has long been [...]

Author(s): Cameron K. Ghalambor; Kim L. Hoke; Emily W. Ruell; Eva K. Fischer; David N. Reznick; Kimberly A. Hughes Nature 525, 372375 (2015); doi:10.1038/nature15256 There are several errors in this [...]

Author(s): Cameron K. Ghalambor (corresponding author) [1, 2]; Kim L. Hoke [1, 2]; Emily W. Ruell [1]; Eva K. Fischer [1]; David N. Reznick [3]; Kimberly A. Hughes [4] REPLYING [...]

The eradication or control of invasive small Indian mongooses from islands likely requires toxic baiting when removal by trapping proves insufficient. The one toxic bait currently registered for mongooses in the United States has relatively low palatability and efficacy for mongooses. Developing and registering a new pesticide can be very expensive, while funding for developing toxicants for mongooses is limited. Once registered, use of a toxic bait may be hindered by other factors, such as public opposition to an inhumane toxicant, poorer efficacy than expected, or if the toxic bait is difficult for applicators to apply or store. Therefore, we conducted a product feasibility assessment comparing the registration and use potential of toxic baits for mongooses containing either bromethalin, diphacinone, para-aminopropiophenone (PAPP), or sodium nitrite (SN). We estimated that a diphacinone bait would be the cheapest and fastest to register, and more application methods may be allowed compared to the others. On the negative side, we ranked diphacinone as the least humane toxicant of the four, largely due to a prolonged time to death following exposure and onset of symptoms. However, this interval also increases the probability that the antidote can be administered following an accidental exposure. If an alternative toxicant is required, use of a bromethalin, PAPP, or SN bait would likely be limited to bait stations or burrow baiting due to primary risks to non-target species. A bromethalin bait would be the cheapest and fastest to register of the three, particularly if a bait that is already commercially available proved efficacious for mongoose. However, we ranked bromethalin lower than PAPP or SN for overall humaneness. A PAPP bait would be slow and the most expensive to register. An SN bait would be challenging to formulate into a palatable bait with a reasonable shelf life. Although we focused on the U.S., mongooses are invasive in many parts of the world and the regulatory and use requirements for pesticides in other countries are generally comparable. In addition, our feasibility assessment can serve as a template or starting point for managers considering development of toxicant products for vertebrate pests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Noninvasive sampling of hair or scat and subsequent genetic analyses is getting extremely popular to determine behavioral and population characteristics of carnivores, such as density, dispersal and genetic structure.