Horn today, gone tomorrow—dehorning as an anti-poaching practice for white rhinos
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Since the beginning of the 20th century, rhino populations have declined from 500 000 individuals to just 27 000. That means they are at just 5% of their population size since 1900! With increasing poaching pressure driven by a demand for rhino horn, the national parks and private reserves that are integral to the remaining rhinos’ survival often need on-the-ground security to protect them. But this type of protection can be expensive. As an alternative, some reserves in South Africa have turned to dehorning—a veterinary procedure that removes a portion of the rhino’s horn. But should managers worry that dehorning causes stress that could impact the welfare of the rhinos? This question is particularly pressing because when managers use dehorning as an anti-poaching tactic, they must trim the rhino’s horns every 1–3 years over its lifetime. Each time the procedure is performed, the rhino needs to be tranquilized. This repetition is necessary because the horns are made of keratin, the same material found in fingernails, claws and hooves. And just like those structures, rhino horns grow continuously. Researchers at the University of Brighton investigated whether the dehorning procedure causes long-term stress for wild white rhinos by analysing hormones in their faeces before and after the procedures. They measured stress hormones called glucocorticoids, which have been shown to rise when rhinos are faced with stressors such as translocation or captivity. They also measured reproductive hormones, which tend to be suppressed under conditions of stress. If the physiology of the rhinos is impacted, it could mean they will face issues when they try to mate and produce offspring. The rhinos in the study were darted from a helicopter and stabilized before having both of their horns trimmed, which is no easy task! The veterinary team must use a chainsaw to remove the horn material and then smooth the edges with a disc sander. They then reverse the effects of the anaesthetic to allow the rhinos to fully recover. This entire process takes about 15–20 minutes. Penny et al. (2020) found that dehorning did not cause a long-term elevation in stress hormone levels compared with rhinos who had not undergone the procedure. They also showed that repeatedly dehorning over multiple years did not lead to increased stress hormone levels or the suppression of reproductive hormones in either male or female rhinos. The researchers outline that further studies are needed to monitor the behaviour of rhinos after dehorning and to confirm that the procedure does not impact rhinos differently in other geographic areas or habitat types. Still, these results are encouraging. Dehorning is considered a relatively drastic measure, and so knowing that the rhinos’ physiology is not negatively affected by these procedures can help managers feel more confident about choosing it as an anti-poaching measure when the pressure to protect the rhinos’ safety is so high. Illustration by Erin Walsh; Email: ewalsh.sci@gmail.com Editor: Jodie L. Rummer
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,008 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».