Registration of wildlife contraceptives in the United States of America, with OvoControl and GonaCon immunocontraceptive vaccines as examples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Overabundant wildlife populations have the potential to adversely affect wildlife habitats or pose risks to human health and safety through disease transmission and collisions with vehicles and aircraft. Traditional methods for reducing overabundant wildlife, such as hunting and trapping, are often restricted or infeasible in urban and suburban areas. Additional management options are needed. For the past 15 years, scientists with the US Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Wildlife Services’ National Wildlife Research Center have been developing and testing contraceptive agents. This research has resulted in the development of several reproductive inhibitors and has forced regulatory bodies to determine where the regulatory authority for wildlife contraceptives will reside. The regulatory authority for contraceptives for wildlife and feral animals has recently been moved from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The first contraceptive registered by the EPA since this move was OvoControl-G for reducing the hatchability of Canada goose eggs. OvoControl was registered in 2005 by Innolytics, LLC working in cooperation with the National Wildlife Research Center. A similar product, OvoControl-P, was registered in 2007 as a contraceptive technique for pigeons. Another product developed by the National Wildlife Research Center, GonaCon immunocontraceptive vaccine, is in the registration process for managing white-tailed deer populations. This manuscript will describe the products that have been and are currently undergoing registration as contraceptives in the United States of America, and the data required for those products.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.048 | 0.013 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".