The use of contraceptive techniques in managed wild African lion (Panthera leo) populations to mimic open system cub recruitment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context Managed wild lions (Panthera leo) are lions found in smaller (<1000 km2), fenced protected areas that hold a substantial portion of South Africa’s wild lion population. Because the natural population control mechanisms are compromised within these properties, managers must actively control population growth rates. Fecundity control is used by wildlife managers, but long-term, empirical data on the impact and consequences of such interventions in lions are lacking. Aims The aim of the present study was to assess the effectiveness of two methods of contraception (deslorelin implant and unilateral hysterectomy) in reducing cub recruitment of managed wild lions. Methods Survey data spanning 14 years from 94 managed wild lions on 19 protected areas were used to evaluate the effectiveness of deslorelin implant treatments and unilateral hysterectomies on population growth rates through mimicking open system cub recruitment. Key results Deslorelin implants were effective at increasing the age of first reproduction and lengthening inter-birth intervals. There was also an unexpected decrease in litter size. Behavioural side-effects were recorded in 40% of individuals: 19% pride fragmentation; 13% lack of receptiveness towards males; 8% other. The more successive deslorelin implants a lioness had, the more likely it was that weight gain was reported. Unilateral hysterectomy resulted in a decrease in litter size post-surgery, but this was not statistically significant. No behavioural or physiological side-effects were noted after unilateral hysterectomy. Conclusions Deslorelin treatment was more effective in reducing the reproductive output of managed wild lionesses than unilateral hysterectomy surgery. While more side-effects were associated with deslorelin implants than unilateral hysterectomies, a single deslorelin treatment is currently a good option for fecundity reduction. More research is required on unilateral hysterectomy surgery. Implications Neither deslorelin implants nor unilateral hysterectomies offer a ‘silver bullet’ solution for reducing rapid population growth in managed wild lions. Reproductive control should be integrated with other best-practice approaches.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".