Suppr超能文献

在半圈养的亚洲和非洲草原象的对照实验中测试“臭”象驱避剂的有效性。

Testing the Effectiveness of the "Smelly" Elephant Repellent in Controlled Experiments in Semi-Captive Asian and African Savanna Elephants.

作者信息

Robertson Marion R, Olivier Lisa J, Roberts John, Yonthantham Laddawan, Banda Constance, N'gombwa Innocent B, Dale Rachel, Tiller Lydia N

机构信息

WildAid, 220 Montgomery Street #1200, San Francisco, CA 94104, USA.

Game Rangers International, Plot 2374, The Village, Leopards Hill Road, Lusaka 10101, Zambia.

出版信息

Animals (Basel). 2023 Oct 26;13(21):3334. doi: 10.3390/ani13213334.

Abstract

Crop-raiding by elephants is one of the most prevalent forms of human-elephant conflict and is increasing with the spread of agriculture into wildlife range areas. As the magnitude of conflicts between people and elephants increases across Africa and Asia, mitigating and reducing the impacts of elephant crop-raiding has become a major focus of conservation intervention. In this study, we tested the responses of semi-captive elephants to the "smelly" elephant repellent, a novel olfactory crop-raiding mitigation method. At two trial sites, in Zambia and Thailand, African elephants () and Asian elephants () were exposed to the repellent, in order to test whether or not they entered an area protected by the repellent and whether they ate the food provided. The repellent elicited clear reactions from both study groups of elephants compared to control conditions. Generalised linear models revealed that the elephants were more alert, sniffed more, and vocalised more when they encountered the repellent. Although the repellent triggered a response, it did not prevent elephants from entering plots protected by the repellent or from eating crops, unlike in trials conducted with wild elephants. Personality played a role in responses towards the repellent, as the elephants that entered the experimental plots were bolder and more curious individuals. We conclude that, although captive environments provide controlled settings for experimental testing, the ecological validity of testing human-elephant conflict mitigation methods with captive wildlife should be strongly considered. This study also shows that understanding animal behaviour is essential for improving human-elephant coexistence and for designing deterrence mechanisms. Appreciating personality traits in elephants, especially amongst "problem" elephants who have a greater propensity to crop raid, could lead to the design of new mitigation methods designed to target these individuals.

摘要

大象偷吃庄稼是人类与大象冲突中最普遍的形式之一,且随着农业向野生动物栖息地的扩张而日益增加。随着非洲和亚洲人与大象之间冲突的加剧,减轻和减少大象偷吃庄稼的影响已成为保护干预的主要重点。在本研究中,我们测试了半圈养大象对“有臭味”的大象驱避剂的反应,这是一种新型的通过嗅觉减轻庄稼被偷吃问题的方法。在赞比亚和泰国的两个试验地点,让非洲象( )和亚洲象( )接触这种驱避剂,以测试它们是否进入由该驱避剂保护的区域以及是否食用提供的食物。与对照条件相比,这种驱避剂在两组研究大象中都引发了明显反应。广义线性模型显示,大象在遇到驱避剂时更加警觉、嗅闻更多且发声更多。尽管这种驱避剂引发了反应,但与对野生大象进行的试验不同,它并不能阻止大象进入由驱避剂保护的地块或食用庄稼。个性在对驱避剂的反应中起到了作用,因为进入试验区的大象是更胆大、更好奇的个体。我们得出结论,尽管圈养环境为实验测试提供了可控的环境,但在用圈养野生动物测试缓解人象冲突方法时,应充分考虑其生态有效性。本研究还表明,了解动物行为对于改善人象共存以及设计威慑机制至关重要。了解大象的个性特征,尤其是在那些更倾向于偷吃庄稼的“问题”大象中,可能会导致设计出针对这些个体的新的缓解方法。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1a12/10647569/e60d2cb890be/animals-13-03334-g001a.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验