Postmortem evaluation of reintroduced migratory whooping cranes (Grus americana) in eastern North America

3Citations
Citations of this article
37Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

We reviewed necropsy records of 124 Whooping Cranes (Grus americana) recovered following reintroduction of 268 individuals from 2001 to 2016 in the eastern US. Causes of death were determined in 62% (77/124) of cases facilitated by active monitoring that limited decomposition and scavenging artifact. The great-est proportions of mortality were caused by predation (0.468; 95% confidence interval 0.356–0.580; 36/77), collision with power lines or vehicles (0.260; 0.162–0.358; 20/77), and gunshot (0.169; 0.085–0.253; 13/77). Six deaths were attributed to infection (0.078; 0.018–0.138; 6/77), including bacterial and fungal etiologies. Lead analysis of 50 liver samples yielded two results with elevated concentrations (3.65 and 10.97 ppm wet weight), and 10 bone samples from partial carcasses lacking suitable liver tissue resulted in one elevated result (48.82 ppm dry weight). These data indicate that underlying subclinical or clinical lead toxicosis may be a factor in up to 5% of deaths attributed to predation or impact trauma. Brain cholinesterase activity testing indicated no exposure to organophosphate or carbamate pesti-cides (mean±SD=17.32±2.90 μmol/min/g, 31/ 71). The causes of death and potential underlying factors summarized in this study constitute the first definitive mortality survey of migratory Whooping Cranes based on a high carcass recovery rate. Causes of death by infectious etiologies remained comparatively rare in this study, and occurred as single cases with no evidence of sustained transmission among rein-troduced Whooping Cranes.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Yaw, T. J., Miller, K. J. G., Lankton, J. S., & Hartup, B. K. (2020). Postmortem evaluation of reintroduced migratory whooping cranes (Grus americana) in eastern North America. Journal of Wildlife Diseases, 56(3), 673–678. https://doi.org/10.7589/2019-05-124

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free