Factors affecting Crop Damage by the Wild Boar (Sus scrofa)

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 140-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seong-Min Lee ◽  
◽  
Eun-Jae Lee ◽  
Hee-Bok Park ◽  
Chang-Wan Seo
Keyword(s):  
Wild Boar ◽  
Sus Scrofa ◽  
Crop Damage ◽  
Factors Affecting

scholarly journals Factors affecting the microbiological load of Italian hunted wild boar meat (Sus scrofa)

Meat Science ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 160 ◽  
pp. 107967 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesca Orsoni ◽  
Claudia Romeo ◽  
Nicola Ferrari ◽  
Lia Bardasi ◽  
Giuseppe Merialdi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Wild Boar ◽  
Sus Scrofa ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Wild Boar Meat

scholarly journals Pets becoming established in the wild: free–living Vietnamese potbellied pigs in Spain

2013 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-215
Author(s):  
M. Delibes–Mateos ◽  
◽  
A. Delibes ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Wild Boar ◽  
Sus Scrofa ◽  
Species Abundance ◽  
Crop Damage ◽  
Wild Boar Population ◽  
Natural Habitats ◽  
Free Living ◽  
In The Wild ◽  
Google Search ◽  
Adequate Management

Vietnamese potbellied (VPB) pigs (Sus scrofa) are a common pet in North America and Europe, but their recent decrease in popularity has increased their abandonment. Our main aim was to identify potential cases of free–living VPB pigs in Spain through an in–depth Google search. We identified 42 cases of free–living VPB pigs distributed throughout the country. The number of free–living VPB pigs reported increased by year but the species abundance still seems to be low. Signs of VPB pig reproduction and possible hybrids between VPB pigs and wild boar or feral pigs have been also reported. Free–living VPB pigs could erode the gene pool of the Spanish wild boar population and exacerbate the damage (e.g. crop damage or spread of diseases) already caused by wild board. Urgent evaluation and adequate management of wild VPB pig sightings is needed to prevent their establishment in natural habitats.

Diet of wild boar Sus scrofa L. and crop damage in an intensive agroecosystem

2006 ◽  
Vol 52 (4) ◽  
pp. 245-250 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan Herrero ◽  
Alicia García-Serrano ◽  
Sergio Couto ◽  
Vicente M. Ortuño ◽  
Ricardo García-González
Keyword(s):  
Wild Boar ◽  
Sus Scrofa ◽  
Crop Damage

Patterns of crop damage by wild boar (Sus scrofa)in Luxembourg over a 10-year period

2008 ◽  
Vol 54 (4) ◽  
pp. 589-599 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurent Schley ◽  
Marc Dufrêne ◽  
Ady Krier ◽  
Alain C. Frantz
Keyword(s):  
Wild Boar ◽  
Sus Scrofa ◽  
Crop Damage

scholarly journals Influence of seasonality, environmental and anthropic factors on crop damage by wild boar Sus scrofa

2019 ◽  
Vol 68 (4) ◽  
pp. 261
Author(s):  
Fabrizio Cappa ◽  
Marco Lombardini ◽  
Alberto Meriggi
Keyword(s):  
Wild Boar ◽  
Sus Scrofa ◽  
Crop Damage

Seroprevalence and factors associated with Toxoplasma gondii infection in wild boar (Sus scrofa) in a Mediterranean island

2010 ◽  
Vol 138 (9) ◽  
pp. 1257-1266 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. RICHOMME ◽  
E. AFONSO ◽  
V. TOLON ◽  
C. DUCROT ◽  
L. HALOS ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Toxoplasma Gondii ◽  
Wild Boar ◽  
Sus Scrofa ◽  
First Year ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Landscape Characteristics ◽  
Meat Juice ◽  
Modified Agglutination Test ◽  
Mediterranean Island ◽  
Toxoplasma Gondii Infection

SUMMARYKnowledge of the factors affecting the presence of Toxoplasma gondii in wildlife is limited. Here we analyse which local landscape characteristics are associated with the presence of toxoplasmosis in wild boar, Sus scrofa, on the island of Corsica, France. Meat juice samples from 1399 wild boars collected during two hunting seasons were tested for T. gondii antibodies using the modified agglutination test (titre 1:4). The overall seroprevalence was 0·55 (95% CI 0·50–0·59) for the first year and 0·33 (95% CI 0·29–0·35) for the second year. Seroprevalence varied according to age and county. At the county level, seropositivity in adults was related to farm density during year 1, and to habitat fragmentation, farm density and altitude during year 2. The exposure of wild boar to T. gondii is thus variable according to landscape characteristics and probably results in a variable risk of transmission of toxoplasmosis to humans.

scholarly journals Increase in crop damage caused by wild boar (Sus scrofa L.): the “refuge effect”

2011 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 683-692 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Amici ◽  
Fioravante Serrani ◽  
Carlo Maria Rossi ◽  
Riccardo Primi
Keyword(s):  
Wild Boar ◽  
Sus Scrofa ◽  
Crop Damage ◽  
Refuge Effect

scholarly journals Using an online survey to assess the spatial distribution of wild boar (Sus scrofa L.) crop damage and factors influencing this distribution and severity in Limburg province, Belgium

2019 ◽  
Vol 149 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anneleen Rutten ◽  
Jim Casaer ◽  
Thierry Onkelinx ◽  
Lieven De Smet ◽  
Nele Witters ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Distribution ◽  
Wild Boar ◽  
Sus Scrofa ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Crop Damage ◽  
Damage Probability ◽  
Factors Influencing ◽  
Potential Respondent ◽  
Survey Results

Wild boar (Sus scrofa L.) reappeared in Flanders (northern Belgium) in 2006 after almost half a century of absence. Interactions between wild boar and human activities are frequent due to extensive fragmentation of the landscape in Flanders. Complaints about agricultural damage are increasing but the actual extent of crop damage remains unknown. The goal of this study was to assess the current risk and the spatial distribution of crop damage, as well as factors influencing damage distribution in the province of Limburg (eastern Flanders). An online survey was sent to farmers by email. Moreover, as we expected potential respondent bias towards farmers that already experienced damage, we also conducted a follow-up non-respondent check by telephone. Our study showed that the current crop damage probability on a farm lies between 42% (likely an overestimation due to respondent bias in the online survey) and 22% (an underestimation based on the non-respondent check). There is considerable geographical variation in the proportion of farms that report boar damage; probability for crop damage due to wild boar is relatively high for farmers in Limburg but shows a geographically heterogeneous spread. Factors explaining the crop damage probability differed strongly between the online survey and the non-respondent check and no consistent results could be found. Our results show that using the online survey, it was possible to get an initial insight in the geographical distribution of crop damage. However, as we found differences between the results of the online survey and the non-respondent check, taking management decisions based solely on online survey results without conducting a non-respondent check could lead to misguided actions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document