Immobilization of African Elephants with Carfentanil and Antagonism with Nalmefene and Diprenorphine

1988 ◽  
Vol 19 (1/2) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elliott R. Jacobson ◽  
George V. Kollias ◽  
Darryl J. Heard ◽  
Randolph Caligiuri
Keyword(s):  
Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 826
Author(s):  
Ilaria Pollastri ◽  
Simona Normando ◽  
Barbara Contiero ◽  
Gregory Vogt ◽  
Donatella Gelli ◽  
...  

This study aimed to investigate how three groups of people of differing ages, and with differing knowledge of the species, perceived the emotional state of African elephants (Loxodonta africana) managed in captive and semi-captive environments. Fifteen video-clips of 18 elephants, observed during three different daily routines (release from and return to the night boma; interactions with visitors), were used for a free choice profiling assessment (FCP) and then analyzed with quantitative methods. A general Procrustes analysis identified two main descriptive dimensions of elephant behavioral expression explaining 27% and 19% of the variability in the children group, 19% and 23.7% in adults, and 21.8% and 17% in the expert group. All the descriptors the observers came up with showed a low level of correlation on the identified dimensions. All three observers’ groups showed a degree of separation between captive and semi-captive management. Spearman analyses showed that stereotypic “trunk swirling” behavior correlated negatively with first dimension (free/friendly versus sad/bored) in the children’s group; second dimension (agitated/confident versus angry/bored) amongst the adults; and first dimension (active/excited versus agitated/bored) amongst the experts. More studies are needed to investigate other potential differences in assessing elephants’ emotional states by visitors of different ages and backgrounds.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Wood ◽  
Simon Chamaillé-Jammes ◽  
Almuth Hammerbacher ◽  
Adrian M. Shrader

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenna M. Parker ◽  
Colleen T. Webb ◽  
David Daballen ◽  
Shifra Z. Goldenberg ◽  
Jerenimo Lepirei ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liberty Mlambo ◽  
Munyaradzi Davis Shekede ◽  
Elhadi Adam ◽  
John Odindi ◽  
Amon Murwira

2006 ◽  
Vol 209 (6) ◽  
pp. 781-792 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. E. Weissengruber ◽  
G. F. Egger ◽  
J. R. Hutchinson ◽  
H. B. Groenewald ◽  
L. Elsässer ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 113 (1-4) ◽  
pp. 322-327 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole M. Weissenböck ◽  
Harald M. Schwammer ◽  
Thomas Ruf

Science News ◽  
1988 ◽  
Vol 133 (21) ◽  
pp. 333
Author(s):  
S. Weisburd

2007 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 725-728 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Chamaillé-Jammes ◽  
Hervé Fritz ◽  
Ricardo M. Holdo

African elephants Loxodonta africana (Blumenbach) may profoundly affect vegetation and associated animal bio-diversity in savannas (Conybeare 2004, Skarpe et al. 2004). Understanding the patterns of habitat use by elephants is crucial to predict their impacts on ecosystems (Ben-Shahar 1993, Nelleman et al. 2002), particularly now that many populations are recovering from past culling events or poaching outbreaks (Blanc et al. 2007). Surface water is one of the major constraints on elephant distribution (Chamaillé-Jammes et al. 2007, Stokke & du Toit 2002), and accordingly, elephant impacts are higher in the vicinity of water (Ben-Shahar 1993, de Beer et al. 2006). However, waterhole selection by elephant remains poorly understood. Weir (1972) showed in Hwange National Park (hereafter Hwange NP), Zimbabwe, that elephant numbers at waterholes over 24 h increased with the sodium concentration of water on nutrient-poor Kalahari sands. His work has become widely cited in elephant studies as it remains the only one, to the best of our knowledge, to have studied elephant use of waterholes in relation to the mineral concentration of water. Weir's work, however, took place when elephant densities in Hwange NP were low, likely below 0.5 elephants km−2 as estimated by aerial censuses (Williamson 1975). Since then, the elephant population has increased dramatically, particularly since the halt to culling operations in 1986 (Chamaillé-Jammes 2006, Cumming 1981). The present elephant density is much higher, estimated to be over 2 elephants km−2 (Chamaillé-Jammes et al. 2007, in press), and is one of the highest in the world (Blanc et al. 2007). Increased density may modify ecological constraints and affect the hierarchy of habitat selection processes (Morris 2003), and the extent to which water-nutrient selection still constrains elephant distribution at high population density – when their impact on savanna vegetation is the highest – remains unknown.


1986 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 515 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Pilgram ◽  
D. Western

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document