In the recent past, peste des petits ruminants (PPR) emerged in East Africa causing outbreaks in small livestock across different countries, with evidences of spillover to wildlife. In order to understand better PPR at the wildlife–livestock interface, we investigated patterns of peste des petits ruminants virus (PPRV) exposure, disease outbreaks, and viral sequences in the northern Albertine Rift. PPRV antibodies indicated a widespread exposure in apparently healthy wildlife from South Sudan (2013) and Uganda (2015, 2017). African buffaloes and Uganda kobs <1-year-old from Queen Elizabeth National Park (2015) had antibodies against PPRV N-antigen and local serosurvey captured a subsequent spread of PPRV in livestock. Outbreaks with PPR-like syndrome in sheep and goats were recorded around the Greater Virunga Landscape in Kasese (2016), Kisoro and Kabale (2017) from western Uganda, and in North Kivu (2017) from eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). This landscape would not be considered typical for PPR persistence as it is a mixed forest–savannah ecosystem with mostly sedentary livestock. PPRV sequences from DRC (2017) were identical to strains from Burundi (2018) and confirmed a transboundary spread of PPRV. Our results indicate an epidemiological linkage between epizootic cycles in livestock and exposure in wildlife, denoting the importance of PPR surveillance on wild artiodactyls for both conservation and eradication programs.

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

1. Large data sets containing precise movement data from free-roaming animals are now becoming commonplace. One means of analysing individual movement data is through discrete, random walk-based models.2. Random walk models are easily modified to incorporate common features of animal movement, and the ways that these modifications affect the scaling of net displacement are well studied. Recently, ecologists have begun to explore more complex statistical models with multiple latent states, each of which are characterized by a distribution of step lengths and have their own unimodal distribution of turning angles centred on one type of turn (e. g. reversals).3. Here, we introduce the compound wrapped Cauchy distribution, which allows for multimodal distributions of turning angles within a single state. When used as a single state model, the parameters provide a straightforward summary of the relative contributions of different turn types. The compound wrapped Cauchy distribution can also be used to build multiple state models.4. We hypothesize that a multiple state model with unimodal distributions of turning angles will best describe movement at finer resolutions, while a multiple state model using our multimodal distribution will better describe movement at intermediate temporal resolutions. At coarser temporal resolutions, a single state model using our multimodal distribution should be sufficient. We parameterize and compare the performance of these models at four different temporal resolutions (1, 4, 12 and 24 h) using data from eight individuals of Loxodonta cyclotis and find support for our hypotheses.5. We assess the efficacy of the different models in extrapolating to coarser temporal resolution by comparing properties of data simulated from the different models to the properties of the observed data. At coarser resolutions, simulated data sets recreate many aspects of the observed data; however, only one of the models accurately predicts step length, and all models underestimate the frequency of reversals.6. The single state model we introduce may be adequate to describe movement data at many resolutions and can be interpreted easily. Multiscalar analyses of movement such as the ones presented here are a useful means of identifying inconsistencies in our understanding of movement.

The predicted relationship between home-range size and group mass in primates developed by Clutton-Brock and Harvey (1977) has proved extremely robust in describing the use of space by most primate species. However, mandrills (Mandrillus sphinx) are now known to have an extreme group mass in the wild, far larger than that of the species used originally to generate that relationship, and so it was unknown whether this relationship would be robust for this species. We investigated the home-range size and use of a wild horde of ca. 700 mandrills in Lopé National Park, Gabon, using radiotelemetry. The total area the horde used over a 6-yr period [100% minimum convex polygon (MCP)] was 182 km2, including 89 km2 of suitable forest habitat. Mandrills used gallery forests and isolated forest fragments with high botanical diversity far more intensively that the continuous forest and completely avoided savanna and marsh. Peeled polygons and fixed kernel contours revealed multiple centres of use, with the horde spending more than half its time in <10% of the total documented range, typical of a frugivore using a patchy environment. Home-range size and internal structure varied considerably between years, but total home range fitted the predicted relationship between group mass and home range size, despite being an outlier to the dataset. We discuss the conservation implications of the species’ space requirements, in light of current pressures on land use in their range.

African Journal of EcologyVolume 48, Issue 4 p. 1134-1138 Movements of four forest elephants in an oil concession in Gabon, Central Africa Joseph M. Kolowski, Corresponding Author Joseph M. Kolowski Center for Conservation Education and Sustainability, National Zoological Park, Smithsonian Institution, 1100 Jefferson Drive S.W., Suite 3123, Washington, DC 20013-7012, U.S.A. E-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorSteve Blake, Steve Blake Wildlife Conservation Society, 2300 Southern Boulevard, Bronx, New York 10460, U.S.A. Max Planck Institute for Ornithology, ‘Vogelwarte Radolfzell’, Schlossallee 2, D-78315 Radolfzell, Germany Department of Biology and Whitney R. Harris World Ecology Center, University of Missouri – St. Louis, 8001 Natural Bridge Road, St. Louis, Missouri 63121, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this authorMichael D. Kock, Michael D. Kock Wildlife Conservation Society, 2300 Southern Boulevard, Bronx, New York 10460, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this authorMichelle E. Lee, Michelle E. Lee Center for Conservation Education and Sustainability, National Zoological Park, Smithsonian Institution, 1100 Jefferson Drive S.W., Suite 3123, Washington, DC 20013-7012, U.S.A. Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, U.K. Institut de Recherches en Écologie Tropicale, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique et Technologique, Libreville, GabonSearch for more papers by this authorAnn Henderson, Ann Henderson Center for Conservation Education and Sustainability, National Zoological Park, Smithsonian Institution, 1100 Jefferson Drive S.W., Suite 3123, Washington, DC 20013-7012, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this authorAnnabelle Honorez, Annabelle Honorez Center for Conservation Education and Sustainability, National Zoological Park, Smithsonian Institution, 1100 Jefferson Drive S.W., Suite 3123, Washington, DC 20013-7012, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this authorAlfonso Alonso, Alfonso Alonso Center for Conservation Education and Sustainability, National Zoological Park, Smithsonian Institution, 1100 Jefferson Drive S.W., Suite 3123, Washington, DC 20013-7012, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this author Joseph M. Kolowski, Corresponding Author Joseph M. Kolowski Center for Conservation Education and Sustainability, National Zoological Park, Smithsonian Institution, 1100 Jefferson Drive S.W., Suite 3123, Washington, DC 20013-7012, U.S.A. E-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorSteve Blake, Steve Blake Wildlife Conservation Society, 2300 Southern Boulevard, Bronx, New York 10460, U.S.A. Max Planck Institute for Ornithology, ‘Vogelwarte Radolfzell’, Schlossallee 2, D-78315 Radolfzell, Germany Department of Biology and Whitney R. Harris World Ecology Center, University of Missouri – St. Louis, 8001 Natural Bridge Road, St. Louis, Missouri 63121, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this authorMichael D. Kock, Michael D. Kock Wildlife Conservation Society, 2300 Southern Boulevard, Bronx, New York 10460, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this authorMichelle E. Lee, Michelle E. Lee Center for Conservation Education and Sustainability, National Zoological Park, Smithsonian Institution, 1100 Jefferson Drive S.W., Suite 3123, Washington, DC 20013-7012, U.S.A. Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, U.K. Institut de Recherches en Écologie Tropicale, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique et Technologique, Libreville, GabonSearch for more papers by this authorAnn Henderson, Ann Henderson Center for Conservation Education and Sustainability, National Zoological Park, Smithsonian Institution, 1100 Jefferson Drive S.W., Suite 3123, Washington, DC 20013-7012, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this authorAnnabelle Honorez, Annabelle Honorez Center for Conservation Education and Sustainability, National Zoological Park, Smithsonian Institution, 1100 Jefferson Drive S.W., Suite 3123, Washington, DC 20013-7012, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this authorAlfonso Alonso, Alfonso Alonso Center for Conservation Education and Sustainability, National Zoological Park, Smithsonian Institution, 1100 Jefferson Drive S.W., Suite 3123, Washington, DC 20013-7012, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this author First published: 10 November 2010 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2028.2009.01204.xCitations: 18Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Citing Literature Volume48, Issue4December 2010Pages 1134-1138 RelatedInformation

A dramatic expansion of road building is underway in the Congo Basin fuelled by private enterprise, international aid, and government aspirations. Among the great wilderness areas on earth, the Congo Basin is outstanding for its high biodiversity, particularly mobile megafauna including forest elephants (Loxodonta africana cyclotis). The abundance of many mammal species in the Basin increases with distance from roads due to hunting pressure, but the impacts of road proliferation on the movements of individuals are unknown. We investigated the ranging behaviour of forest elephants in relation to roads and roadless wilderness by fitting GPS telemetry collars onto a sample of 28 forest elephants living in six priority conservation areas. We show that the size of roadless wilderness is a strong determinant of home range size in this species. Though our study sites included the largest wilderness areas in central African forests, none of 4 home range metrics we calculated, including core area, tended toward an asymptote with increasing wilderness size, suggesting that uninhibited ranging in forest elephants no longer exists. Furthermore we show that roads outside protected areas which are not protected from hunting are a formidable barrier to movement while roads inside protected areas are not. Only 1 elephant from our sample crossed an unprotected road. During crossings her mean speed increased 14-fold compared to normal movements. Forest elephants are increasingly confined and constrained by roads across the Congo Basin which is reducing effective habitat availability and isolating populations, significantly threatening long term conservation efforts. If the current road development trajectory continues, forest wildernesses and the forest elephants they contain will collapse.

Issues at the interface between wild lands and people will become more critical as the world’s population is expected to increase from 6.1 billion people in 2000 to 8.9 billion by the year 2050 (United Nations Population Information Network 2003). Population growth will place ever-increasing pressure on the world’s natural resources and ecosystem services, as demand continues to grow for adequate nutrition and clean water, health care for all, and overall improvements in human livelihoods and well-being (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2003). Poverty is probably the single most important constraint to development and protection of the environment in Africa. Over 24% of the world’s poor who live below US $1 per day reside in sub-Saharan Africa. These individuals and families will through necessity prioritize their lives with regard to the following factors in descending order of importance: Food on the table Health Good social relations Promotion of culturally appropriate rural livelihoods, including livestock-keeping Desire for stability and security Environmental concerns Environmental concerns will remain a luxury for the world’s poor whilst poverty remains an issue, and protected areas in Africa will come under increasing pressure from illegal activities, livestock production, and political as well as socioeconomic pressures (Osofsky 1997, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2003, Kock and Kock 2003). Poverty is an integral part of the health paradigm: poverty leads to ill health, poor productivity, and little desire to address environmental issues. The key is to link poverty reduction to improved health of people and their livestock through the promotion of healthier ecosystems that include the wildlife that lives within these systems. In balancing the needs and expectations of Africa’s rural inhabitants with those of conservationists, it is necessary to consider how disease interactions influence human, livestock, and wildlife health (WCS 2003a, WCS 2003b, Kalema-Zikusoka 2005, Kock 2005, Bengis 2005) while keeping in mind that the role of wildlife health in conservation goes beyond the presence or absence of disease (Mainka 2001, Deem et al. 2001). Wildlife health, in the broadest sense, is a holistic concept with a focus on populations and the environments in which they live. This focus must of course include human populations and livelihood needs, especially at the wildlife/livestock interface. While some caution is merited to prevent making too simplistic a linkage between “ecosystem health” and “human health,” potentially at the expense of wildlife and conservation funding (Osofsky et al. 2000), it is clear in Africa that a paradigm shift is needed. Health is the key linkage that can contribute to human well-being and, therefore, promote environmental stewardship and healthy ecosystems (Margoluis et al. 2001). This paper will: Promote an ecosystem-based approach to health and disease issues; Argue that the biomedical professions have powerful tools that can assist other conservation practitioners in evaluating dysfunction in ecosystems; Emphasize that health and disease, in their broadest sense, are important issues in protected-area management and conservation practice; and Stress that healthy ecosystems contribute to sustainable development and human well-being and provide a diverse resource base that can be utilized on a sustainable basis to address poverty.

A recent editorial in this journal highlights the important roles that veterinarians can have in con servation, including research, formulation of gov ernment policy that promotes conservation, capac ity-building and education, and ex-situ manage ment.4 The majority (54%) of 42 IUCN Species Survival Commission Working Groups (SSC WG) action plan reports, some of which involve veteri narians, were related to research, while legislation and policy action accounted for 15%, ?cologie management and issues related to sustainable use each represented 7%, and capacity-building actions and educational activities accounted for 6%. Ex-situ management recommendations represented just 5 %. While the overall goals of these action plans are commendable, some of the less represented plans may deserve greater emphasis. Conservation programs help to maintain life on earth and should be an integral part of all cultures. But despite decades of hard work, hundreds of pro jects, thousands of trained professionals and mil lions of dollars of funding,5 the destruction of for ests, grasslands, terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems substantially continues. We need more "out of the box" thinking and creativity to slow these process es.

Journal of ZoologyVolume 258, Issue 3 p. 278-278 Response to Alibhai, Jewell and Towindo Mark W. Atkinson, Corresponding Author Mark W. Atkinson *All correspondence to: Mark Atkinson, Director of Animal Health, The Wilds, 14000 International Road, Cumberland, OH 43732, U.S.A. E-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorRaoul du Toit, Raoul du ToitSearch for more papers by this authorRobin W. Radcliffe, Robin W. RadcliffeSearch for more papers by this authorJames L. Dooley Jr, James L. Dooley JrSearch for more papers by this authorMichael D. Kock, Michael D. KockSearch for more papers by this author Mark W. Atkinson, Corresponding Author Mark W. Atkinson *All correspondence to: Mark Atkinson, Director of Animal Health, The Wilds, 14000 International Road, Cumberland, OH 43732, U.S.A. E-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorRaoul du Toit, Raoul du ToitSearch for more papers by this authorRobin W. Radcliffe, Robin W. RadcliffeSearch for more papers by this authorJames L. Dooley Jr, James L. Dooley JrSearch for more papers by this authorMichael D. Kock, Michael D. KockSearch for more papers by this author First published: 28 February 2006 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952836902221391Citations: 3AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL No abstract is available for this article.Citing Literature Volume258, Issue3November 2002Pages 278-278 RelatedInformation

Four of 20 black rhinoceroses (Diceros bicornis) became lethargic, anorectic, anemic, and jaundiced, with elevations in serum bilirubin, after being moved into creosote-treated holding pens (bomas). One of these animals died, and a second became moribund and was euthanized. Both had oral and gastric ulcers, widespread hemorrhages and hematomata, and uniformly swollen, intensely green livers, containing excessive intrahepatic bilirubin. The remaining two animals made full clinical recoveries, and additional cases were not seen in Zimbabwe, although three of these animals died with similar liver lesions after final translocation to the USA, and two with similar liver lesions died after translocation to Australia. This report describes clinical, h?matologie, and pathological findings in two black rhinoceroses that were confined in wooden pens that had been treated with creosote, noting similarities described in creosote toxicosis in other animals.

The capture of black rhinoceros (Diceros bicornis) for relocation within Zimbabwe, for export, and to a lesser extent capture of black rhino in Namibia, presented opportunities to take blood samples for laboratory testing for antibodies to various diseases, to establish physiologic norms. and for electrophoretic analysis of protein markers of heterozygosity. Both leptospirosis and vitamin E deficiency have been implicated in the "hemolytic anemia syndrome" deaths of a number of captive black rhino. Vitamin E levels in black rhinoceros we sampled confirmed the reports of Dierenfeld et al., that diets of free-ranging rhino in diverse locations apparently contain considerably higher levels of that vitamin than do diets of captive animals. Its role in "hemolytic anemia syndrome" remains unproven. A total of 60 rhino captured at 5 locations in Zimbabwe and 3 animals from Namibia were tested for agglutinating antibodies to seven or eight serovars (strains) of leptospirosis. Most rhino from Zimbabwe had titers to several serovars and 38 (63%) had titers greater than 1:100 to at least one serovar. Rhino from Namibia had little evidence of exposure to leptospiras. Microenvironmental differences at water sources in the two locations may explain this observation. Immunization and further testing may offer approaches to reducing the risk of clinical leptospirosis in relocated black rhino. Relocation of wildlife carries the risk that diseases that threaten livestock and/or man may accidentally also be relocated. Sera were tested for antibodies that suggest previous exposure to African Horse Sickness, Rinderpest, or Foot and Mouth Disease. These samples included the 10 Zimbabwean rhino relocated to North American zoos in 1989 and 2 that went to Germany. Electrophoretic separation of 7 blood proteins, coding for 12 loci, revealed no heterozygosity, and no differences between the 16 Zimbabwean and 3 Namibian black rhino tested.

A database was developed to access field data collected from free-ranging Bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis) which were captured and sampled in the western U.S.A. between 1978 and 1987. These data included serological prevalence results for exposure to selected infectious diseases. The database was developed to enable wildlife biologists, veterinarians and wildlife managers to have rapid access to collected data. A microcomputer spreadsheet package was utilized and the database developed using the macro program within the speadsheet. The database was designed to provide in-depth examination of zoographic and disease data, and to facilitate updating of the database when more information was collected. This database was menu operated, allowing rapid access to data without the need for extensive computer knowledge or experience. The data were presented in concise tabular form, and a graphics program allowed visual display of the data.

Biostatistics are used in two principle fashions, to test hypotheses and to estimate population parameters, both of which are used to gain reliable knowledge. Individuals involved in a nascent science like the management of wild animals and plants have an obvious need to use such knowledge, but they frequently do not have the statistical backgrounds necessary to discriminate among possible biases in the presentation of data. Hence, any errors about the reliability of results may be serious. Halverson and Teare (1989) suggest that our (Berger and Kock, 1988) statement”... carfentanil had no long term negative effect on the survival of bull bison” is without basis, and therefore “there is a danger that the unfounded conclusions will misdirect the decisions of wildlife managers working in the field.” While we agree with Halverson and Teare (1989) that care must be taken in all analyses and that Type II errors can be very serious, we believe that there are good reasons why studies, even those with small samples, should focus on hypothesis testing. Our response considers three issues: acquisition of reliable know!edge, Type I and Type II errors, and the utility of our data for wildlife management.

A problem with studies that examine immobilization-related drug effects on large mammals is that no true control group exists because untreated (non-captured) animals in the same population have not been examined. We present data to show that overwinter survival in male bison (Bison bison) immobilized with carfentanil was the same as untreated bison. This unique experimental design allows us to conclude that the drug had no long-term effect on male bison overwinter survival.

Blood samples and physiological data were collected from 634 bighorn sheep captured between 1980 and 1986 in the western United States. Bighorn sheep were evaluated for physiological parameters (temperature, pulse and respiration), selected biochemical parameters (Cortisol, creatine phosphokinase (CPK), serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase (SGOT), lactic dehydrogenase (LDH), alkaline phosphotase (AP), potassium, sodium, chloride, creatinine, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), selenium, glucose, total protein, plasma pH and plasma PCO2), and selected hematological parameters (packed cell volume (PCV), hemoglobin (HB), red blood cell count (RBC), and white blood cell count (WBC)). These parameters were compared among bighorn sheep captured by four different methods: drop-net (n = 158), drive-net (n = 249), chemical immobilization (n =90) and the net-gun (n = 137). Biological parameters affected by stress, including temperature, respiration, Cortisol, CPK, SGOT, potassium, glucose and WBC revealed significant differences among capture methods (P < 0.05). Some blood parameter differences, including temperature, respiration, Cortisol, glucose and WBC could be explained partially by the distribution of age and sex within capture method groups. Drop-net and net-gun methods of capture appeared to produce the least amount of alteration to biological parameters related to capture stress or compromise and capture mortality. Drive-net was similar to the former methods while chemical immobilization caused the greatest changes in the above physiological, biochemical and hematological parameters.