Search USGSSearch

USGS · 70194111

Anticoagulant rodenticides and wildlife: Introduction

Abstract

Rodents have interacted with people since the beginning of systematic food storage by humans in the early Neolithic era. Such interactions have had adverse outcomes such as threats to human health, spoiling and consumption of food sources, damage to human infrastructure and detrimental effects on indigenous island wildlife (through inadvertent anthropogenic assisted introductions). These socio/economic and environmental impacts illustrate the clear need to control populations of commensal rodents. Different methods have been applied historically but the main means of control in the last decades is through the application of rodenticides, mainly anticoagulant rodenticides (ARs) that inhibit blood clotting. The so-called First Generation Anticoagulant Rodenticides (FGARs) proved highly effective but rodents increasingly developed resistance. This led to a demand for more effective alternative compounds and paved the way to the development of Second Generation Anticoagulant Rodenticides (SGARs). These were more acutely toxic and persistent, making them more effective but also increasing the risks of exposure of non-target species and secondary poisoning of predatory species. SGARs often fail the environmental thresholds of different regulatory frameworks because of these negative side-effects, but their use is still permitted because of the overwhelming societal needs for rodent control and the lack of effective alternatives. This book provides a state-of-the-art overview of the scientific advancements in assessment of environmental exposure, effects and risks of currently used ARs. This is discussed in relation to the societal needs for rodent control, including risk mitigation and development of alternatives.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Nico W. van den Brink, John E. Elliott, Richard F. Shore, Barnett A. Rattner. 2017-11-11. Anticoagulant rodenticides and wildlife: Introduction. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64377-9_1

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Loma salmonae and related species

Loma salmonae is a microsporidium that infects Pacific salmon and causes a gill inflammatory syndrome known as microsporidial gill disease of salmon. This disease has been mostly associated with netpen-farmed Chinook salmon ( Oncorhynchus tshawytscha ) in British Columbia, Canada. Clinical, diagnostic, pathological aspects of disease, as well as approaches for disease avoidance in salmon aquaculture are discussed. A laboratory infection model in rainbow trout was used to determine life cycle-stages, transmission dynamics, pathophysiology, influence of temperature, and to test therapeutics applicable to aquaculture. This experimental model has been informative on various approaches of disease control, including the development of a promising vaccine. In addition to improving fish health in salmon farming in North America, this L. salmonae model will be applicable to other microsporidial diseases that may be encountered in emerging aquaculture regions.

Book chapter

Cumulative effects of multiple stressors on marine mammals: Elephant seals as a model system

Noise exposure is a potential stressor for free-ranging marine mammals and is often studied in the absence of other environmental factors. Here, a multi-investigator, interdisciplinary effort was undertaken to examine the response of elephant seals to multiple stressors. An integrated physiological and ecological approach was taken, including immunology, stress physiology, toxicology, animal behavior, population biology, and life history theory, to examine the cumulative effects of exposure to multiple stressors in elephant seals. While we measured the response of individual animals, a population response can be predicted by incorporating these results into the long-term data on elephant seal demographics.

Book chapter

When is a parasite a problem?

A parasite’s perceived societal impact depends on the disease it causes and the perception of the affected host species. For instance, doctors and veterinarians have a mission to treat parasites that infect humans or that impact host species that have some utilitarian or aesthetic value for society. Marine scientists have different concerns than doctors. Although the number of parasites that marine scientists should be concerned about may vary, only 13% of parasites and 6% of host–parasite links might be considered “problematic” in a kelp forest food web. With regard to the many threats to marine ecosystems, these percentages suggest that most parasites and infectious diseases are inconsequential. A related issue is the common expectation that parasites and the impacts that they cause are increasing under stress as ocean environments across the globe degrade. Yet, reports of disease have not increased due to human impacts on the marine environment, where the factors that influence parasitism are more complex. Thus, the expectation that marine parasites create problems, and that the diseases they cause are getting worse, is more likely the exception than the rule.

Book chapter