Comparison of pregnancy detection methods in live white‐tailed deer

Abstract Assessing ungulate reproduction is important to biologists for managing populations and predicting trends. We compared efficacy of trans‐abdominal ultrasound and pregnancy‐specific protein B (PSPB) white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) pregnancy estimates, respectively, from January to...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jared F. Duquette, Jerrold L. Belant, Dean E. Beyer Jr., Nathan J. Svoboda
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2012-03-01
Series:Wildlife Society Bulletin
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.115
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1846120407533355008
author Jared F. Duquette
Jerrold L. Belant
Dean E. Beyer Jr.
Nathan J. Svoboda
author_facet Jared F. Duquette
Jerrold L. Belant
Dean E. Beyer Jr.
Nathan J. Svoboda
author_sort Jared F. Duquette
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Assessing ungulate reproduction is important to biologists for managing populations and predicting trends. We compared efficacy of trans‐abdominal ultrasound and pregnancy‐specific protein B (PSPB) white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) pregnancy estimates, respectively, from January to mid‐April 2009–2011 in the south‐central Upper Peninsula of Michigan, USA. We observed a strong agreement (K = 0.68, SE = 0.13, 95% CI = 0.42–0.94) of PSPB and ultrasound in categorizing pregnant and nonpregnant deer. Five deer were determined to be pregnant by ultrasound but not by PSPB and 6 females were judged to be nonpregnant using either method. Total cost for PSPB testing of 101 deer was US$2,220, whereas ultrasound equipment cost US$14,150. Trans‐abdominal ultrasound and PSPB provided accurate detection of pregnancy in live white‐tailed deer. We recommend PSPB for studies testing comparatively small numbers (up to several hundred) of deer. However, we recommend ultrasonography if real‐time pregnancy determination is needed (e.g., vaginal implant transmitter use), particularly for large numbers (i.e., several hundred to thousands) of deer. © 2012 The Wildlife Society.
format Article
id doaj-art-0f0670d2c3884e868879e97824a23b76
institution Kabale University
issn 2328-5540
language English
publishDate 2012-03-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Wildlife Society Bulletin
spelling doaj-art-0f0670d2c3884e868879e97824a23b762024-12-16T11:15:41ZengWileyWildlife Society Bulletin2328-55402012-03-0136111511810.1002/wsb.115Comparison of pregnancy detection methods in live white‐tailed deerJared F. Duquette0Jerrold L. Belant1Dean E. Beyer Jr.2Nathan J. Svoboda3Carnivore Ecology Laboratory, Forest and Wildlife Research Center, Mississippi State University, Box 9690, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USACarnivore Ecology Laboratory, Forest and Wildlife Research Center, Mississippi State University, Box 9690, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USAMichigan Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife Division, 1990 United States Highway 41 S, Marquette, MI 49855, USACarnivore Ecology Laboratory, Forest and Wildlife Research Center, Mississippi State University, Box 9690, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USAAbstract Assessing ungulate reproduction is important to biologists for managing populations and predicting trends. We compared efficacy of trans‐abdominal ultrasound and pregnancy‐specific protein B (PSPB) white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) pregnancy estimates, respectively, from January to mid‐April 2009–2011 in the south‐central Upper Peninsula of Michigan, USA. We observed a strong agreement (K = 0.68, SE = 0.13, 95% CI = 0.42–0.94) of PSPB and ultrasound in categorizing pregnant and nonpregnant deer. Five deer were determined to be pregnant by ultrasound but not by PSPB and 6 females were judged to be nonpregnant using either method. Total cost for PSPB testing of 101 deer was US$2,220, whereas ultrasound equipment cost US$14,150. Trans‐abdominal ultrasound and PSPB provided accurate detection of pregnancy in live white‐tailed deer. We recommend PSPB for studies testing comparatively small numbers (up to several hundred) of deer. However, we recommend ultrasonography if real‐time pregnancy determination is needed (e.g., vaginal implant transmitter use), particularly for large numbers (i.e., several hundred to thousands) of deer. © 2012 The Wildlife Society.https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.115captureconditiondeerOdocoileus virginianuspregnancyPSPB
spellingShingle Jared F. Duquette
Jerrold L. Belant
Dean E. Beyer Jr.
Nathan J. Svoboda
Comparison of pregnancy detection methods in live white‐tailed deer
Wildlife Society Bulletin
capture
condition
deer
Odocoileus virginianus
pregnancy
PSPB
title Comparison of pregnancy detection methods in live white‐tailed deer
title_full Comparison of pregnancy detection methods in live white‐tailed deer
title_fullStr Comparison of pregnancy detection methods in live white‐tailed deer
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of pregnancy detection methods in live white‐tailed deer
title_short Comparison of pregnancy detection methods in live white‐tailed deer
title_sort comparison of pregnancy detection methods in live white tailed deer
topic capture
condition
deer
Odocoileus virginianus
pregnancy
PSPB
url https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.115
work_keys_str_mv AT jaredfduquette comparisonofpregnancydetectionmethodsinlivewhitetaileddeer
AT jerroldlbelant comparisonofpregnancydetectionmethodsinlivewhitetaileddeer
AT deanebeyerjr comparisonofpregnancydetectionmethodsinlivewhitetaileddeer
AT nathanjsvoboda comparisonofpregnancydetectionmethodsinlivewhitetaileddeer