Publish or perish: why it’s important to publicise how, and if, research activities affect animals
Clive R. McMahon A D , Mark A. Hindell B and Robert G. Harcourt CA Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, NT 0909, Australia.
B Institute for Marine and Antarctic Research, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 129, Hobart, Tas. 7001, Australia.
C Department of Environment and Geography, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia.
D Corresponding author. Email: clive.mcmahon@cdu.edu.au
E All authors contributed equally to the development and writing of the paper.
Wildlife Research 39(5) 375-377 https://doi.org/10.1071/WR12014
Submitted: 20 January 2012 Accepted: 2 March 2012 Published: 22 May 2012
Abstract
Wildlife researchers and conservation biologists are encountering growing research difficulties due to strong and effective advocacy of animal welfare concerns. However, collecting information on the basic biology of animals, which is often essential to effective conservation and management, frequently involves invasive research. The latter is unacceptable to some animal welfare advocates, even if it ultimately leads to better conservation outcomes. For effective biodiversity conservation it is imperative that conservation and wildlife researchers lucidly present the case for their research on individual animals. This requires conservation biologists and the research community in general, to present these arguments in the public domain as well as in peer-reviewed literature. Moreover, it is important to measure how these activities affect animals. Only then can we show that high quality research activities often have little or no effects on animal vital rates and performance.
References
Campbell, T. S., Irvin, P., Campbell, K. R., Hoffmann, K., Dykes, M. E., Harding, A. J., and Johnson, S. A. (2009). Evaluation of a new technique for marking anurans. Applied Herpetology 6, 247–256.| Evaluation of a new technique for marking anurans.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Casper, R. M. (2009). Guidelines for the instrumentation of wild birds and mammals. Animal Behaviour 78, 1477–1483.
| Guidelines for the instrumentation of wild birds and mammals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Field, I. C., Harcourt, R. G., Boehme, L., de Bruyn, P. J. N., Charrassin, J. B., McMahon, C. R., Bester, M. N., Fedak, M. A., and Hindell, M. A. (2011). Refining instrument attachment on phocid seals. Marine Mammal Science , .
| Refining instrument attachment on phocid seals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Fisher, D. O., and Blomberg, S. P. (2009). Toe-bud clipping of juvenile small marsupials for ecological field research: no detectable negative effects on growth or survival. Austral Ecology 34, 858–865.
| Toe-bud clipping of juvenile small marsupials for ecological field research: no detectable negative effects on growth or survival.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gauthier-Clerc, M., Gendner, J. P., Ribic, C. A., Fraser, W. R., Woehler, E. J., Descamps, A., Gilly, C., Le Bohec, C., and Le Maho, Y. (2004). Long-term effects of flipper bands on penguins. Proceedings of the Royal Society B. Biological Sciences 271, S423–S426.
| Long-term effects of flipper bands on penguins.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Godley, B. J., Blumenthal, J. M., Broderick, A. C., Coyne, M. S., Godfrey, M. H., Hawkes, L. A., and Witt, M. J. (2008). Satellite tracking of sea turtles: where have we been and where do we go next? Endangered Species Research 4, 3–22.
| Satellite tracking of sea turtles: where have we been and where do we go next?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Langkilde, T., and Shine, R. (2006). How much stress do researchers inflict on their study animals? A case study using a scincid lizard, Eulamprus heatwolei. The Journal of Experimental Biology 209, 1035–1043.
| How much stress do researchers inflict on their study animals? A case study using a scincid lizard, Eulamprus heatwolei.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Le Maho, Y., Saraux, C., Durant, J. M., Viblanc, V. A., Gauthier-Clerc, M., Yoccoz, N. G., Stenseth, N. C., and Le Bohec, C. (2011). An ethical issue in biodiversity science: the monitoring of penguins with flipper bands. Comptes Rendus Biologies 334, 378–384.
| An ethical issue in biodiversity science: the monitoring of penguins with flipper bands.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
McMahon, C. R., Bradshaw, C. J. A., and Hays, G. C. (2006a). Branding can be justified in vital conservation research. Nature 439, 392.
| Branding can be justified in vital conservation research.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD28XntFWgtg%3D%3D&md5=e1f5e6c48cc3a79b024bc4a3081e426bCAS |
McMahon, C. R., Burton, H. R., van den Hoff, J., Woods, R., and Bradshaw, C. J. A. (2006b). Assessing hot-iron and cryo-branding for permanently marking southern elephant seals. The Journal of Wildlife Management 70, 1484–1489.
| Assessing hot-iron and cryo-branding for permanently marking southern elephant seals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
McMahon, C. R., Bradshaw, C. J. A., and Hays, G. C. (2007). Applying the heat to research techniques for species conservation. Conservation Biology 21, 271–273.
| Applying the heat to research techniques for species conservation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
McMahon, C. R., Field, I. C., Bradshaw, C. J. A., White, G. C., and Hindell, M. A. (2008). Tracking and data-logging devices attached to elephant seals do not affect individual mass gain or survival. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 360, 71–77.
| Tracking and data-logging devices attached to elephant seals do not affect individual mass gain or survival.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
McMahon, C. R., Collier, N., Northfield, J. K., and Glen, F. (2011). Taking the time to assess the effects of remote sensing and tracking devices on animals. Animal Welfare (South Mimms, England) 20, 515–521.
| 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3MXhsVeit7zF&md5=e372140f846f212fc3be9111bddc11ccCAS |
Saraux, C., Le Bohec, C., Durant, J. M., Viblanc, V. A., Gauthier-Clerc, M., Beaune, D., Park, Y.-H., Yoccoz, N. G., Stenseth, N. C., and Le Maho, Y. (2011). Reliability of flipper-banded penguins as indicators of climate change. Nature 469, 203–206.
| Reliability of flipper-banded penguins as indicators of climate change.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3MXkvFentA%3D%3D&md5=4ceea08467e264b2bb2d447b03c277bbCAS |
Vandenabeele, S. P., Wilson, R. P., and Grogan, A. (2011). Tags on seabirds: how seriously are instrument-induced behaviours considered? Animal Welfare (South Mimms, England) 20, 559–571.
| 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3MXhsVeit73I&md5=c53e610eb9de3547f8f2d994a83bc132CAS |
Walker, K. A., Trites, A. W., Haulena, M., and Weary, D. M. (2011). A review of the effects of different marking and tagging techniques on marine mammals. Wildlife Research 39, 15–30.
| A review of the effects of different marking and tagging techniques on marine mammals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wilson, R. P. (2011). The price tag. Nature 469, 164–165.
| The price tag.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3MXkvFensA%3D%3D&md5=a31cd16cc87c6433c13cb95f39c7bc3aCAS |
Wilson, R. P., and McMahon, C. R. (2006). Measuring devices on wild animals: what constitutes acceptable practice? Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 4, 147–154.
| Measuring devices on wild animals: what constitutes acceptable practice?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
