An extensive re-evaluation of evidence and analyses of the Randomised Badger Culling Trial II: In neighbouring areas.

IF 2.9 3区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES Royal Society Open Science Pub Date : 2024-08-21 eCollection Date: 2024-08-01 DOI:10.1098/rsos.240386
Cathal L Mills, Rosie Woodroffe, Christl A Donnelly
{"title":"An extensive re-evaluation of evidence and analyses of the Randomised Badger Culling Trial II: In neighbouring areas.","authors":"Cathal L Mills, Rosie Woodroffe, Christl A Donnelly","doi":"10.1098/rsos.240386","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the second investigation in a pair of analyses which re-evaluates the Randomised Badger Culling Trial (RBCT), we estimate the effects of proactive badger culling on the incidence of tuberculosis (TB) in cattle populations in unculled neighbouring areas. Throughout peer-reviewed analyses of the RBCT, proactive culling was estimated to have detrimental effects on the incidence of herd breakdowns (i.e. TB incidents) in neighbouring areas. Using previously published, publicly available data, we appraise a variety of frequentist and Bayesian models as we estimate the effects of proactive culling on confirmed herd breakdowns in unculled neighbouring areas. For the during trial period from the initial culls until 4 September 2005, we estimate consistently high probabilities that proactive culling had adverse effects on confirmed herd breakdowns in unculled neighbouring areas, thus supporting the theory of heightened risk of TB for the neighbouring cattle populations. Negligible culling effects are estimated in the post-trial period across the statistical approaches and imply unsustained long-term effects for unculled neighbouring areas. Therefore, when considered alongside estimated beneficial effects within proactive culling areas, these conflicting adverse side effects render proactive culling complex, and thus, decision making regarding potential culling strategies should include (i) ecological, geographical and scientific considerations and (ii) cost-benefit analyses.</p>","PeriodicalId":21525,"journal":{"name":"Royal Society Open Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11335398/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Royal Society Open Science","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.240386","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the second investigation in a pair of analyses which re-evaluates the Randomised Badger Culling Trial (RBCT), we estimate the effects of proactive badger culling on the incidence of tuberculosis (TB) in cattle populations in unculled neighbouring areas. Throughout peer-reviewed analyses of the RBCT, proactive culling was estimated to have detrimental effects on the incidence of herd breakdowns (i.e. TB incidents) in neighbouring areas. Using previously published, publicly available data, we appraise a variety of frequentist and Bayesian models as we estimate the effects of proactive culling on confirmed herd breakdowns in unculled neighbouring areas. For the during trial period from the initial culls until 4 September 2005, we estimate consistently high probabilities that proactive culling had adverse effects on confirmed herd breakdowns in unculled neighbouring areas, thus supporting the theory of heightened risk of TB for the neighbouring cattle populations. Negligible culling effects are estimated in the post-trial period across the statistical approaches and imply unsustained long-term effects for unculled neighbouring areas. Therefore, when considered alongside estimated beneficial effects within proactive culling areas, these conflicting adverse side effects render proactive culling complex, and thus, decision making regarding potential culling strategies should include (i) ecological, geographical and scientific considerations and (ii) cost-benefit analyses.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对 "随机捕杀獾试验 II:邻近地区 "的证据和分析进行广泛的重新评估。
在重新评估 "随机扑杀獾试验"(RBCT)的两项分析中的第二项调查中,我们估算了主动扑杀獾对未扑杀獾的邻近地区牛群结核病(TB)发病率的影响。在同行评议的 RBCT 分析中,主动扑杀估计会对邻近地区牛群崩溃(即结核病事件)的发生率产生不利影响。利用之前公布的公开数据,我们评估了各种频数模型和贝叶斯模型,估计了主动扑杀对邻近未扑杀地区确诊牛群发病率的影响。在从最初扑杀到 2005 年 9 月 4 日的试验期间,我们估计主动扑杀对邻近未扑杀地区确诊牛群崩溃产生不利影响的概率一直很高,从而支持了邻近牛群结核病风险增加的理论。在所有统计方法中,对试验后时期的扑杀效果估计都是微不足道的,这意味着对未扑杀邻近地区的长期影响是不可持续的。因此,在考虑主动扑杀区域内的估计有利影响时,这些相互冲突的不利副作用会使主动扑杀变得复杂,因此,有关潜在扑杀策略的决策应包括:(i) 生态、地理和科学考虑因素;(ii) 成本效益分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Royal Society Open Science
Royal Society Open Science Multidisciplinary-Multidisciplinary
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
508
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Royal Society Open Science is a new open journal publishing high-quality original research across the entire range of science on the basis of objective peer-review. The journal covers the entire range of science and mathematics and will allow the Society to publish all the high-quality work it receives without the usual restrictions on scope, length or impact.
期刊最新文献
Comparative study of the catalytic performance of physically mixed and sequentially utilized γ-alumina and zeolite in methanol-to-propylene reactions. Protein folding, protein dynamics and the topology of self-motions. Biological pest regulation can benefit from diverse predation modes. Spatial and seasonal foraging patterns drive diet differences among north Pacific resident killer whale populations. A new sponge from the Marjum Formation of Utah documents the Cambrian origin of the hexactinellid body plan.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1