ONRAB® oral rabies vaccine is shed from, but does not persist in, captive mammals.

ONRAB® is a human adenovirus rabies glycoprotein recombinant vaccine developed to control rabies in wildlife. To support licensing and widespread use of the vaccine, safety studies are needed to assess its potential residual impact on wildlife populations. We examined the persistence of the ONRAB® vaccine virus in captive rabies vector and non-target mammals. This research complements work on important rabies vector species (raccoon, striped skunk, and red fox) but also adds to previous findings with the addition of some non-target species (Virginia opossum, Norway rats, and cotton rats) and a prolonged period of post vaccination monitoring (41 days). Animals were directly inoculated orally with the vaccine and vaccine shedding was monitored using quantitative real-time PCR applied to oral and rectal swabs. ONRAB® DNA was detected in both oral and rectal swabs from 6 h to 3 days post-inoculation in most animals, followed by a resurgence of shedding between days 17 and 34 in some species. Overall, the duration over which ONRAB® DNA was detectable was shorter for non-target mammals, and by day 41, no animal had detectable DNA in either oral or rectal swabs. All target species, as well as cotton rats and laboratory-bred Norway rats, developed robust humoral immune responses as measured by competitive ELISA, with all individuals being seropositive at day 31. Similarly, opossums showed good response (89% seropositive; 8/9), whereas only one of nine wild caught Norway rats was seropositive at day 31. These results support findings of other safety studies suggesting that ONRAB® does not persist in vector and non-target mammals exposed to the vaccine. As such, we interpret these data to reflect a low risk of adverse effects to wild populations following distribution of ONRAB® to control sylvatic rabies.

Predators, alternative prey and climate influence annual breeding success of a long-lived sea duck.

1. Perturbations to ecosystems have the potential to directly and indirectly affect species interactions, with subsequent impacts on population dynamics and the vital rates that regulate them. 2. The few long-term studies of common eider breeding ecology indicate that reproductive success is low in most years, interrupted by occasional boom years. However, no study has explicitly examined the drivers of long-term variation in reproductive success. 3. Here, we use encounter history data collected across 41 years to examine the effects of arctic foxes (a terrestrial nest predator), local abundance and spatial distribution of lesser snow geese (an alternative prey source), and spring climate on common eider nest success. 4. Eider nest success declined over the course of the study, but was also highly variable across years. Our results supported the hypothesis that the long-term decline in eider nest success was caused by apparent competition with lesser snow geese, mediated by shared predators. This effect persisted even following a large-scale exodus of nesting geese from the eider colony. Nest success was also lowest in years of low arctic fox index, presumably driven by prey switching in years of low small mammal availability. However, increased snow goose abundance appeared to buffer this effect through prey swamping. The effect of spring climate depended on the stage of the breeding season; cold and wet and warm and dry conditions in early spring were correlated with decreased nest success, whereas warm and wet conditions in late spring increased eider nest success. 5. These results underscore the significance of both trophic interactions and climate in regulating highly variable vital rates, which likely have important consequences for population dynamics and the conservation of long-lived iteroparous species.

Wild bird influenza survey, Canada, 2005.

Of 4,268 wild ducks sampled in Canada in 2005, real-time reverse transcriptase-PCR detected influenza A matrix protein (M1) gene sequence in 37% and H5 gene sequence in 5%. Mallards accounted for 61% of samples, 73% of M1-positive ducks, and 90% of H5-positive ducks. Ducks hatched in 2005 accounted for 80% of the sample.