Fertility control in wildlife: humans as a model.
In a time of accelerated extinction rates and biodiversity loss, it may seem illogical to be concerned with methods limiting the reproduction of wild populations; however, there is an urgent need to inhibit the proliferation of a wide variety of species. The range of animals for which fertility control is desired makes the development of a single method impossible. The various reproductive strategies used by individual species, the desired outcome of contraceptive programs (reversible or irreversible; male or female directed) and our ignorance of the reproductive biology of many endangered species necessitate thorough species-specific investigations. As fertility control in humans is a reality and research into methods of fertility control is more advanced, humans serve as a model for developing contraceptive approaches for wild species. Population control by traditional methods (indirect or direct intervention by culling, poisoning, translocation, etc.) is increasingly unacceptable to the public, making human studies even more valuable for finding solutions to overabundant wild populations. This review compares and contrasts the range of contraceptive methods used in both wildlife and humans.
Barfield
Jennifer P
JP
Institute of Reproductive Medicine, University of Münster, D-48129 Münster, Germany.
Nieschlag
Eberhard
E
Cooper
Trevor G
TG
D000818:Animals; D000835:Animals, Wild; D003247:Conservation of Natural Resources; D003267:Contraception / Q000379:methods / Q000662:veterinary*; D003269:Contraception, Immunologic / Q000662:veterinary; D044363:Contraception, Postcoital / Q000662:veterinary; D003271:Contraceptive Agents, Female; D003272:Contraceptive Agents, Male; D017753:Ecosystem; D005260:Female; D020387:Food Chain; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008954:Models, Biological; D010571:Pest Control / Q000379:methods; D011156:Population Density
D003271:Contraceptive Agents, Female; D003272:Contraceptive Agents, Male