Trends in the development of mammalian pest control technology in New Zealand

The Enigma of Norbormide, a Rattus-Selective Toxicant

Norbormide (NRB) is a Rattus-selective toxicant, which was serendipitously discovered in 1964 and formerly marketed as an eco-friendly rodenticide that was deemed harmless to non-Rattus species. However, due to inconsistent efficacy and the emergence of second-generation anticoagulants, its usage declined, with registration lapsing in 2003. NRBs' lethal action in rats entails irreversible vasoconstriction of peripheral arteries, likely inducing cardiac damage: however, the precise chain of events leading to fatality and the target organs involved remain elusive. This unique contractile effect is exclusive to rat arteries and is induced solely by the endo isomers of NRB, hinting at a specific receptor involvement. Understanding NRB's mechanism of action is crucial for developing species-selective toxicants as alternatives to the broad-spectrum ones currently in use. Recent research efforts have focused on elucidating its cellular mechanisms and sites of action using novel NRB derivatives. The key findings are as follows: NRB selectively opens the rat mitochondrial permeability transition pore, which may be a factor that contributes to its lethal effect; it inhibits rat vascular KATP channels, which potentially controls its Rattus-selective vasoconstricting activity; and it possesses intracellular binding sites in both sensitive and insensitive cells, as revealed by fluorescent derivatives. These studies have led to the development of a prodrug with enhanced pharmacokinetic and toxicological profiles, which is currently undergoing registration as a novel efficacious eco-sustainable Rattus-selective toxicant. The NRB-fluorescent derivatives also show promise as non-toxic probes for intracellular organelle labelling. This review documents in more detail these developments and their implications.

Rodent management in Aotearoa New Zealand: approaches and challenges to landscape-scale control

Aotearoa-New Zealand has only four rodent species, all introduced. In order of arrival, they are Pacific rat Rattus exulans, brown rat R. norvegicus, house mouse Mus musculus, and black rat R. rattus. Rodent management in New Zealand aims mainly to conserve indigenous biodiversity rather than to protect crops or manage diseases, as is usual elsewhere. We describe four major "regimes" and one major vision for rodent control in New Zealand to meet ecological restoration objectives. Current challenges for island eradications are for large islands that are remote or populated by people. Aerial 1080 is the only large-scale (tens of thousands of hectares) option for black rat control, but its application requires adjustment to counter subsequent rapid black rat repopulation. Unfenced "ecosanctuaries" (mean 720 ha) use ground-based traps and poisons to target mainly black rats and face constant reinvasion. Ecosanctuaries with mammal-resistant fences (up to 3500 ha) limit reinvasion and target more pest species and have enabled the return of previously extirpated taxa to the main islands. Predator Free 2050 aims to eradicate the rat species (but not mice) plus some other introduced mammals from New Zealand by 2050. This vision is not attainable with current tools, but research and experimental management is exploring techniques and technologies. The large scale (to 100 000 ha) at which black rats are now targeted for control to extremely low abundance seems to be unique to New Zealand.

Has the introduction of two subspecies generated dispersal barriers among invasive possums in New Zealand?

The introduction of species into new environments provides the opportunity for the evolution of new forms through admixture and novel selection pressures. The common brushtail possum, Trichosurus vulpecula vulpecula from the Australian mainland and T.v.fuliginosus from Tasmania, were introduced multiple times to New Zealand from Australia to become one of New Zealand’s most significant pests. Although derived from two subspecies, possums in New Zealand are generally considered to be a single entity. In a previous analysis, we showed that possums in the Hawkes Bay region of New Zealand appeared to consist of at least two overlapping populations. Here, we extend that analysis using a genotype-by-sequencing approach to examine the origins and population structure of those possums and compare their genetic diversity to animals sampled from Australia. We identify two populations of each subspecies in Hawkes Bay and provide clear evidence of a contact zone between them in which a hybrid form is evident. Our analysis of private alleles shows higher rates of dispersal into the contact zone than away from it, suggesting that the contact zone functions as a sink (and hence as a barrier) between the two subspecies. Given the widespread and overlapping distribution of the two subspecies across both large islands in New Zealand, it is possible that many such contact zones exist. These results suggest an opportunity for a more targeted approach to controlling this pest by recognising sub-specific differences and identifying the contact zones that may form between them.

Underlying beliefs linked to public opinion about gene drive and pest-specific toxin for pest control

Abstract ContextDeveloping a new tool for wide-scale rat eradication is necessary for significant biodiversity gains. Underlying beliefs linked to public opinion can help guide policy makers to understand public concern and inform an effective discourse. AimsWe investigated underlying beliefs linked to levels of support for a potentially disruptive tool, gene drive, compared with a traditional stepwise tool, aerial distribution of a new pest-specific toxin. MethodsUsing the theory of planned behaviour, we surveyed (n=1200) a representative sample of New Zealanders to assess the level of support for the tool related to attitude, normative and control beliefs. Key resultsAttitude (e.g. gene drive is good/bad and gene drive is risky/safe) and two norms (e.g. people like me and people in my household) were key contributors to level of support for gene drive. Behavioural beliefs (if scientific evidence can prove it works, concern there are unknown consequences, a humane way to rid New Zealand of rats, and gene drive goes against natural way of life) were also significant. For aerial distribution of a new pest-specific toxin, the same attitudes and normative beliefs identified for gene drive also contributed significantly to the model. Four behavioural beliefs, namely, aerial delivery could affect areas outside the target zones, if there is scientific evidence, and it is impossible to make a pest-specific toxin that would not harm our native wildlife were also significant. The impact either tool may have on biodiversity was not significant in either model. ConclusionsDecision making about both gene drive (a disruptive technology) and aerial distribution of a pest-specific toxin (a stepwise technology) is primarily influenced by attitudes, with a few beliefs also influencing decision making. Novelty of the tool does not affect the underlying beliefs that are influencing levels of support. ImplicationsPublic engagement that acknowledges and responds to these underlying beliefs, rather than a traditional campaign based on biodiversity and environmental gains, may be more effective at creating a constructive dialogue about if and how these tools should be used, and to avoid replicating the polarised debate about 1080.

"Feelings and Fitness" Not "Feelings or Fitness"-The Raison d'être of Conservation Welfare, Which Aligns Conservation and Animal Welfare Objectives

Increasingly, human activities, including those aimed at conserving species and ecosystems (conservation activities) influence not only the survival and fitness but also the welfare of wild animals. Animal welfare relates to how an animal is experiencing its life and encompasses both its physical and mental states. While conservation biology and animal welfare science are both multi-disciplinary fields that use scientific methods to address concerns about animals, their focus and objectives sometimes appear to conflict. However, activities impacting detrimentally on the welfare of individual animals also hamper achievement of some conservation goals, and societal acceptance is imperative to the continuation of conservation activities. Thus, the best outcomes for both disciplines will be achieved through collaboration and knowledge-sharing. Despite this recognition, cross-disciplinary information-sharing and collaborative research and practice in conservation are still rare, with the exception of the zoo context. This paper summarizes key points developed by a group of conservation and animal welfare scientists discussing scientific assessment of wild animal welfare and barriers to progress. The dominant theme emerging was the need for a common language to facilitate cross-disciplinary progress in understanding and safeguarding the welfare of animals of wild species. Current conceptions of welfare implicit in conservation science, based mainly on "fitness" (physical states), need to be aligned with contemporary animal welfare science concepts which emphasize the dynamic integration of "fitness" and "feelings" (mental experiences) to holistically understand animals' welfare states. The way in which animal welfare is characterized influences the way it is evaluated and the emphasis put on different features of welfare, as well as, the importance placed on the outcomes of such evaluations and how that information is used, for example in policy development and decision-making. Salient examples from the New Zealand and Australian context are presented to illustrate. To genuinely progress our understanding and evaluation of wild animal welfare and optimize the aims of both scientific disciplines, conservation and animal welfare scientists should work together to evolve and apply a common understanding of welfare. To facilitate this, we propose the formal development of a new discipline, Conservation Welfare, integrating the expertise of scientists from both fields.