1. Reimmunization increases contraceptive effectiveness of gonadotropin-releasing hormone vaccine (GonaCon-Equine) in free-ranging horses (Equus caballus): Limitations and side effects.
- Author
-
Baker DL, Powers JG, Ransom JI, McCann BE, Oehler MW, Bruemmer JE, Galloway NL, Eckery DC, and Nett TM
- Subjects
- Animals, Animals, Wild, Female, Pregnancy, Random Allocation, Vaccination adverse effects, Vaccination methods, Vaccination veterinary, Contraception, Immunologic adverse effects, Contraception, Immunologic methods, Contraception, Immunologic veterinary, Contraceptive Effectiveness, Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone immunology, Horses immunology, Immunization, Secondary adverse effects, Immunization, Secondary methods, Immunization, Secondary veterinary, Vaccines, Contraceptive therapeutic use
- Abstract
Wildlife and humans are increasingly competing for resources worldwide, and a diverse, innovative, and effective set of management tools is needed. Controlling abundance of wildlife species that are simultaneously protected, abundant, competitive for resources, and in conflict with some stakeholders but beloved by others, is a daunting challenge. Free-ranging horses (Equus caballus) present such a conundrum and managers struggle for effective tools for regulating their abundance. Controlling reproduction of female horses presents a potential alternative. During 2009-2017, we determined the long-term effectiveness of GnRH vaccine (GonaCon-Equine) both as a single immunization and subsequent reimmunization on reproduction and side effects in free-ranging horses. At a scheduled management roundup in 2009, we randomly assigned 57 adult mares to either a GonaCon-Equine treatment group (n = 29) or a saline control group (n = 28). In a second roundup in 2013, we administered a booster vaccination to these same mares. We used annual ground observations to estimate foaling proportions, social behaviors, body condition, and injection site reactions. We found this vaccine to be safe for pregnant females and neonates, with no overt deleterious behavioral side effects during the breeding season. The proportion of treated mares that foaled following a single vaccination was lower than that for control mares for the second (P = 0.03) and third (P = 0.08) post-treatment foaling seasons but was similar (P = 0.67) to untreated mares for the fourth season, demonstrating reversibility of the primary vaccine treatment. After two vaccinations, however, the proportion of females giving birth was lower (P <0.001) than that for control mares for three consecutive years and ranged from 0.0-0.16. The only detectable adverse side effect of vaccination was intramuscular swelling at the vaccination site. Regardless of vaccine treatment (primary/secondary), approximately 62% (34/55) of immunized mares revealed a visible reaction at the vaccine injection site. However, none of these mares displayed any evidence of lameness, altered gait or abnormal range of movement throughout the 8 years they were observed in this study. Our research suggests that practical application of this vaccine in feral horses will require an initial inoculation that may provide only modest suppression of fertility followed by reimmunization that together could result in greater reduction in population growth rates over time., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
- Published
- 2018
- Full Text
- View/download PDF