Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37627448›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2023

Attitudes towards the Potential Use of Aversive Geofencing Devices to Manage Wild Elephant Movement.

Surendranie J Cabral de Mel, Saman Seneweera, Ashoka Dangolla, Devaka K Weerakoon, Tek Maraseni, Benjamin L Allen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Surendranie J Cabral de MelInstitute for Life Sciences and the Environment, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD 4350, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5045-2716
Saman SeneweeraNational Institute of Fundamental Studies, Kandy 20000, Sri Lanka.
Ashoka DangollaDepartment of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, University of Peradeniya, Peradeniya 20400, Sri Lanka.
Devaka K WeerakoonDepartment of Zoology and Environmental Sciences, University of Colombo, Colombo 00300, Sri Lanka.ORCID 0000-0002-3473-4972
Tek MaraseniInstitute for Life Sciences and the Environment, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD 4350, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9361-1983
Benjamin L AllenInstitute for Life Sciences and the Environment, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD 4350, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1533-0163

Funding

National Institute of Fundamental Studies In-kind supportNational Research Council 19-046University of Southern Queensland International Fees Research Scholarship
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aversive geofencing devices (AGDs) or animal-borne satellite-linked shock collars might become a useful tool to mitigate human-elephant conflict (HEC). AGDs have the potential to condition problem elephants to avoid human-dominated landscapes by associating mild electric shocks with preceding audio warnings given as they approach virtual boundaries. We assessed the opinions of different stakeholders (experts, farmers, and others who have and have not experienced HEC; n = 611) on the potential use of AGDs on Asian elephants. Most respondents expressed positive opinions on the potential effectiveness of AGDs in managing elephant movement (62.2%). About 62.8% respondents also provided positive responses for the acceptability of AGDs if pilot studies with captive elephants have been successful in managing their movements. Some respondents perceived AGDs to be unacceptable because they are unethical or harmful and would be unsuccessful given wild elephants may respond differently to AGDs than captive elephants. Respondents identified acceptability, support and awareness of stakeholders, safety and wellbeing of elephants, logistical difficulties, durability and reliable functionality of AGDs, and uncertainties in elephants' responses to AGDs as potential challenges for implementing AGDs. These issues need attention when developing AGDs to increase support from stakeholders and to effectively reduce HEC incidents in the future.

Indexed as

conservationelectric shock collarsElephas maximushuman-elephant conflictpublic opinionvirtual fencingwildlife management

Identifiers

PMID37627448
PMCPMC10451760

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.