ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2025
Wild Boar Attacks on Hunting Dogs in Czechia: The Length of the Hunting Season Matters.
Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Wild pigs, wild costs: the economic consequences of wild pig invasions in the United States.Pest management science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Hunting dogs are exposed to the risk of injury in driven hunts, an often-used method for managing growing wild boar numbers. This study investigated the impact of increased hunting pressure-both across the hunting season and within individual hunting events-on the risk of wild boar attacks on hunting dogs, i.e., the length of the hunting season (2.68 ± 0.76 months, mean ± standard deviation), the number of driven hunts per season (3.99 ± 0.43), the intervals between hunts (17.85 ± 4.83 days), the number of wild boars harvested per season (14.46 ± 13.10), and the number of participants (23.8 ± 10.69) and dogs (4.56 ± 2.66) involved per hunt. The data were collected via a retrospective questionnaire survey. The information-theoretic approach (IT-AIC) and GLMM were employed to estimate the factors' effects on the number of wild boar attacks on dogs reported in 40 hunting grounds in five consecutive hunting seasons (2.60 ± 5.07 attacks per hunting season in a hunting ground). The number of attacks only increased with the length of the hunting season. The best model did not include other factors, such as shorter intervals between hunts, a higher number of driven hunts, wild boars harvested, or participants. The respondents reported 150 injuries by wild boars during 797 driven hunts. Most injuries were mild (73.8%), with fewer severe (18.8%) and fatal (7.4%) cases. Further investigation into wild boar and hunting dog interactions is necessary for constructing strategies to improve hunting practices and reduce dog injury risks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.