ReviewAnimal reproduction2026
Wildlife fertility control: a mini-review of technologies, efficacy, and welfare impacts.
Review in Animal reproduction, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This review examines the growing challenge of managing overabundant wildlife populations in the context of increasing human-wildlife conflicts. Traditionally, population control has relied on lethal methods such as culling, but these approaches are increasingly restricted due to concerns over environmental harm, non-target effects, human safety, and shifting societal values favouring more humane solutions. Fertility control has emerged as a promising non-lethal alternative, aiming to regulate populations by reducing reproductive success rather than increasing mortality. Its effectiveness depends on species-specific life-history traits: it can rapidly reduce populations of short-lived, highly fecund species, while effects in long-lived animals are delayed. Various fertility control methods are available, including endocrine suppression, immunocontraceptive vaccines, synthetic hormones and non-endocrine approaches such as zona pellucida vaccines. A major limitation to field applications of fertility control is the development of efficient delivery systems, particularly for small or free-ranging species where oral delivery must overcome challenges of palatability, stability, and species-specificity. Animal welfare considerations depend on species, contraceptives and contexts and involve trade-offs between reduced mortality and potential impacts on behaviour, physiology, and reproduction. Nevertheless, fertility control may offer welfare advantages over lethal methods and can reduce the transmission of infectious agents by maintaining social stability. Despite its potential, widespread implementation is constrained by economic and regulatory barriers. Overall, fertility control represents a valuable tool within integrated wildlife management strategies, though continued technological innovation and regulatory adaptation are essential for widespread application in the future.
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.