European Journal of Wildlife Research

, Volume 54, Issue 2, pp 293–297 | Cite as

A mortality survey of free range nutria (Myocastor coypus)

  • Pablo Martino
  • Juan C. Sassaroli
  • José Calvo
  • Jorge Zapata
  • Eduardo Gimeno
Original Paper

Abstract

A review of the literature revealed little information on natural occurring diseases in wild nutria. In this report, a summary of necropsies performed on free-range animals from four different geographical areas, is presented. Fifty-two percent of the nutria had trauma (mostly by predation and road kill), 15% had poisoning by different toxics, and 11% had starvation. The rest died due to infectious diseases and miscellaneous causes, while 21 individuals had no significant lesions. The occurrence of infections seems sporadic with a far lower prevalence than in the farmed animals, while the incidence of poisoning is rather high. In addition, anthrax was diagnosed in two individuals. Thus, nutria are probably subject to mortality from a number of different human-induced causes rather than natural ones. Analysis of these records may provide insight into prevention of problem and better management practices.

Keywords

Wild nutria Mortality Post mortem examination 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by a grant (2157–1288/04) from the Scientific Research Council (CIC) of the Buenos Aires Province. It is stated that the experiments here comply with the current laws of the country in which they were performed.

References

  1. Bollo E, Pregel P, Gennero S, Pizzini E, Biolatti E (2003) Health status of a population of nutria (Myocastor coypus) living in a protected area in Italy. Res Vet Sci 75:21–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Buck WB (1974) Warfarin and other anticoagulant poisonings. In: Kirk RV (ed) Current veterinary therapy. W.B.Saunders Co. Press, Philaldelphia, pp 51–55Google Scholar
  3. Catzeflis FM, Hanni C, Sorrouille P, Douzery E (1995) Molecular systematics of histricograph rodents: evidence from the mitochondrial 12 SrRNA gene. Mol Phylogenet Evol 3:206–220Google Scholar
  4. Doncaster CP, Micol T (1990) Response by coypus to catastrophic events of cold and flooding. Holarctic Ecol 13:98–104Google Scholar
  5. Foley RE, Fackling SJ, Sloan RJ, Brown MK (1988) Organochlorine and mercury residues in wild mink and otter: comparison between fish. Environ Toxicol Chem 7:363–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Frank R, Vav Holdrinet M, Suda P (1979) Organochlorine and mercury residues in wild mammals in southern Ontario. B Environ Contam Tox 22:500–507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Guichon ML, Doncaster CP, Cassini M (2003) Population structure of coypus (Myocastor coypus) in their region of origin and comparison with introduced populations. J Zoo 261:265–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Guichon ML, Cassini M (2005) Population parameters of indigenous populations of Myocastor coypus: the effect of hunting pressure. Acta Theriol 50:125–132Google Scholar
  9. Howerth EW, Reeves AJ, McElveen MR, Aaustin FW (1994) Survey for selected diseases in nutria (Myocastor coypus) from Louisiana. J Wild Dis 30:450–453Google Scholar
  10. IUCN (2004). IUCN Red List of threatened species. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland & Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  11. Jeantet AY, Truchet M, Naulleau G, Martoja R (1991) Effects de la bromadiolone sur quelques organes ou tissus (foie, rein, rate, sang) de ragondin (Myocastor coypus). C.R.Academie Science Paris 312:149–156Google Scholar
  12. Köhler B, Wendland V, Winkler B (1988) Untersuchungenüber das Vorkommen bakterieller Infektionskrankheiten beim Sumpfbiber (Myocastor coypus Molina, 1782). Arch Exp Vet Med 42:877–879Google Scholar
  13. Martino P, Stanchi N (1994) Epizootic pneumonia in Nutria. J Vet Med B 41:561–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Martino P, Stanchi N (1998) Causes of death in captive nutria (Myocastor coypus) in Argentina. Isr J Vet Med 53:83–88Google Scholar
  15. Norris JD (1967) The control of coypus (Myocastor coypus) by cage trapping. J Appl Ecol 4:167–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Soccini C, Ferri V (2004) Nutrie: da più di settant’anni presenti in Italia. In: Dinetti M (ed) Origini del popolamento e attuale distribuzione in Italia, Proceedings of the Conference “Infrastrutture varie e biodiversità”. Pisa, Italia, pp 58–63Google Scholar
  17. Vietmeyer ND (1991) Microlivestock Little-known small animals with a promising economic future. National Academy Press, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  18. Willner GR, Chapman J, Pursley D (1979) Reproduction, physiological responses, food habits, and abundance of nutria on Maryland marshes. Wildlife Monogr 65:1–43Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pablo Martino
    • 1
  • Juan C. Sassaroli
    • 2
  • José Calvo
    • 3
  • Jorge Zapata
    • 1
  • Eduardo Gimeno
    • 1
  1. 1.Pathology - CIC & Microbiology DepartmentVeterinary CollegeLa PlataArgentina
  2. 2.Ecological ReserveBuenos AiresArgentina
  3. 3.Fur-Bearing Animals Dept.INTABuenos AiresArgentina

Personalised recommendations