Skip to main content

Table 3 Effectiveness* of 4 intervention strategies for CWD control in wild deer in North America

From: Systematic review of management strategies to control chronic wasting disease in wild deer populations in North America

Study

Intervention strategy

Selective removal

Non-selective removal

Seasonal (summer) hunting

Vaccination

Predictive modeling studies

 

Gross and Miller, 2001, J Wildl Manage [20]

Effectivea,b

    

Wasserberg et al., 2009, J Appl Ecol [21]

 

Effective

   

Wild et al., 2011, J Wildl Dis [22]

Effectivec

    

Potapov et al., 2012, Proc R Soc B [23]

 

Effectived

  

Effective

Jennelle et al., 2014, PLOS One [24]

Effectivee

 

Not effective

  

Oraby et al., 2014, J Theor Biol [25]

   

Effective

 

Analytical observational studies

     

Conner et al., 2007, Ecol Appl [26]

  

Not effective

  

Mateus-Pinilla et al., 2013, Prev Vet Med [27]

 

Effective

   

Manjerovic et al., 2014, Prev Vet Med [28]

 

Effective

   
  1. *All models showed some degree of effectiveness depending on parameters and scenarios chosen. Effectiveness was defined based on the extent to which the specific management objectives were achieved or were projected to be achieved by the specific intervention. Most studies, depending on the specific objectives, were considered effective when the control measure either maintained CWD at low prevalence or reduced it to low or zero prevalence
  2. aPreferential removal of infected deer
  3. bEffective only when CWD prevalence was low (0.01 and 0.05) and when 80–90 % of infected deer could be removed after 80 years of intervention
  4. cPreferential removal of infected deer by large predators
  5. dEffective only when assuming a FD transmission of CWD but not when assuming a DD transmission
  6. ePreferential removal of infected deer by targeting males which have a higher prevalence