No abstract

Coyotes (Canis latrans) are novel predators throughout the southeastern United States and their depredation of white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) neonates may explain observed declines in some deer populations in the region, but direct evidence for such a relationship is lacking. Our objective was to quantify neonate survival rates and causes of mortality at the United States Department of Energy's Savannah River Site (SRS), South Carolina to directly evaluate degree of predation in this deer population. From 2006 to 2009, we radio‐monitored 91 neonates captured with the aid of vaginal implant transmitters in pregnant adult females and opportunistic searches. Overall Kaplan–Meier survival rate to 16 weeks of age was 0.230 (95% CI = 0.155–0.328), and it varied little among years. Our best‐fitting model estimated survival at 0.220 (95% CI = 0.144–0.320). This model included a quadratic time trend variable (lowest survival rate during the first week of life and increasing to near 1.000 around week 10), and Julian date of birth (survival probability declining as date of birth increased). Predation by coyotes was the most frequent cause of death among the 70 monitored neonates that died, definitively accounting for 37% of all mortalities and potentially accounting for as much as 80% when also including probable coyote predation. Predation by bobcats (Felis rufus) accounted for 7% (definitive) to 9% (including probable bobcat predation) of mortalities. The level of coyote‐induced mortality we observed is consistent with the low recruitment rates exhibited in the SRS deer population since establishment of coyotes at the site. If representative of recruitment rates across South Carolina, current harvest levels appear unsustainable. This understanding is consistent with the recent declining trend in the statewide deer population. The effects of coyote predation on recruitment should be considered when setting harvest goals, regardless of whether local deer population size is currently above or below desired levels, because coyotes can substantially reduce fawn recruitment. Published 2012. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Purpose To update American Society of Clinical Oncology/American Society of Hematology recommendations for use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) in patients with cancer. Methods An Update Committee reviewed data published between January 2007 and January 2010. MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library were searched. Results The literature search yielded one new individual patient data analysis and four literature-based meta-analyses, two systematic reviews, and 13 publications reporting new results from randomized controlled trials not included in prior or new reviews. Recommendations For patients undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy who have a hemoglobin (Hb) level less than 10 g/dL, the Update Committee recommends that clinicians discuss potential harms (eg, thromboembolism, shorter survival) and benefits (eg, decreased transfusions) of ESAs and compare these with potential harms (eg, serious infections, immune-mediated adverse reactions) and benefits (eg, rapid Hb improvement) of RBC transfusions. Individual preferences for assumed risk should contribute to shared decisions on managing chemotherapy-induced anemia. The Committee cautions against ESA use under other circumstances. If used, ESAs should be administered at the lowest dose possible and should increase Hb to the lowest concentration possible to avoid transfusions. Available evidence does not identify Hb levels ≥ 10 g/dL either as thresholds for initiating treatment or as targets for ESA therapy. Starting doses and dose modifications after response or nonresponse should follow US Food and Drug Administration–approved labeling. ESAs should be discontinued after 6 to 8 weeks in nonresponders. ESAs should be avoided in patients with cancer not receiving concurrent chemotherapy, except for those with lower risk myelodysplastic syndromes. Caution should be exercised when using ESAs with chemotherapeutic agents in diseases associated with increased risk of thromboembolic complications. Table 1 lists detailed recommendations. This guideline was developed through a collaboration between the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American Society of Hematology and has been published jointly by invitation and consent in both Journal of Clinical Oncology and Blood. Copyright © 2010 American Society of Clinical Oncology and American Society of Hematology. All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission by the American Society of Clinical Oncology or the American Society of Hematology.