↓ Skip to main content

Routledge

A Veterinary and Behavioral Analysis of Dolphin Killing Methods Currently Used in the “Drive Hunt” in Taiji, Japan

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#1 of 483)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
8 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
twitter
1209 X users
facebook
67 Facebook pages
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
4 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
103 Mendeley
Title
A Veterinary and Behavioral Analysis of Dolphin Killing Methods Currently Used in the “Drive Hunt” in Taiji, Japan
Published in
Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, April 2013
DOI 10.1080/10888705.2013.768925
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew Butterworth, Philippa Brakes, Courtney S. Vail, Diana Reiss

Abstract

Annually in Japanese waters, small cetaceans are killed in "drive hunts" with quotas set by the government of Japan. The Taiji Fishing Cooperative in Japan has published the details of a new killing method that involves cutting (transecting) the spinal cord and purports to reduce time to death. The method involves the repeated insertion of a metal rod followed by the plugging of the wound to prevent blood loss into the water. To date, a paucity of data exists regarding these methods utilized in the drive hunts. Our veterinary and behavioral analysis of video documentation of this method indicates that it does not immediately lead to death and that the time to death data provided in the description of the method, based on termination of breathing and movement, is not supported by the available video data. The method employed causes damage to the vertebral blood vessels and the vascular rete from insertion of the rod that will lead to significant hemorrhage, but this alone would not produce a rapid death in a large mammal of this type. The method induces paraplegia (paralysis of the body) and death through trauma and gradual blood loss. This killing method does not conform to the recognized requirement for "immediate insensibility" and would not be tolerated or permitted in any regulated slaughterhouse process in the developed world.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 1,209 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Argentina 2 2%
Germany 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 96 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 19 18%
Researcher 15 15%
Student > Master 14 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 12%
Other 6 6%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 21 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 43 42%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 7%
Environmental Science 6 6%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 4%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 4 4%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 23 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1136. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 April 2023.
All research outputs
#13,328
of 25,804,096 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science
#1
of 483 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54
of 214,013 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,804,096 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 483 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 214,013 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them