Don't have a vet? Check out VET RESOURCES
The subject of intentional breeding or meat rabbits is prohibited. The answers provided on this board are for general guideline purposes only. The information is not intended to diagnose or treat your pet. It is your responsibility to assess the information being given and seek professional advice/second opinion from your veterinarian and/or qualified behaviorist.
LEADERS: Beka27 BinkyBunny KokaneeandKahlua LBJ10 LittlePuffyTail LongEaredLions MoveDiagonally RabbitPam Sarita
My brain just exploded. Lol
Question: the live vector, this is using a virus that would have to be injected into the animal?
I agree, it is interesting. My mind of course when to rabbits. If something like this could be used for rabbit populations, I wonder what the effects would be in Does if the reproductive cells are reduced, could the ones leading to uterine cancers and endometriosis also be destroyed. That couldbe a good side effect! Another thought is the impact having non fertile Does would have in a group. Rabbit groups are matriarchal and dominant Does (I read) can prevent Bucks impregnating subordinate Does. The mind boggles!
By the way, I altered thread title a little but not due to this topic. I just read it and thought it might attract one-off posters to make suggestions of less desirable methods of culling.
Yes, generally a live vector is a virus. It would have to be injected somehow and the genes are transferred to the animal's cells by the virus itself. In vivo simply means that the genes are being transferred to the cells while the cells are inside the animal's body. This is opposed to ex vivo, where cells are removed from the body, the genes are delivered to the cells, and then the cells are transplanted back into the body. Obviously, if the genes could simply be delivered by the virus it would vastly simplify things. That was all that I meant before, that that is really amazing and apparently this person was able to do it (or maybe not, who knows without reading the article exactly how they did it, haha!).
You bring up some good questions about side effects. I wonder if such things have even been looked at as far as a study goes. I don't know how long the study conducted by this person was, so it is hard to say if there was even the potential for observation of such effects. It would be interesting to read the article if I can find it somewhere to view for free.
Just caught up on this thread, that's an interesting method of population control, hm. Might a more "humane" way to do things (well, don't know the side effects) but at the same time it also sounds like a fast-track selective pressure that will breed resistance pretty quickly? I tried to look up the article you mentioned on my university's databases...while I've had no luck yet, I've found a slew of related articles, some rabbit-specific, on PubMed:
 Argh, most of the really promising looking articles are in the journal "Reproduction, Fertility, and Development," which I apparently don't have immediate access to. The librarians claim that with some notice, they can procure most articles for students to peruse..maybe I'll put in a request. So that's where my tuition goes, hmm. I did however have access to download the full text of a review titled "Biological control of vertebrate pests using virally vectored immunocontraception" that actually cites the Tyndale-Biscoe paper and has a bit of specific discussion on the use of the myxoma virus in rabbits; if anyone is interested shoot me a PM and I can email it to you