Back

Fast and cost-effective age estimation in Bengal tiger and Asiatic lion: applicability of cementum analysis method

Sharma, V.; Sharma, C. P.; Sharma, V.; Goyal, S. P.; Gupta, S. K.

2021-09-28 zoology
10.1101/2021.09.27.461978 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Age estimation methods, through cementum analysis, for wild animals are rarely developed in Southeast Asian Countries. In the present study, we describe the applicability of the cementum analysis technique for developing a fast ({+/-}19 hours) and cost-effective age estimation method for Bengal tiger (Panthera tigris tigris) and Asiatic lion (Panthera leo persica) using incisor tooth. The I2 and I3 incisor teeth from the right mandible of a tiger and I2 and I3 from the left maxilla of a lion were used in the study. The longitudinal sections of the tooth were made using a low cost hand grinding technique on sand papers followed by decalcification and staining with hematoxylin. The cementum layers were counted under the microscope at 100X or 200X magnifications. Two cementum layers were observed in each of the I2 and I3 incisor tooth of tiger and six cementum layers were observed in each of the I2 and I3 incisor teeth of lion. The permanent incisors in tiger and lion erupt between 12-14 months; hence, we added 1 year to the counted number of cementum layers to estimate the final age of tiger and lion incisors. The absolute age of tiger and lion incisors was estimated to be of 2+1 years and 6+1 years, respectively. The same number of cementum layers in both incisors respective to the tiger and lion were observed. Therefore, we suggest (i) undertake the blind test and (ii) collect incisor teeth from naturally died or killed individuals for strengthening the database on the age of the wild population. This optimized method may be suitable for many carnivore species, applicable in wildlife forensic studies and can be used by researchers with minimum expertise, time, and funds requirements throughout the world.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.