Behavioural and electroencephalographic assessment of captive-bolt stunning in kangaroo pouch young.

Overview

1. Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, New South Wales Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, Australia
2. Animal Welfare Science and Ethics Group, The Royal Veterinary College Department of Pathobiology and Population Sciences, United Kingdom

Abstract

During commercial harvesting (shooting) of kangaroos, pouch young of shot females must be euthanased to prevent suffering. The current euthanasia method, manually applied concussive (or blunt force) trauma to the head, can be effective but is not always applied consistently and is often perceived by observers to be inhumane. The captive-bolt device (CBD), which fires a steel bolt that either penetrates or impacts the skull, could provide a more suitable alternative. We reviewed a range of potentially suitable CBDs and assessed the effectiveness of four types on live animals. Effectiveness of CBDs was determined by assessing behaviour, electroencephalogram (EEG) and evaluating brain and skull trauma post mortem. Pouch young were also euthanased using manual blunt force trauma for comparison. Shooting with a penetrating CBD produced brain activity that was inconsistent with consciousness in 100% (n = 20) of animals. Behavioural indicators of consciousness and normal-like EEG were not detected after shooting with the CBD and damage to the brain was extensive. Seven out of 29 (24%) joeys shot with a non-penetrating CBD were either still breathing (n = 1) or recovered breathing (n = 6) after shooting. All seven animals had no or only mild damage to the medulla. We conclude that a cartridge-powered, penetrating CBD and manual blunt force trauma can both achieve immediate unconsciousness in pouch young, but a second step to exsanguinate the animal must still be performed. Penetrating CBDs are preferred to manual blunt force trauma since they are more repeatable, less reliant upon operator skill and confidence and more likely to reduce animal (and observer) distress.

Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY), from the paper cited above.

Code

No file of the authors' code could be read here: it is described below, and read at its source.

Tracing map

Proposed by the machine: these links were found in the paper and verified at the source, without human review. The map will receive a Zenodo DOI once one of the paper's authors has validated it with their ORCID.

What the map holds:

• 1 repository of the authors' code, each at its verified commit, with its license and how the link was found in the paper;
• 0 scripts, each with its path and the digest of its content;
• no match between paragraphs and code yet;
• neither the text of the paper nor the code itself.

Its JSON (tracing-map.json) is deposited on Zenodo with its DOI once the map is validated.

Data

No dataset and no data link were found in the paper.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from TS, upon reasonable request.

Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY), from the paper cited above.

Versions

The history of this record: each version stored by the harvester or made by a correction of its authors or of the maintainers of its code, and what changed in its facts. The texts of the paper (its abstract, its availability statements) are not part of it; versions that changed only those are not listed.

Version 1, 30 September 2026: the first record

Recorded: type, language, journal, volume, pages, dates, 3 authors, 8 keywords, 1 funder, 42 references.

Cite

This paper

Sharp, T. M., McLeod, S. R., & Gibson, T. J. (2026). Behavioural and electroencephalographic assessment of captive-bolt stunning in kangaroo pouch young. Animal welfare (South Mimms, England), 35, e20. https://doi.org/10.1017/awf.2026.10070

The tracing map gets a citation of its own once an author has validated it and it has a DOI.

Similar papers

The papers with a page that share the most with this one: the tools found in their code, their categories, datasets, cited references and authors, the rarest counting most.

[1] doi:10.1111/joa.70035 [code]

A suture in time: The ontogeny of cranial suture morphology in mammals.

Journal: Journal of anatomy

In common: 4 references

[2] doi:10.1093/zoolinnean/zlae060 [code]

Divergent patterns of cranial suture fusion in marsupial and placental mammals.

Journal: Zoological journal of the Linnean Society

In common: 3 references

[3] doi:10.1016/j.patter.2025.101182 [code]

GREEN: A lightweight architecture using learnable wavelets and Riemannian geometry for biomarker exploration with EEG signals.

Journal: Patterns (New York, N.Y.)

In common: EEG, 1 reference

[4] doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1011817 [code]

Brain tropism acquisition: The spatial dynamics and evolution of a measles virus collective infectious unit that drove lethal subacute sclerosing panencephalitis.

Journal: PLoS pathogens

In common: 1 reference

[5] doi:10.1186/s12576-022-00847-z

Temporal variations in the pattern of breathing: techniques, sources, and applications to translational sciences.

Journal: The journal of physiological sciences : JPS

In common: 1 reference

[6] doi:10.7554/elife.103592 [code]

Gene regulatory dynamics during craniofacial development in a carnivorous marsupial.

Journal: eLife

In common: 1 reference

[7] doi:10.1038/s42003-025-07875-6 [code]

Enhanced insights into the genetic architecture of 3D cranial vault shape using pleiotropy-informed GWAS.

Journal: Communications biology

In common: 1 reference

[8] doi:10.1016/j.ynirp.2023.100179

White matter microstructural integrity continues to develop from adolescence to young adulthood in mice and humans: Same phenotype, different mechanism.

Journal: Neuroimage. Reports

In common: 1 reference

[9] doi:10.1016/j.isci.2023.106985

Dissection of insular cortex layer 5 reveals two sublayers with opposing modulatory roles in appetitive drinking behavior.

Journal: iScience

In common: 1 reference

[10] doi:10.1098/rstb.2022.0083 [code]

Developmental origin underlies evolutionary rate variation across the placental skull.

Journal: Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences

In common: 1 reference

Contribute

The authors of this paper can claim it, correct its record and validate its tracing map, and the maintainers of its code (its owner, or a public member of its organization) correct what it says of their repository; anyone signed in can ask for its removal. Every request goes to OSCR's own machine, which answers it; your account page follows them.

<!-- oscr-badge:start -->
[![OSCR](https://openscicode.org/badge/doi/10.1017/awf.2026.10070.svg)](https://openscicode.org/badge/doi/10.1017/awf.2026.10070)
<!-- oscr-badge:end -->

.. oscr-badge:start

.. image:: https://openscicode.org/badge/doi/10.1017/awf.2026.10070.svg
   :target: https://openscicode.org/badge/doi/10.1017/awf.2026.10070
   :alt: OSCR

.. oscr-badge:end

<!-- oscr-badge:start -->
<a href="https://openscicode.org/badge/doi/10.1017/awf.2026.10070"><img src="https://openscicode.org/badge/doi/10.1017/awf.2026.10070.svg" alt="OSCR"></a>
<!-- oscr-badge:end -->

Request its removal

To ask OSCR to remove this record, the copies of its authors' scripts or its tracing map, use the removal request page: signed in, you say who you are, what to remove and why, then review and confirm the request. Published rules decide every request (how).

Discussion: code errors and mismatches between the code and the paper about this paper and its code, from readers and its authors, beside the paper and its tracing map.

Report a mismatch between the code and the paper · Report a code error (signed in)

Reproductions: reports from readers who ran the authors' code and did not get the paper's result, what they ran, with which environment, commit and data.

Report a reproduction failure (signed in)

Activity: what happens around this paper: new versions of its record, its map's validation, discussions and reproductions. It opens with sign-in.