Ideally, the title of this article has been in a manner that it tends to represent the findings of diverse studies involving stress in world animals. In statistics, this is the concept of generalization whereby the researchers use the existing body of knowledge to develop a hypothesis regarding their study's phenomena. In essence, the title does not represent the accurate findings, rather it provides the researcher with the main argument that will be used to justify their specific qualities and studies of the phenomena. In this case, the phenomena are the death of wild animals from the stress of being captured for the study. The article concludes that is the current era, there is no room for error which means that there should be no deaths for the wild animals being trapped for study. This conclusion seems to be overstated as there is no research that provides ideal results without significant variations.
The article focuses on examining the worthiness of wild animals dying in the name of doing research. In fact, this is what the title outline summarizes. However, the sole purpose of researchers is to use a small size of a particular animal to understand how the whole species respond to capture. Thus, the finding of these would be useful to other scientists and wildlife managers while relocating animals. In essence, know how to handle different species at the expense of a few stressed up during the study is worth it. In extreme cases, if the trapped animal for the study happens to dies, the findings recorded will continue to be used in the unforeseeable future. With this, the first sentence of the article that needs to be changed is the title. This sentence would be reduced to “How to control the death rate of wild animals trapped for studies.” The basic reason is that it would be more reasonable to know how to reduce the death of these animals rather than to reason out the worthiness of those dying at the expense of research.
The article widely shared the negative effect of capturing wild animals for research. Though, it is a fact that the process of capturing involves a reduction in survival probability, risk of mortality and injuries of focal animals. The best criterion for evaluating the safety level of capture is through the mortality rate. However, to ensure the validity and ethical standards I would suggest the need to assess the positive effect of capturing wild animals for the purpose of research. Thus, if a single paragraph was to be added in this article, I would suggest the paragraph to address how wild animal capture can be improved to enhance their safety. With this, the researchers can opt for the use of drugs and doses such as induction of sedation, xylazine, and α2-agonists drugs. Although these improvement capture methodologies pose risks of severe side effects, it would be safer than physical capture.
The researches involve the study of how variables of the phenomena relate. However, for quantitative research, graphs or figures help in providing a compact and clear idea and knowledge of the relationship between variables. The basic reason is that graphs and figures facilitate data comparison against time and geographic among other factors that affect variables. However, in this article, the graph and figure may not be necessarily given a number of reasons. Firstly, the article is more qualitative than quantitative. This means that the largest part of the analysis can adequately be described in the text. Secondly, the article contained a small amount of data quotes that do not show any significant trend and thus, it can be conveyed succinctly using sentences.
