The Ecological Theoretical Approach

 

The ecological approach that has emerged from the early works of Germain (1973) and others (Barker, 1973; Grinnell, 1973; Hartman, 1976) offers a rich theoretical base which practitioners can translate into effective social work practice. Presently, the ecological approach provides strategies that allow the social worker to move from a micro level of intervention to a macro level of social treatment. The ecological perspective not only helps the social worker impact a client system through policy and planning activities but also through psychotherapy and other micro level approaches. Thus, direct and indirect practice strategies for intervention can be combined into a congruent practice orientation when working with a client system through the ecological approach.

The present thinking on the ecological approach suggests that the primary premise explaining human problems is derived from the complex interplay of psychological, social, economic, political and physical forces. Such a framework accords due recognition to the transactional relationship between environmental conditions and the human condition. This perspective allows the practitioner to effectively treat problems and needs of various systemic levels including the individual, family, the small group, and the larger community. In essence, the practitioner can easily shift from a clinical role to a policy and planning role within the board framework of the ecological approach.

What this research provides for social work practice is a novel way for conceptualizing the problems of clients. It suggests that the client's behavior is not only shaped by the environment, an idea long accepted in social work practice, but also that behavioral change in the client provides for different inputs from the environment. In a certain sense, the client appears to play a role in the shaping of the environment. Through the ecological perspective, the behavioral setting can be viewed as the basic unit of analysis for social work practice. The behavioral setting of the client should be viewed in terms other than the simple behavioral approaches found in traditional psychology. In other words, the behavioral setting is more than the behaviorist's conceptualization of behavior as a stimulus-response relationship, but rather is an inextricably interwoven relationship of physical setting, time, people, and individual behavior (Plas, 1981). The conglomeration of behavorial settings of a given client forms the client's ecosystem.

A client functions in more than one ecology. The client's ecosystem is the interrelationships and conglomeration of these ecologies. For example, a client's ecosystem consists of the self, family, the neighborhood, and the entire community. Obviously, as stressed earlier, conceptualizing the client's relationship to the environment is not a new idea in the profession of social work. What is powerful, however, about the concept of ecosystem is that the client's social functioning is clearly interrelated with the environment, and the client is an inextricable part of the ecological system (Hobbs, 1980). Consequently, the client's ecosystem is composed of numerous overlapping systems including the family, the workplace, and the community, as well as other critical subsystems unique to each client.

The traditional methods of social work intervention such as casework and groupwork largely view the presenting problem of a client as individual pathology. That is, the client is viewed as deviant, behaviorally troubled, or disturbed. The ecological perspective through the concept of transaction suggests that problems of clients are not a result of individual pathology, but rather a product of a malfunctioning ecosystem. The ecological perspective suggests that emotional disturbances, for example, are disturbances resulting from a pattern of maladaptive transactions between the organism and the environment through which environmental activity shapes the person and the person's social functioning influences the environment.

Advantages

The social ecological perspective is useful for understanding relationships between children or young people, and for understanding the different systems listed above, including friendship networks, families, community organisations and services, cultures, national policies, and even globalisation. According to Stevenson (1998, p. 19), ‘though it [social ecological perspective] is theoretical, it is very practical, it provides us with a kind of map to guide us through very confusing terrain’.

The social ecological perspective may assist practitioners when engaging with children and parents, because it reflects their realities, world views and explanations of their difficulties (Gill and Jack, 2007). It is a useful approach to support work with children, young people and families because it can act as a framework within which different and sometimes competing theories can be brought together (Seden, 2006). It is possible to look at practice problems from different perspectives and consider the impact of family, community, culture and societal processes both in causing problems and finding solutions (for example, resilience building). In particular, it reminds social workers about the diversity and uniqueness of children and service users and the importance of keeping them at the heart of their work.

Limitations

Although Bronfenbrenner’s model is very useful, models are only representations of the real world and should always be considered alongside other knowledge and experiences. The social ecological perspective is indeed helpful for showing interrelationships. It is, however, not so good at showing the weighting between the different elements. For example, many children who grow up in poverty may still achieve positive outcomes – the effects of poverty may be offset by other factors (for example, quality of parenting). The perspective often appears to overlook the day-to-day reality of practitioners. They might show the availability of support to a child from a social worker, yet the conditions under which the social worker is working (a large case load, conflicting priorities, personal development needs, etc.) are not necessarily visible within the model. Social workers are also ‘nested’ within their own social ecologies, and their practice is related to the different levels.

Although the ecological perspective has proposed a framework within which the development of children’s lives can be viewed, it does not necessarily define what is good or bad for children. Social ecological models are often a snapshot and do not easily represent changes across time.

Altruistic Behaviors in Primates, Birds, Bees, and Ants

 

Altruistic behaviour is conducted by an organism as in such a way that allows it to protect the interests of another organism other than itself. The importance of this process cannot be underestimated because it involves organisms essentially display behaviours that would otherwise not be considered natural (Schott, Neumann, Baertschi, & Ritz, 2019). The costs and benefits of this process can be measured through a consideration of the reproductive fitness or number of offspring that organisms end up producing. However, it is noteworthy that altruism is a process that takes place when an organism undertakes an action aimed at helping another other than itself, and this ensures that there is the promotion of a scenario where organism, in this case animals, end up being shown to have conscious thought, just like humans. This paper seeks to consider the way that altruistic behaviours are displayed among a diversity of organisms including primates, birds, bees, and ants, and the differences between them.

In order to ensure that there is the promotion of a scenario where there is an enhancement of survival, animals have come to adopt altruistic behaviour. This is especially the case when it comes to the way that for scientists that promote natural selection, it is considered unnatural behaviour (De Waal, 2008). Altruistic behaviour is one that shows considerable problems with natural selection, as seen through the scenario where natural selection involves a process of survival of the fittest yet this perspective is challenged through the way that animals behave when it comes to altruism (Kay, Lehmann, & Keller, 2019). Rather than promoting a scenario where there is the advancement of their own interests, some animal species have shown characteristics aimed at making sure that there is the promotion of interests of other individuals apart from themselves. However, despite the above argument, it is essential to consider that natural selection could also play a part, as seen through the way that only those animals that display altruistic behaviour end up enhancing their survival while those that do not are presented with the dilemma of not being able to do so.

Numerous benefits for those animals or organisms display altruistic behaviour are pertinent. Among this is that it enhances kinship bonds because animals will share with one another the little that they have, ensuring that there is an increase in the chance of all of them surviving. Furthermore, the entire group of animals can be greatly benefitted through the promotion of a scenario where the various members are able to advance themselves through caring for one another with a focus solely on the benefits of the group rather than the self (Crockett & Lockwood, 2018; Rusch, Böhm, & Herrmann, 2016). This behaviour can also be considered mutualistic because it ensures that the animals involved are able to support one another in times of scarcity, as seen through the way that such creatures as the vampire bats are able to regurgitate blood that they have consumed so that their less fortunate companions can have something to eat. The individual can also be benefitted because it can rely on social bonds based on altruistic relationships to ensure that its survives.

However, while there may be some benefits to altruism, there is also the potential of altruism being detrimental. This is seen through the way that it can end up having a negative effect on the survival and reproduction of the animal involved. Some animals, especially those that take in the offspring of their companions that have been killed, end up having to share the meagre food they have with their offspring, resulting in a scenario where they risk the survival of their own offspring. There is also the risk of death and injury because these individuals place themselves at considerable risk for the sake of others. Therefore, altruism is an action that results in there not being any direct benefit for the organism itself and instead, the main beneficiary is the organism that is being provided with assistance.

Group altruism takes place between a diversity of creatures, especially when it comes to smaller creatures. Honeypot ants display considerable altruism because of the way that they have evolved in order to bring about the enhancement of their own interests (Downing, Cornwallis, & Griffin, 2016). These creatures will often sacrifice themselves for the sake of their colony, showing a consideration for others over themselves. Some birds also display group altruism because they are able to make sure that they help their kin, especially those that have been survived attacks or are suffering from some form of disadvantage. This ensures that they are able to survive even in the most difficult of scenarios. Bees are also prominent in this case because they are able to ensure that they undertake a diversity of tasks, based on the division of labour within their hives. This ensures that they are able to survive in various circumstances, including some of the most dangerous, as seen through threats to their colonies.

Primates have also been found to display considerable altruistic behaviours, which can be considered to be closely related to that of humans. The altruistic behaviours of primates can be considered to be almost human, as seen through the way that they will often seek to alert one another whenever there are enemies, or when bonobos help to feed the disabled or sick among them (Post, Underwood, Schloss, & Hurlbut, 2002). They undertake these actions without seeking any benefit for themselves and instead will make sure that they benefit others among themselves. With a gesture, for example, chimpanzees will ask for help from others, which shows the highly social nature that these primates have ("Altruism in Chimpanzees," 2016). It is also important to consider that group altruism, while important for the group, is not advantageous for the individuals animal’s fitness because it involves a scenario where there is the advancement of the interests others over one self’s.

Altruism is also seen in humans, as seen through the way that it is considered human to help one another. Humans will often seek to makes sure that they advance the interests of one another, especially in scenarios where they feel that they are at an advantage over others (Trivers, 1971). In this way, there is the promotion of altruism as part of human values to such an extent that it is an extremely common phenomenon among humans. In animals, on the other hand, it is not common because most of the scientific studies show that animal do not have the same social values that could be compared with humans. Instead, animals seem to undertake altruistic actions as part of their instincts rather than based on conscious thought. The cognitive awareness of humans is far more advanced than that of animals and this may be the main reason behind the former being able to partake in altruism than would otherwise be the case. The major advantage of altruism in humans is that it ensure that there is the promotion of mutual interests in society to such an extent that it allows for cohesion. However, there are instances where individuals will act altruistically against their own interests, with the result being that they are unable to cope with certain circumstances, ending up suffering.

Altruism has both long- and short-term consequences to the fitness of the organism involved. It allows for the attainment of cohesion, as seen in the way that humans will seek to make sure that they advance each other’s interests as a way of promoting an environment where they can rely on one another (Platt, Seyfarth, & Cheney, 2016). One of the most important aspects of altruism is that it allows for the short term support between members of the same species or kin, which results in the enhancement of their ability to survive. The long term benefit is that there is the enhancement of mutual support between organisms in such a way that they are able to develop useful characteristics that are inherited by their offspring. It is therefore important to study altruism in animals because it allows for the promotion of the best interests of the group as a whole.

History

The behaviour of animals has been a subject of fascination by humans for centuries and has involved a process where there has been the study of animals. One of the earliest works that considered animal cognition in the modern world is that of Charles Darwin, who promoted the idea of evolution and mental continuity; suggesting that it is a process that involves a continuous development of the mental capacity of animals ("Important Scientists in the Early Development of Comparative Cognition,"). Another to make a study of animal cognition was George Romanes, who made a study of the comparative psychology of intelligence in a systematic manner. Edward Thorndike undertook the study of animal learning and intelligence while B.F. Skinner made a consideration of operant conditioning and behaviourism in animals. Finally, Wolfgang Kohler undertook the study of learning and intelligence in animals.

In order to ensure that there is the effective study of altruism in animals, it is essential to have an effective definition of animal behaviour. Animal behaviour is the way that animals will interact with their environment. Ethologists undertake the study of animals in their natural environment in order to better understand their behaviour and why they behave as they do. Moreover, studies in animals can also be conducted in labs, especially when it comes to simulations concerning how they would behave under a diversity of conditions. Comparative psychologists also conduct studies of animal behaviour, but focus more on making sure that there is an understanding of this behaviour based on mental processes of the animals involved.

In their natural habitat, primates live in an altruistic environment. This is pertinent because these animals are highly social and because of this, they are able to conduct altruism as a means of enhancing social cohesion. Primates such as chimpanzees and gorillas will often groom one another as a means of not only preventing the spread of unwanted insects among their group, but also as a form of social bonding. Moreover, the mental processes they use show that they have goals, intentions, knowledge and perception ("Altruism in Chimpanzees," 2016). There is a slight difference when one considers honeypot ants because for them, the individual is not important, and in the colony, it is the queen that is the most important member since she ensures its survival through reproduction. While this may be the case, it is important to note that all the ants are specialised in their tasks, which are critical for the survival of the colony and are often willing to sacrifice themselves for the greater good (Ichimura, Uemoto, Hara, & Mackin, 2014).

The study of altruism in animals is a process that began to be taken seriously in the middle of the 20^th century. Among the most important developments in this field was the theory of reciprocal altruism that was developed by Trivers in 1971 (Trivers, 1971). This theory proposes that animals will undertake altruistic actions because they expect the same in return from their companions. This is important because it shows a similarity to human behaviour. One of the aspects that need to be considered is that of grooming among chimpanzees; creatures that take turns grooming each other. It is likely that they evolved this characteristic as a means of ensuring that they not only enhanced social bonds, but also benefitted themselves from the process.

Hormones and the Brain

Hormones dictate the altruistic behaviour of animals. This is seen in the way that primates behave in the display of either maternal of paternal instincts. Maternal instincts come into play when the hormones associated with giving birth and after birth are released, affecting the brain (Dulac, O’Connell, & Wu, 2014). The result is that there is a change in behaviour in the female at this time to such an extent that they are more likely than not to engage in altruistic behaviours. The significance of this behaviour can be seen in the way that animals such as gorilla females will undertake to provide the best care possible for their offspring; a scenario that would not be possible without the hormonal changes taking place within them.

Paternal instincts also develop in male primates, which induces them to display care towards their offspring. The significance of this can be seen in the way that they will show considerable altruism towards their offspring, as seen through the way that a male silverback gorilla will take care of its young (Dulac et al., 2014). However, this changes in a scenario where they encounter young that are not their own offspring. Thus, males are less likely to engage in altruism towards offspring that are not their own but this changes as soon as their own are born; resulting in their showing considerable care towards their offspring. Therefore, the hormonal changes that take place in the brains of males results in either altruism or hostility toward young in the group.

The structure of the primate brain plays a significant role in the development of altruism. This is especially the case when it comes to the discovery of neurons that are related to bonding, decision making and competition (Platt et al., 2016). These are pertinent because they enhance the ability of primates to care to such an extent that they are more likely to act altruistically. The emotions are perceived through the way that the primates respond to each other based on memories of their previous encounters. Thus, when it comes to encounters that were previously friendly, the individual involved is more likely to respond in a friendly manner and vice versa.

When considering altruism in the animal kingdom, it is important to make an analysis of bees. Bees display a considerable level of altruism to such an extent that they are able to communicate with one another through the use of pheromones (Bortolotti & Costa, 2014). The primer pheromone, which is usually produced and dispersed by only a few individuals, such as the queen, will end up regulating caste expression and regulate sexuality. Moreover, there are instances where the other bees in the hive will produce releaser pheromones as a means of communicating. It is therefore pertinent to consider that the social organisation of the bee colonies is often dependent on the pheromones that are produced by the queens and it allows for the efficient communication and recognition. About 15 components end up stimulating one of more alarm behaviours in bees, which is significant because it allows for the production and elicitation of response.

The queen bee is highly protective of the entire colony and because of this, they will seek to maintain control as needed. One of the most important factors concerning queen bees is that they will undertake the process of producing all the members of the hive through reproduction. It is the queen, through the laying of specific eggs, that it becomes possible to produce worker bees, drones, and future queens in the hive (Downing, Cornwallis, & Griffin, 2017). It is likely that altruism born out of a sense of survival as well as instinct makes the worker bees to ensure that they mobilise in order to protect their queen. They often do this at the cost of their own life, which is significant because they sacrifice themselves for the survival of the queen, who is the most important member of the hive.

Birds also display considerable altruistic instincts which can be associated with survival. This is seen through the way that most birds will have maternal instincts which guide them in the process of ensuring the survival of their offspring, and in some cases, the offspring of others that are related to them (Reznikova, 2011). Some birds display cooperative breeding as seen through the way that they will work together towards raising offspring. Thus, a female bird will take on the responsibility of taking care of the offspring of its relatives. Under circumstances where they live alongside other closely related birds, as exemplified by such birds as scrub-jays, highly altruistic behaviour end up being displayed as seen through the way that they will seek to ensure that there is the advancement of mutual interests, such as the protection of their young.

Birds will also display considerable paternal instincts seen through the way that the males of different bird species will often end up raising their offspring alongside the females. Furthermore, males are more likely to engage in altruistic behaviours when they feel that their mates are under threat from predators (Koenig, 1988). In fact, the male bird will work alongside its mate to protect one another from predators. It is also necessary to consider that male birds will often undertake to provide food for offspring, and in some cases, their mates when the latter have to incubate their eggs. Thus, birds have a high capacity for caring for one another, especially for their mates and those that are related to them, such as their offspring. It shows the way that bird species have evolved in such a way that altruism has become a means of survival, and it is an instinctive feature of their nature.

Ants perform altruistic behaviour that ensures that there is the promotion of each other’s wellbeing. Army ants, for example, perform altruistic actions through the promotion of a situation where they build bridges using their own bodies so that their companions can be able to transfer food to their colony (Ichimura et al., 2014). This ensures that there is the promotion of a scenario where the wellbeing of the entire colony is placed before that of the individual. Furthermore, there is the use of pheromones as a means of communication, which ensures that other ants in the colony are provided with signals that they can use to either find food or to detect danger. Honeypot ants are truly altruistic and this characteristic has become a part of their way of life; essentially instinctive. It has allowed for the wellbeing of the entire hive through the suppression of individualism.

Studies

Studies that have been conducted on primates have shown that they are altruistic. One of the most significant of these is that of grooming among primates such as chimpanzees. These animals have been shown to have a reciprocal altruistic relationship based on grooming ("Altruism in Chimpanzees," 2016). Another study that was conducted is that of sharing, which showed that with a gesture, a chimpanzee could ask its companion to share food with it. Observational studies on bees also showed the manner through which been comply with or without a queen (Downing et al., 2017). It showed the importance of the queen within the colony and that without one, there was a risk of collapse; a sign of the altruism and kinship prevalent in bee hives. Moreover, a study of flight formation in birds showed the manner through which altruism plays a role in encouraging the birds to work together towards the fulfilment of their mutual interests (Andersson & Wallander, 2004). It also showed the way that birds are more amenable to taking care of kin offspring because of the ties between them while at the same time displaying a level of hostility towards those that were not kin.

A study of ants through a food searching study showed the manner through which ants live in a highly stratified society where each one of them fulfilled a certain purpose. Each of the ants in the colony was willing to undertake any action possible aimed at promoting the general welfare of all. The survival of the colony was paramount meaning that it was critical for all, especially workers, to ensure that they not only found food, but also alerted others to the food source so that they could feed the rest of the colony. Honeypot ants were found to be willing to sacrifice their own lives for the greater good (Ichimura et al., 2014); a sign of the way that the relationships between the members of the colonies overrode all individual considerations.

Conclusions

There have been major changes in the study of altruism in animals. One of the most significant of these is that there has been rapid advancement in the study and recognition of animal cognition and their capability for altruism. Moreover, four major categories of animal behaviour have been considered including general behaviour, cognitive behaviour, types of bonds, and brain structures. Also, while there may be differences in altruistic behaviours, it is dependent on the way that the animals themselves have evolved and the interest they might have towards others, whether hostile or kinship. The results further support the idea that altruism is a trait that is displayed by a diversity of creatures and because of this, they are able to not only form societies, but also enhance their chances of survival. Additionally, the study has shown the questions that can be considered when conducting future studies. Among these is whether all animals display altruistic behaviours, what can be learned based on the brain structures of animals concerning their capacity for emotions, and whether altruistic behaviours outweigh their disadvantages. Also, there should be a consideration of the reasons behind their displaying altruistic behaviours.

This study was conducted as a means of allowing the researchers to learn more about the behaviours of animals and the relation of altruism to brain structures and neural connections. Furthermore, there was an attempt to ensure that there was an improvement of understanding of animals. Finally, there was an attempt to seek a connection between the altruistic nature of humans with that of animals in order to determine whether their processes are similar.

The story of rabbits in Australia

 

Rabbits are an invasive species in parts of Australia and have had a considerably negative effect on its ecosystem. They were first introduced by the First Fleet in 1788, as well as by British settlers in the nineteenth century, whose aim was to ensure that they continued to enjoy hunting for sport as they has in their home country (Fenner 103). A result was that the rabbits, which were for the most part hybrids of wild hares and domesticated rabbits, ended up proving hardy and more adaptive to the new environment in Australia. It led to a situation where they were able to breed prolifically to such an extent that they not only achieved a stable population, but records show that despite their being killed by the millions every year, their population remained quite stable. The mild winters found in Australia enabled these animals to breed throughout the year, unlike in Europe, where they would only breed at certain times of the year (Williams et al. 2). Thus, while the rabbits were not in their native environment, they were quite prolific to such an extent that they came to tame it. Today, rabbits are still considered pests in Australia and a considerable number of steps have been taken to make sure that they are brought under control, although most of them have proven to be unsuccessful.

Background and Native Environment

The European or common rabbit is a species that is native to Europe and it is also the most common rabbit species in the world, having been spread to such places as Australia, New Zealand and Africa. This species is one that has been adapted to conditions on the European continent and tends to be most active either at dawn or at dusk. During the day, they spend most of their time close to vegetation in order to hide from their natural predators, such as foxes, and only come out at dusk, when they are sure that they are quite safe. They are found all over Europe and North West Africa, especially on the edges of farmland, on grasslands, or on woodlands (Delibes-Mateos et al. 149). These areas are ideal for them to dig into the ground and reside in such a way that they are not only safe from predators, but cannot be easily spotted. This ensures that they are able to promote a situation where they are able to live in relative safety while at the same time being able to breed, with their usual breeding months in their native habitat being between May and November. The female of the species are capable of reproducing throughout the year, often having offspring within thirty days of mating. They are able to increase their numbers swiftly because their average lifespan is about nine years.

Non-Native Ecosystem (Australian)

The ecosystem of Australia where most of the rabbit population is located is one that is well known for its mild weather. It is one where there is a diversity of both plant and animal species that are native to the continent. Most of the population of these species is located in these areas and they ensure that there is the existence of an extremely delicate balance. However, with the introduction of rabbits into the wild, all this has changed because it has led to a situation where there has been a disruption of the native ecosystem. Rabbits do not have a natural predator in Australia and this means that their population cannot be controlled naturally (Fenner 105). A consequence has been that they have been able to outcompete the native species to such an extent that they are essentially being driven to extinction. Furthermore, the large wild rabbit population has also led to considerable overgrazing to such an extent that native plant species, especially grasses, have also been depleted. The lack of enough grasses and other small plants for food has made the rabbits adapt to feeding on tree barks, and this has had the negative effect of also driving some tree species to extinction because these rabbits tend to feed circularly; eventually killing the trees. Moreover, the removal of native plant life has also created a serious problem of soil erosion, which has had a negative impact in some areas.

Techniques in the Management of Rabbits in Australia

A number of techniques have been adopted over time to ensure that there is the reduction in the number of wild rabbits in Australia. Among these has been the population is allowed to hunt it without any controls whatsoever. However, despite this initiative, and the millions of rabbits that have been killed every year, the population has remained resilient, and this is mainly because of their prolific nature. Furthermore, there has been the use of poisons to make sure that the rabbit population is brought under control, but while this method has proven to be effective in the short term, a re-infestation is often inevitable. In recent years, there have been initiatives aimed at the introduction of the myxoma virus, which causes myxomatosis, a condition that leads to the eventual death of the rabbit (Hamilton et al. 3168). However, rabbits in Australia have been able to develop resistance to this virus and have been able to recover their population (Williams et al. 45). It is essential to note that despite the considerable measures that have been taken to ensure that the wild rabbit population in Australia is brought under control in order to protect the native ecosystem, they have not been successful, and in some cases, they have ended up being counterproductive. This is because a considerable number of the rabbits have been able to prove their resilience and are passing the acquired characteristics to their offspring.

Conclusion

Despite the relative lack of success when it comes to controlling and managing the species, it is pertinent to make sure that more is done to promote a situation where the impact of rabbits on the native ecosystem of Australia is reduced. This is because if nothing is done soon, this species will end up creating more havoc within the ecosystem than has already been the case. Despite the considerable damage that they have caused, all measures possible should be undertaken to control the wild rabbit population because it is a problem that is here to stay and has to be managed. The adoption of such measures such as unlimited hunting, poisoning, and the use of biological initiatives should be implemented simultaneously so that it is possible to bring about effective controls. Furthermore, this approach will ensure that their population is being controlled from a diversity of initiatives that will promote greater ecological balance and might just end up eventually being successful.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Works Cited

Delibes-Mateos, Miguel, et al. "Rabbits as a Keystone Species in Southern Europe." Biological Conservation 137.1 (2007): 149-56. Print.

Fenner, F. "Deliberate Introduction of the European Rabbit, Oryctolagus Cuniculus, into Australia." Revue scientifique et technique 29.1 (2010): 103. Print.

Hamilton, PB, et al. "The Inadvertent Introduction into Australia of Trypanosoma Nabiasi, the Trypanosome of the European Rabbit (Oryctolagus Cuniculus), and Its Potential for Biocontrol." Molecular Ecology 14.10 (2005): 3167-75. Print.

Williams, C Kent, et al. "Managing Vertebrate Pests: Rabbits."  (1995). Print.