Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 6, 2026

Bottlenose Dolphin Tursiops truncatus Spermatozoa: Collection, Cryopreservation, and Heterologous In Vitro Fertilization
Published on: August 21, 2017
Comparison of Nephrolithiasis Prevalence in Two Bottlenose Dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) Populations
Cynthia R Smith1, Stephanie Venn-Watson, Randall S Wells
1National Marine Mammal Foundation , San Diego, CA , USA.
Abstract:
In humans, ammonium urate (AU) nephrolithiasis is rare in the Western hemisphere and more common in Japan and developing countries. Among a variety of risk factors, insulin resistance has been associated with urate nephrolithiasis in people. Bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) are susceptible to AU nephrolithiasis, and it is believed that some populations are more likely to develop nephrolithiasis compared to others. In an effort to better understand population-based risk factors for AU nephrolithiasis in dolphins and their comparative value to humans, sonographic evaluation was performed on dolphins from a managed collection in San Diego Bay, CA (n = 40) and dolphins from a free-ranging, nearshore population in Sarasota Bay, FL (n = 39) to look for evidence of nephrolithiasis. While 14 (35%) of San Diego Bay dolphins evaluated for the study had sonographic evidence of nephrolithiasis, none of the Sarasota Bay dolphins had evidence of disease. Presence or absence of stones was confirmed by computed tomography in a subset of the San Diego collection (n = 10; four dolphins with stones, six without stones). Age was identified as a risk factor, as dolphins with stones in the San Diego collection were significantly older than dolphins without stones (25.4 vs. 19.1 years, respectively; P = 0.04). Additionally, San Diego dolphins included in the study were significantly older than Sarasota Bay dolphins (21.3 vs. 13.8 years, respectively; P = 0.008). In addition to the previously reported risk factors of hypocitraturia and hyperinsulinemia in bottlenose dolphins, other potential factors include geographic location, managed vs. free-ranging status, prey species, and feeding schedules.
More Related Videos
09:39Cultivation of the Marine Pelagic Tunicate Dolioletta gegenbauri Uljanin 1884 for Experimental Studies
Published on: August 9, 2019
03:46Author Spotlight: Coproparasitoscopic Examination of Dog Stools for Control and Prevention of Zoonotic Parasite Diseases
Published on: December 15, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Testing a Claim about Population Proportion
There are two methods of testing a claim about a population proportion: (1) Using the sample proportion from the data where a binomial distribution is approximated to the normal distribution and (2) Using the binomial probabilities calculated from the data.
The first method uses normal distribution as an approximation to the binomial distribution. The requirements are as follows: sample size is large...
Testing a Claim about Mean: Unknown Population SD
Estimating a population mean requires the samples to be approximately normally distributed. The data should be collected from the randomly selected samples having no sampling bias. There is no specific requirement for sample size. But if the sample size is less than 30, and we don't know the population standard deviation, a different approach is used;...
Convergent Evolution
Urinary Tract Calculi II: Pathophysiology and Clinical Manifestations