Pathogen exposure varies widely among sympatric populations of wild and domestic felids across the United States
Pathogen exposure varies widely among sympatric populations of wild and domestic felids across the United States
复制标题
DOI：
10.1890/15-0445
复制
发表时间：
2016-03-01
影响因子：
5
通讯作者：
VandeWoude, Sue
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Carver, Scott;Bevins, Sarah N.;VandeWoude, Sue
了解景观、宿主和病原体特征如何影响疾病暴露需要对宿主物种和地理区域内部和之间的病原体进行系统评估。这些属性的相对重要性对于野生动物的管理以及减轻家畜和人类疾病至关重要，特别是考虑到城市化等快速的生态变化。我们在代表北美三个地区的六个地点的城市梯度中，对美洲狮 (Puma concolor)、山猫 (Lynx rufus) 和家猫 (Felis catus) 的同域种群的 1000 多个样本进行了筛查，以检测是否接触了一组具有代表性的细菌、原生动物和病毒病原体（巴尔通体、弓形虫、猫疱疹病毒-1、猫泛白斑病毒、猫科动物）。杯状病毒和猫免疫缺陷病毒）。我们评估了每个物种的患病率，并检查了宿主特征和土地覆盖的暴露决定因素；对与驯养和野生猫科动物感染可能性相关的因素进行了前所未有的分析。不同宿主物种的患病率不同（美洲狮最高，家猫最低），间接传播病原体的患病率更高。性别只能不一致地预测接触直接传播的病原体，而年龄则不能预测直接和间接传播的病原体。野生猫科动物物种之间病原体暴露的决定因素存在很大差异。对于美洲狮来说，郊区土地利用预计会增加巴尔通体的暴露。在加利福尼亚州南部，FHV-1 暴露在佛罗里达州城市边缘附近增加。这可能表明家猫通过跳蚤媒介（加利福尼亚州）和城市边界周围的直接接触（佛罗里达州）进行种间传播。在佛罗里达州，在城市地区附近捕获的山猫接触弓形虫的机会增加，这表明它们是城市的猎物来源。在科罗拉多州和佛罗里达州城市地区附近捕获的山猫具有较高的 FIV 暴露率，这可能表明通过聚集范围的堆积增加了种内相互作用。除了这些区域和病原体的特定关系之外，靠近荒地-城市界面通常不会增加野生或家养猫科动物接触疾病的可能性，这强调了当地生态决定因素的重要性。事实上，对于所有猫科动物来说，病原体暴露往往与荒地与城市的界面呈负相关。我们的分析表明，围绕该界面的跨物种病原体传播事件可能并不常见，但随后会在新宿主物种内自我维持传播。
Understanding how landscape, host, and pathogen traits contribute to disease exposure requires systematic evaluations of pathogens within and among host species and geographic regions. The relative importance of these attributes is critical for management of wildlife and mitigating domestic animal and human disease, particularly given rapid ecological changes, such as urbanization. We screened >1000 samples from sympatric populations of puma (Puma concolor), bobcat (Lynx rufus), and domestic cat (Felis catus) across urban gradients in six sites, representing three regions, in North America for exposure to a representative suite of bacterial, protozoal, and viral pathogens (Bartonella sp., Toxoplasma gondii, feline herpesvirus-1, feline panleukopenea virus, feline calicivirus, and feline immunodeficiency virus). We evaluated prevalence within each species, and examined host trait and land cover determinants of exposure; providing an unprecedented analysis of factors relating to potential for infections in domesticated and wild felids. Prevalence differed among host species (highest for puma and lowest for domestic cat) and was greater for indirectly transmitted pathogens. Sex was inconsistently predictive of exposure to directly transmitted pathogens only, and age infrequently predictive of both direct and indirectly transmitted pathogens. Determinants of pathogen exposure were widely divergent between the wild felid species. For puma, suburban land use predicted increased exposure to Bartonella sp. in southern California, and FHV-1 exposure increased near urban edges in Florida. This may suggest interspecific transmission with domestic cats via flea vectors (California) and direct contact (Florida) around urban boundaries. Bobcats captured near urban areas had increased exposure to T. gondii in Florida, suggesting an urban source of prey. Bobcats captured near urban areas in Colorado and Florida had higher FIV exposure, possibly suggesting increased intraspecific interactions through pile-up of home ranges. Beyond these regional and pathogen specific relationships, proximity to the wildland-urban interface did not generally increase the probability of disease exposure in wild or domestic felids, emphasizing the importance of local ecological determinants. Indeed, pathogen exposure was often negatively associated with the wildland-urban interface for all felids. Our analyses suggest cross-species pathogen transmission events around this interface may be infrequent, but followed by self-sustaining propagation within the new host species.