| Literature DB >> 24533323 |
Tracey Hollings1, Menna Jones1, Nick Mooney2, Hamish McCallum3.
Abstract
Changing ecosystem dynamics are increasing the threat of disease epidemics arising in wildlife populations. Several recent disease outbreaks have highlighted the critical need for understanding pathogen dynamics, including the role host densities play in disease transmission. In Australia, introduced feral cats are of immense concern because of the risk they pose to native wildlife through predation and competition. They are also the only known definitive host of the coccidian parasite, Toxoplasma gondii, the population-level impacts of which are unknown in any species. Australia's native wildlife have not evolved in the presence of cats or their parasites, and feral cats may be linked with several native mammal declines and extinctions. In Tasmania there is emerging evidence that feral cat populations are increasing following wide-ranging and extensive declines in the apex predator, the Tasmanian devil, from a consistently fatal transmissible cancer. We assess whether feral cat density is associated with the seroprevalence of T. gondii in native wildlife to determine whether an increasing population of feral cats may correspond to an increased level of risk to naive native intermediate hosts. We found evidence that seroprevalence of T. gondii in Tasmanian pademelons was lower in the north-west of Tasmania than in the north-east and central regions where cat density was higher. Also, samples obtained from road-killed animals had significantly higher seroprevalence of T. gondii than those from culled individuals, suggesting there may be behavioural differences associated with infection. In addition, seroprevalence in different trophic levels was assessed to determine whether position in the food-web influences exposure risk. Higher order carnivores had significantly higher seroprevalence than medium-sized browser species. The highest seroprevalence observed in an intermediate host was 71% in spotted-tailed quolls (Dasyurus maculatus), the largest mammalian mesopredator, in areas of low cat density. Mesopredator release of cats may be a significant issue for native species conservation, potentially affecting the population viability of many endangered species.Entities:
Keywords: Australia; Disease ecology; Felis catus; Feral cat; Mesopredator release; T. gondii; Tasmanian devil; Toxoplasma
Year: 2013 PMID: 24533323 PMCID: PMC3862529 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijppaw.2013.02.002
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Parasitol Parasites Wildl ISSN: 2213-2244 Impact factor: 2.674
Fig. 1Map of Tasmania showing average cat densities from individual spotlighting districts over 8 years and blood collection sites for the Tasmanian pademelon. Positive T. gondii sites are those where at least one sample tested positive to IgG antibodies. Negative sites are those where no evidence of exposure to T. gondii was found in any sample.
Fig. 2Map of Tasmania showing blood collection sites for the three native carnivore species and the introduced feral cat. Places identified are those referred to in the text.
Fig. 3Prevalence of IgG antibodies of Tasmanian mammals to T. gondii by trophic level; n represents the total number of samples tested. Standard error bars are shown.
Prevalence of IgG antibodies to T. gondii in Tasmanian pademelons. Cat density is the estimated value of the number of cats per transect within the region for data aggregated over 8 years.
| Region | Number positive ( | Total number ( | Percent positive (%) | Est. cat density (cats per transect) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| North-east | 6 | 39 | 15 | 0.13 |
| Central | 14 | 74 | 19 | 0.13 |
| North-west | 8 | 115 | 7 | 0.07 |
| Total | 28 | 228 | 12 | |
The most parsimonious GLM models of factors influencing the seroprevalance of T. gondii in pademelons. k = number of model parameters, ΔAICc represents the difference in AICc from the most parsimonious model, w = model weight.
| Model parameters | ΔAICc | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Sample source + region | 3 | 0.00 | 0.12 |
| Cat density + rainfall + sample source | 4 | 0.04 | 0.12 |
| Cat density + rainfall + sample source + region | 5 | 0.61 | 0.09 |
| Cat density + sample source + region | 4 | 0.89 | 0.08 |
| Rainfall + sample source + region | 4 | 1.07 | 0.07 |
| Region | 2 | 1.17 | 0.07 |
| Method | 2 | 1.52 | 0.06 |
| Rainfall + method | 3 | 1.53 | 0.06 |
| Cat density + method | 3 | 1.70 | 0.05 |
| Null | 1 | 3.77 | 0.02 |