| Literature DB >> 26294048 |
Elizabeth A Roznik1, Sarah J Sapsford1, David A Pike1, Lin Schwarzkopf1, Ross A Alford1.
Abstract
Natural disturbances can drive disease dynamics in animal populations by altering the microclimates experienced by hosts and their pathogens. Many pathogens are highly sensitive to temperature and moisture, and therefore small changes in habitat structure can alter the microclimate in ways that increase or decrease infection prevalence and intensity in host populations. Here we show that a reduction of rainforest canopy cover caused by a severe tropical cyclone decreased the risk of endangered rainforest frogs (Litoria rheocola) becoming infected by a fungal pathogen (Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis). Reductions in canopy cover increased the temperatures and rates of evaporative water loss in frog microhabitats, which reduced B. dendrobatidis infection risk in frogs by an average of 11-28% in cyclone-damaged areas, relative to unaffected areas. Natural disturbances to the rainforest canopy can therefore provide an immediate benefit to frogs by altering the microclimate in ways that reduce infection risk. This could increase host survival and reduce the probability of epidemic disease outbreaks. For amphibian populations under immediate threat from this pathogen, targeted manipulation of canopy cover could increase the availability of warmer, drier microclimates and therefore tip the balance from host extinction to coexistence.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26294048 PMCID: PMC4544035 DOI: 10.1038/srep13472
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Severe Tropical Cyclone Yasi impacted the northeastern coast of Queensland, Australia, on 2–3 February 2011.
Shown are (a) a satellite image of the cyclone approaching the coast (a star denotes our study region, and the inset shows this location within Australia), hemispherical photographs of the rainforest canopy above Stoney Creek taken from the same location at 80 m along our stream transect both (b) before and (c) after the cyclone and showing the canopy cover at that site (88% and 60%, respectively), and ground-level images of Stoney Creek (taken from different locations) both (d) before and (e) after the cyclone. Images were provided by (a) NASA (by the MODIS instrument on NASA’s Aqua satellite, taken at 13:35 Australian Eastern Standard Time on 2 February 2011. This image is not copyrighted and is used under NASA’s open access policy; the image is available at http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/514455main_Yasi-MODIS-WEDNESDAY-LARGE.jpg. We imported the image into ArcGIS 9.3 to create a map), (b,c) Sarah Sapsford, (d) Angus McNab, and (e) Elizabeth Roznik.
Study site details and sample sizes of unique male Litoria rheocola (N = 1163) captured at six rainforest streams in northeastern Queensland, Australia, that were impacted by Cyclone Yasi.
| Site | Coordinates | Elevation (mASL) | Frog sample sizes | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cyclone damage | Before cyclone | After cyclone | |||||||
| t (df) | P | Infected | Uninfected | Infected | Uninfected | Total | |||
| Bobbin Bobbin Creek | 17.378°S, 145.775°E | 700 | −1.967 (39) | 0.972 | 35 | 99 | 24 | 13 | 171 |
| Frenchman Creek | 17.307°S, 145.922°E | 40 | 1.073 (37) | 0.145 | 33 | 152 | 24 | 40 | 249 |
| Mena Creek | 17.649°S, 145.987°E | 60 | 0.330 (40) | 0.371 | 59 | 121 | 12 | 34 | 226 |
| Stoney Creek | 17.920°S, 146.069°E | 20 | 25.654 (35) | <0.001 | 50 | 75 | 10 | 26 | 161 |
| Tully Creek | 17.773°S, 145.645°E | 150 | 12.954 (35) | <0.001 | 45 | 165 | 16 | 43 | 269 |
| Windin Creek | 17.365°S, 145.717°E | 750 | −2.944 (35) | 0.997 | 17 | 36 | 6 | 28 | 87 |
Frogs were captured during seasonal stream surveys (1 night for spring surveys post-cyclone, and 5 nights for all other surveys) before and after the cyclone, and tested for infection by the pathogenic chytrid fungus Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (infected or uninfected). Also shown are statistical results from one-tailed paired-difference t-tests for whether rainforest canopy cover decreased at each site after the cyclone.
Figure 2Boxplots of canopy cover (%) before and after Cyclone Yasi at two sites that were damaged significantly by the cyclone, and at four sites that were not damaged significantly (see Table 1 for statistical results).
Figure 3Relationships between canopy cover (%) and (a) mean temperature during the warmest part of the day (10:00–16:00), and (b) relative desiccation rate (percent of initial mass lost by models over 24 hr).
These responses were estimated using physical models that mimic the thermal and hydric properties of frogs, which were placed on rocks in the stream that are similar to those used by Litoria rheocola.
Figure 4Prevalence of infection (and 95% confidence interval) by Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis in Litoria rheocola at sites before and after Cyclone Yasi that were or were not damaged significantly by the cyclone (see Table 1 for statistical results).
Seasons and sites were combined to show the overall effect of the storm on infection prevalence.
Generalized linear mixed-effects models (family: binomial, link function: logit) used to examine effects of changes in canopy cover caused by Cyclone Yasi on the probability of infection by Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis in individual Litoria rheocola.
| Candidate models | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model effects | AICc | ΔAICc | Weight | Cumulative weight |
| Canopy, Season, Year, Canopy × Year, Season × Year | 1332.101 | 0.000 | 0.312 | 0.312 |
| Canopy, Season, Year, Canopy × Season, Canopy × Year, Season × Year, Canopy × Season × Year | 1332.326 | 0.224 | 0.279 | 0.591 |
| Canopy, Season, Year, Season × Year | 1333.541 | 1.440 | 0.152 | 0.743 |
| Canopy, Season, Year, Canopy × Season, Canopy × Year, Season × Year | 1333.584 | 1.482 | 0.149 | 0.892 |
| Canopy, Season, Year, Canopy × Season, Season × Year | 1334.625 | 2.524 | 0.088 | 0.980 |
| Season, Year, Season × Year | 1339.006 | 6.905 | 0.010 | 0.990 |
| Canopy, Season, Year, Canopy × Season | 1341.522 | 9.421 | 0.003 | 0.993 |
| Canopy, Season, Year, Canopy × Season, Canopy × Year | 1342.221 | 10.120 | 0.002 | 0.995 |
| Canopy, Season, Year | 1342.275 | 10.174 | 0.002 | 0.997 |
| Canopy, Season, Year, Canopy × Year | 1342.333 | 10.232 | 0.002 | 0.999 |
| Canopy, Season, Canopy × Season | 1347.617 | 15.516 | 0.000 | 0.999 |
| Canopy, Season | 1348.597 | 16.495 | 0.000 | 0.999 |
| Season, Year | 1349.068 | 16.967 | 0.000 | 0.999 |
| Season | 1351.864 | 19.763 | 0.000 | 0.999 |
| Canopy, Year | 1379.147 | 47.046 | 0.000 | 0.999 |
| Canopy, Year, Canopy × Year | 1379.977 | 47.876 | 0.000 | 0.999 |
| Year | 1384.527 | 52.426 | 0.000 | 0.999 |
| Canopy | 1384.689 | 52.588 | 0.000 | 0.999 |
| Intercept only | 1387.078 | 54.977 | 0.000 | 0.999 |
| Final model | ||||
| Model effect | Estimate | Importance | ||
| Intercept | - 1.846 | − | ||
| Canopy | 0.018 | 1.00 | ||
| Season (spring) | - 0.314 | 1.00 | ||
| Year (2011) | - 1.130 | 1.00 | ||
| Season (spring) × Year (2011) | - 3.291 | 1.00 | ||
| Canopy × Year (2011) | 0.042 | 0.75 | ||
| Canopy × Season (spring) | - 0.009 | 0.53 | ||
| Canopy × Season (spring) × Year (2011) | 0.116 | 0.28 | ||
We developed a set of candidate models that included all possible combinations of the following fixed effects, plus their interactions: canopy cover (%) at each frog’s location, season (winter or spring), and year (2010 or 2011). All models also included the random effect of site. We ranked models according to Akaike’s Information Criterion with adjustment for finite sample size (AICc). All models that we tested are shown, and five models were strongly supported by our data (∆AICc < 3, total weight of 98%). We averaged these five models to obtain the final model, which is presented below the candidate models.
Figure 5Probability of infection by the pathogen Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis for each individual frog (Litoria rheocola) sampled in our study during the winter (a,b) and spring (c,d) before and after Cyclone Yasi (2010–2011), based on the canopy cover above each frog’s location.
Before the cyclone, all sites had intact, undamaged canopies, but after the cyclone, some sites had significantly damaged canopies. These predictions were generated from the averaged generalized linear mixed-effects model based on our field data (Table 2).