| Literature DB >> 27651533 |
Adrian A Castellanos1, Matthew C I Medeiros2, Gabriel L Hamer3, Michael E Morrow4, Micky D Eubanks3, Pete D Teel3, Sarah A Hamer5, Jessica E Light6.
Abstract
Invasive species may impact pathogen transmission by altering the distributions and interactions among native vertebrate reservoir hosts and arthropod vectors. Here, we examined the direct and indirect effects of the red imported fire ant (Solenopsis invicta) on the native tick, small mammal and pathogen community in southeast Texas. Using a replicated large-scale field manipulation study, we show that small mammals were more abundant on treatment plots where S. invicta populations were experimentally reduced. Our analysis of ticks on small mammal hosts demonstrated a threefold increase in the ticks caught per unit effort on treatment relative to control plots, and elevated tick loads (a 27-fold increase) on one common rodent species. We detected only one known human pathogen (Rickettsia parkeri), present in 1.4% of larvae and 6.7% of nymph on-host Amblyomma maculatum samples but with no significant difference between treatment and control plots. Given that host and vector population dynamics are key drivers of pathogen transmission, the reduced small mammal and tick abundance associated with S. invicta may alter pathogen transmission dynamics over broader spatial scales.Entities:
Keywords: ecology; invasive species; species interactions; tick-borne pathogens; vector
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27651533 PMCID: PMC5046925 DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2016.0463
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biol Lett ISSN: 1744-9561 Impact factor: 3.703
Mammal captures presented by species and plot type at both Attwater Prairie Chicken National Wildlife Refuge (APCNWR) and a private ranch in Goliad County, Texas (GRR). (Number of captures and percentage of total captures per site (in parentheses) are indicated for each species across site and plot type. Treatment plots are those that were treated with Extinguish Plus™ to suppress red imported fire ants.)
| species | APCNWR treatment | APCNWR control | GRR treatment | GRR control | total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 354 (68.5%) | 163 (31.5%) | 11 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 528 | |
| 127 (62.0%) | 78 (38.0%) | 107 (65.6%) | 56 (34.4%) | 368 | |
| 69 (51.9%) | 64 (48.1%) | 63 (84.0%) | 12 (16.0%) | 208 | |
| 12 (42.9%) | 16 (57.1%) | 9 (56.3%) | 7 (43.7%) | 44 | |
| 0 (0%) | 27 (100%) | 10 (90.9%) | 1 (9.1%) | 38 | |
| 0 (0%) | 1 (100%) | 6 (66.7%) | 3 (33.3%) | 10 | |
| 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 1 (100%) | 1 | |
| 0 (0%) | 1 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 1 | |
| total | 562 | 350 | 206 | 80 | 1198 |
Figure 1.A violin/box plot hybrid demonstrating the number of small mammal captures on treatment and control plots. Asterisks denote means.
Figure 2.A violin plot demonstrating the probability density of tick loads on two species of small mammals. Dots represent actual observations, jittered horizontally to better demonstrate sample sizes.