| Literature DB >> 28721215 |
Sanjeeta Sharma Pokharel1, Polani B Seshagiri2, Raman Sukumar1.
Abstract
We studied seasonal and annual changes in visual body condition scores (BCSs), and assessed how these scores were related to levels of faecal glucocorticoid metabolites (fGCMs) in free-ranging Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) in the seasonally dry tropical forests of the Mysore and Nilgiri Elephant Reserves in southern India. We assessed the animals' BCS visually on a scale of 1 to 5; where 1 represents a very thin and 5 represents a very fat elephant. To understand the influence of seasonality on BCS, we sampled the population during dry (n = 398) and wet seasons (n = 255) of 2013 and 2015 while, for annual changes in BCS, we sampled nine free-ranging adult females from different family groups that had been repeatedly sighted over seven years. To evaluate the influence of body condition on fGCM, 307 faecal samples were collected from 261 different elephants and were analysed. As a parameter of adrenocortical activity, and thus stress, fGCM was measured (μg/g) in the ethanol-extracted samples using a group-specific 11-oxoaetiocholanolone EIA (antibody raised against 11-oxoaetiocholanolone-17-CMO:BSA and biotinylated-11-oxoaetiocholanolone as a label). Effect of age and season on BCS in relation to fGCM was also studied. A seasonal shift in BCS was observed as expected, i.e. individuals with low BCS were more frequent during the dry season when compared with the wet season. Concentrations of fGCM were highest in individuals with lowest BCS (BCS 1) and then significantly declined till BCS 3. fGCM levels were almost comparable for BCS 3, 4 and 5. This pattern was more conspicuous in female than in male elephants. Season-dependent BCS, hence, reflect the stress status as measured by fGCM, especially in female Asian elephants. This could be used as an important non-invasive approach to monitor the physiological health of free-ranging elephant populations.Entities:
Keywords: Asian elephants; Elephas maximus; body condition score; faecal glucocorticoid metabolites; seasonality; stress physiology
Year: 2017 PMID: 28721215 PMCID: PMC5508666 DOI: 10.1093/conphys/cox039
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Conserv Physiol ISSN: 2051-1434 Impact factor: 3.079
Figure 1:Representative schematic and photographic (animal photographs depict adult females having BCS 1 to BCS 4, and BCS 5 corresponds to a tuskless male. This latter photograph was included since we were unable to capture a high-quality photograph of a female elephant with BCS 5) illustrations of elephants showing their body conditions with assigned BCS values, ranging from 1 to 5. Criteria of assigning BCS values are described in Table 1.
Effect of BCSs, season, age class and their interaction with BCS on levels of fGCMs (n = 307) based on the GLM (gamma family, log link function)
| Predictor variables | Level | Femalea ( | Maleb ( | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate | ± SE | Pr(>| | Estimate | ± SE | Pr(>| | ||||
| (Intercept) | 0.97 | 0.99 | 0.98 | 0.33 | |||||
| BCSs (1 to 5) | |||||||||
| −1.39 | 1.02 | −1.37 | 0.17 | ||||||
| −1.72 | 1 | −1.72 | 0.09 | ||||||
| −1.53 | 0.1 | −1.53 | 0.13 | ||||||
| −2.1 | 1.2 | −1.75 | 0.08 | ||||||
| Season (wet and dry) | |||||||||
| Season (wet) | 0.63 | 0.34 | 1.83 | 0.07 | 0.02 | 0.84 | 0.03 | 0.98 | |
| Age class (A, SA, J and C) | |||||||||
| Age class (calf) | −0.05 | 0.44 | −0.11 | 0.91 | −0.82 | 0.81 | −1.02 | 0.31 | |
| Age class (juvenile) | −0.18 | 0.2 | −0.86 | 0.39 | −0.62 | 0.42 | −1.47 | 0.14 | |
| Age class (sub-adult) | −0.09 | 0.18 | −0.52 | 0.6 | 0.13 | 0.71 | 0.02 | 0.98 | |
| BCS × season interaction | |||||||||
| BCS 2 : Season (wet) | −0.68 | 0.36 | −1.89 | 0.06 | 0.57 | 0.97 | 0.59 | 0.55 | |
| BCS 3 : Season (wet) | −0.49 | 0.36 | −1.38 | 0.17 | 0.26 | 0.88 | 0.3 | 0.77 | |
| BCS 4 : Season (wet) | −0.4 | 0.42 | −1.04 | 0.3 | 0.27 | 0.87 | 0.31 | 0.76 | |
| BCS × age class interaction | |||||||||
| BCS 2 : Age class (calf) | −0.6 | 0.62 | −0.97 | 0.33 | |||||
| BCS 2 : Age class (juvenile) | −0.11 | 0.33 | −0.35 | 0.73 | −0.07 | 0.91 | −0.08 | 0.93 | |
| −0.58 | 0.84 | −0.69 | 0.49 | ||||||
| BCS 3 : Age class (sub-adult) | 0.02 | 0.21 | 0.08 | 0.93 | −0.21 | 0.77 | −0.27 | 0.79 | |
Statistically significant differences are in bold font.
aGLM (formula = Hormone ~ BCS + season + age class + BCS × season + BCS × age class, family = gamma(link = log), data = female).
bGLM (formula = Hormone ~ BCS + season + age class + BCS × season + BCS × age class, family = gamma(link = log), data = male).
Figure 2:Changes in BCS of nine adult female elephants between dry and wet seasons from 2009 to 2015. The X-axis represents seasons (D = dry and W = wet) through the period 2009–2015, and the Y-axis represents BCS. Each plot represents changes in BCS for each adult female. Panels ‘A’, ‘B’ and ‘C’ represent individuals exhibiting similar profiles of change in BCS. Symbols represent: ***: not sighted; : Drought year.
Figure 3:Proportion of elephants showing various BCS between dry and wet seasons. Bar plot representing: (A) frequency (%) of female individuals (n = 470) with different BCS in the two seasons; (B) frequency (%) of male individuals (n = 183) with different BCS in the two seasons. The number over each bar represents the sample size for that BCS (see text for statistical test results).
Figure 4:Association between BCS of elephants and their fGCMs levels. Box plots representing: (A) grouped concentrations of fGCM level (μg/g) of female individuals (n = 207) and (B) grouped concentrations of fGCM level (μg/g) of male individuals (n = 100) with BCS ranging from 1 to 5. The boxes show the median value and the upper and lower quartile values. The whiskers show the 10th and 90th percentiles of the values. Red dots represent the mean fGCM levels for the respective BCS. Numbers above the box represent sample sizes for each BCS. Statistically significant differences in fGCM concentrations of female individuals with different BCS, determined using the GLM and post hoc Tukey's HSD test, are explained in Supplementary Table 5.