| Literature DB >> 29942738 |
Stephanie S Godfrey1,2, Sarah Keatley1, Adriana Botero1, Craig K Thompson1, Adrian F Wayne1,3, Alan J Lymbery1, Keith Morris3, R C Andrew Thompson1.
Abstract
Understanding the impacts of parasites on wildlife is growing in importance as diseases pose a threat to wildlife populations. Woylie (syn. brush-tailed bettong, Bettongia penicillata) populations have undergone enigmatic declines in south-western Western Australia over the past decade. Trypanosomes have been suggested as a possible factor contributing towards these declines because of their high prevalence in the declining population. We asked whether temporal patterns of infection with Trypanosoma spp. were associated with the decline patterns of the host, or if other factors (host sex, body condition, co-infection or rainfall) were more influential in predicting infection patterns. Species-specific nested PCRs were used to detect the two most common trypanosomes (T. copemani and T. vegrandis) from 444 woylie blood samples collected between 2006 and 2012. Time relative to the decline (year) and an interaction with co-infection by the other trypanosome best explained patterns of infection for both trypanosomes. The prevalence of single species infections for both T. copemani and T. vegrandis was lower after the population crash, however, the occurrence of co-infections increased after the crash compared to before the crash. Our results suggest an interaction between the two parasites with the decline of their host, leading to a higher level of co-infection after the decline. We discuss the possible mechanisms that may have led to a higher level of co-infection after the population crash, and highlight the importance of considering co-infection when investigating the role of parasites in species declines.Entities:
Keywords: Conservation; Epidemiology; Parasite-induced declines; Polyparasitism; Wildlife disease ecology
Year: 2018 PMID: 29942738 PMCID: PMC6010928 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijppaw.2018.06.002
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Parasitol Parasites Wildl ISSN: 2213-2244 Impact factor: 2.674
Fig. 1A map of Australia indicating the location of Keninup (our sampling site), with the location of Perth provided for reference.
A summary of the sampling across years, presented by month to indicate the seasonal spread of sampling. Numbers refer to distinct captures (where samples were collected), not individual woylies. Mean rainfall for each month (presented as an average of the rainfall for that month over the whole study period for the purpose of summarizing this information) is also presented. No sampling was carried out in the months of January or July.
| Month | Mean Rainfall (mm) | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| February | 16.4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 25 | 0 | 13 | 0 |
| March | 24.4 | 0 | 20 | 29 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| April | 28.1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 23 | 0 | 11 | 8 |
| May | 111.9 | 0 | 6 | 37 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| June | 184.8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| August | 46.2 | 0 | 0 | 54 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| September | 104.4 | 0 | 0 | 31 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| October | 65.4 | 16 | 0 | 31 | 0 | 2 | 9 | 0 |
| November | 41.8 | 16 | 14 | 21 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 0 |
| December | 39.3 | 8 | 0 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Fig. 2The proportion of woylie captures detected with (a) T. copemani and (b) T. vegrandis in individual sampling trips across the study period (n = 32, 8, 20, 6, 14, 29, 37, 54, 31, 31, 21, 25, 25, 32, 15, 13, 2, 8, 13, 11, 9, 8), with the x-axis representing continuous time. Error bars represent 95% Jeffrey's confidence intervals of prevalence estimates. Overlaid on prevalence estimates are the capture rates (the number of independent captures as a proportion of the total number of traps set, derived from Wayne et al., 2015) for each of the sampling periods to indicate the woylie population trends over the same period.
Summary of model selection for analyses of Trypanosoma sp. infection. Models are ranked in order of AICc (smaller values indicate more parsimonious models) in the top 95% of model weights (ωi). K is the number of estimated parameters in the model, and LL is the log likelihood of each model. Models in bold are the top-most ranked models within 2AIC of the top model.
| Model | K | LL | AICc | ΔAICc | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (a) | |||||
| − | |||||
| Year + MonthlyRain + Year*MonthlyRain | 6 | −154.21 | 320.61 | 3.10 | 0.109 |
| CoInfect | 4 | −156.76 | 321.61 | 4.09 | 0.066 |
| MonthlyRain + BodyCond + MonthlyRain*BodyCond | 6 | −154.71 | 321.61 | 4.10 | 0.066 |
| BodyCond + CoInfect + BodyCond*CoInfect | 6 | −154.79 | 321.77 | 4.25 | 0.061 |
| Year | 4 | −156.94 | 321.97 | 4.45 | 0.056 |
| BodyCond | 4 | −157.49 | 323.07 | 5.55 | 0.032 |
| Null | 3 | −158.98 | 324.01 | 6.50 | 0.020 |
| MonthlyRain | 4 | −157.99 | 324.08 | 6.56 | 0.019 |
| Year + BodyCond + CoInfect + Year*BodyCond + Year*CoInfect + BodyCond*CoInfect + Year*BodyCond*CoInfect | 10 | −152.01 | 324.53 | 7.01 | 0.015 |
| (b) | |||||
| CoInfect | 4 | −247.99 | 504.08 | 4.52 | 0.088 |
| Year + BodyCond + CoInfect + Year*BodyCond + Year*CoInfect + BodyCond*CoInfect + Year*BodyCond*CoInfect | 10 | −242.51 | 505.53 | 5.97 | 0.043 |
Coefficients and 95% profile confidence intervals of standardized and centered model coefficients from the best (smallest AICc) models from generalized linear mixed effects models examining factors influencing Trypanosoma sp. infection patterns.
| Model parameters | Coefficient | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| (a) | ||
| Year | −1.31 | −2.88 – (−) 0.33 |
| Co-infection | 1.67 | −0.05–3.80 |
| Year*Co-infection | 1.33 | −0.18–3.04 |
| (b) | ||
| Year | −0.53 | −1.50–0.25 |
| Co-infection | 1.62 | 0.73–2.69 |
| Year*Co-infection | 0.99 | 0.21–1.96 |
Fig. 3The proportion of woylie captures detected with (a) T. copemani and (b) T. vegrandis across years (categorized into groups for plotting purposes: 2006–2007, 2008, 2009–2010, 2011–2012) for woylies that were either co-infected by the other trypanosome species (blue) or individuals not co-infected by the other trypanosome species (red). Error bars represent 95% Jeffrey's confidence intervals of prevalence estimates. Numbers above the x-axis represent the sample sizes for each group. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)