| Literature DB >> 32188499 |
Edward King'ori1,2, Vincent Obanda2, Patrick I Chiyo3, Ramon C Soriguer4, Patrocinio Morrondo1, Samer Angelone5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The dynamics of helminth infection in African elephant populations are poorly known. We examined the effects of age, sex, social structure and the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) as primary drivers of infection patterns within and between elephant populations.Entities:
Keywords: Disease ecology; Epidemiology; Gastrointestinal parasites; Helminths; Nematodes; Trematodes; Wildlife
Year: 2020 PMID: 32188499 PMCID: PMC7081694 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-020-04017-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Fig. 1Map of Kenya showing the locations of the four major elephant populations in Kenya
Fig. 2Model-based classification into operational taxonomic groups of elephants’ a trematode and b Strongylidae (nematode) eggs. Trematodes are classified into two (OTU1, blue; OTU2, red) and nematodes into five (OTU1, green; OTU2, orange; OTU3, purple; OTU4, red; and OTU5, blue) operational taxonomic units
Fig. 3Photomicrographs of eggs of nematodes and trematodes of five genera. aMurshidia (69 × 37 µm). b, c Different egg sizes of Quilonia: 96 × 57 µm (b) and 84 × 52 µm (c). dMammomonogamus (101 × 59 µm). eProtofasciola (90 × 49 µm). fBrumptia (115 × 59 µm). Scale-bars: 50 µm
Results of unsupervised classification of trematode and nematode eggs into operational taxonomic units (OTUs)
| OTUs | Mean ± SD | Percentile (2.5–97.5%) | Range | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Length (µm) | Width (µm) | Length (µm) | Width (µm) | Length (µm) | Width (µm) | ||
| Trematode OTUs | |||||||
| OTU1 | 90 ± 7 | 48 ± 3 | 76–101 | 43–52 | 72–103 | 41–53 | 76 |
| OTU2 | 113 ± 7 | 61 ± 3 | 98–122 | 56–68 | 93–122 | 55–69 | 36 |
| Nematode OTUs | |||||||
| OTU1 | 67 ± 4 | 39 ± 3 | 58–74 | 34–44 | 50–78 | 30–47 | 492 |
| OTU2 | 83 ± 5 | 49 ± 3 | 72–94 | 43–57 | 66–100 | 32–59 | 452 |
| OTU3 | 76 ± 3 | 43 ± 2 | 70–82 | 38–48 | 67–85 | 35–49 | 556 |
| OTU4 | 94 ± 4 | 55 ± 3 | 87–102 | 50–61 | 85–105 | 48–62 | 441 |
| OTU5 | 105 ± 6 | 62 ± 5 | 90–117 | 51–71 | 83–128 | 46–76 | 125 |
Abbreviation: SD, standard deviation
Variation in the prevalence of helminths in elephant populations and social groups in Kenya estimated using sedimentation and floatation methods
| Elephant population | Floatation | Sedimentation | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Male social group | |||
| Amboseli | 16 | 88 | 94 |
| Laikipia-Samburu | 14 | 86 | 100 |
| Maasai Mara | 19 | 100 | 100 |
| Tsavo East | 22 | 86 | 91 |
| Total | 71 | 90 | 96 |
| Family social group | |||
| Amboseli | 27 | 93 | 96 |
| Laikipia-Samburu | 46 | 98 | 100 |
| Maasai Mara | 62 | 100 | 100 |
| Tsavo East | 37 | 78 | 95 |
| Total | 172 | 94 | 98 |
| Male and family social groups combined | |||
| Amboseli | 43 | 91 | 95 |
| Laikipia-Samburu | 60 | 95 | 100 |
| Maasai Mara | 81 | 100 | 100 |
| Tsavo East | 59 | 81 | 93 |
| Total | 243 | 93 | 98 |
Prevalence of nematodes and trematodes in male and family social groups in different populations estimated using the faecal sedimentation method
| Elephant population | Trematodes (%) | Nematodes (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Male social group | |||
| Amboseli | 16 | 44 | 94 |
| Laikipia-Samburu | 14 | 79 | 93 |
| Maasai Mara | 19 | 42 | 100 |
| Tsavo East | 22 | 18 | 86 |
| Total | 71 | 42 | 93 |
| Family social group | |||
| Amboseli | 27 | 41 | 96 |
| Laikipia-Samburu | 46 | 76 | 100 |
| Maasai Mara | 62 | 19 | 98 |
| Tsavo East | 37 | 19 | 95 |
| Total | 172 | 38 | 98 |
| Male and family social group combined | |||
| Total | 243 | 39 | 96 |
Fig. 4Mean egg burden (epg faeces) of helminths for each social group in the studied Kenyan elephant populations
Mean helminth burden (epg faeces) for each sex and type of social group in Kenyan elephant populations
| Sex and social group | Mean ± SD | Median | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Amboseli elephants | |||
| Females in a family social group | 19 | 202.63 ± 318.62 | 50 |
| Males in a family social group | 7 | 121.43 ± 236.04 | 50 |
| Males in a male social group | 16 | 106.25 ± 125.00 | 75 |
| Laikipia-Samburu elephants | |||
| Females in a family social group | 35 | 320.00 ± 418.89 | 200 |
| Males in a family social group | 4 | 275.00 ± 332.92 | 175 |
| Males in a male social group | 14 | 171.43 ± 272.25 | 50 |
| Maasai Mara elephants | |||
| Females in a family social group | 46 | 145.65 ± 204.62 | 100 |
| Males in a family social group | 8 | 200.00 ± 276.46 | 100 |
| Males in a male social group | 19 | 89.47 ± 132.89 | 50 |
| Tsavo East elephants | |||
| Females in a family social group | 25 | 36.00 ± 66.96 | 0 |
| Males in a family social group | 10 | 0 | 0 |
| Males in a male social group | 22 | 22.73 ± 45.58 | 0 |
A multivariate hurdle GLM showing important factors explaining variations in epg between Kenyan elephant populations
| Covariate | Estimate | SE | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Count model coefficients (truncated negbin with log link) | ||||
| Intercept | 3.09 | 0.92 | 3.35 | 0.001 |
| 3-month mean NDVI | 24.18 | 10.04 | 2.41 | 0.016 |
| Sub-adults and Juveniles | 0.11 | 0.18 | 0.63 | 0.528 |
| Family social group | 0.29 | 0.18 | 1.68 | 0.094 |
| Laikipia-Samburu | − 1.43 | 0.72 | − 2.00 | 0.046 |
| Maasai Mara | − 3.74 | 1.50 | − 2.49 | 0.013 |
| Tsavo East | − 1.37 | 0.40 | − 3.43 | 0.001 |
| Log (theta) | 0.38 | 0.11 | 3.41 | 0.001 |
| Zero hurdle model coefficients (binomial with logit link) | ||||
| Intercept | 5.27 | 2.69 | 1.96 | 0.050 |
| 3-month mean NDVI | − 56.56 | 29.46 | − 1.92 | 0.055 |
| Sub-adults and Juveniles | − 0.71 | 0.36 | − 1.96 | 0.050 |
| Family social group | 0.72 | 0.36 | 2.01 | 0.045 |
| Laikipia-Samburu | 5.04 | 2.21 | 2.28 | 0.023 |
| Maasai Mara | 8.56 | 4.38 | 1.96 | 0.051 |
| Tsavo East | − 0.25 | 0.92 | − 0.28 | 0.783 |
Abbreviation: SE, standard error
Fig. 5Scatterplot showing the relationship between NDVI and egg burden (epg faeces) for each social group for all elephant populations combined
Fig. 6Scatterplot showing the relationship between NDVI and egg burden (epg faeces) for each social group for elephant populations treated separately