| Literature DB >> 34064759 |
Ming-Shan Tsai1, Sarah François2, Chris Newman1,3, David W Macdonald1, Christina D Buesching3,4.
Abstract
Gammaherpesvirus reactivation can promote diseases or impair reproduction. Understanding reactivation patterns and associated risks of different stressors is therefore important. Nevertheless, outside the laboratory or captive environment, studies on the effects of stress on gammaherpesvirus reactivation in wild mammals are lacking. Here we used Mustelid gammaherpesvirus 1 (MusGHV-1) infection in European badgers (Meles meles) as a host-pathogen wildlife model to study the effects of a variety of demographic, physiological and environmental stressors on virus shedding in the genital tract. We collected 251 genital swabs from 150 free-ranging individuals across three seasons and screened them for the presence of MusGHV-1 DNA using PCR targeting the DNA polymerase gene. We explored possible links between MusGHV-1 DNA presence and seven variables reflecting stressors, using logistic regression analysis. The results reveal different sets of risk factors between juveniles and adults, likely reflecting primary infection and reactivation. In adults, virus shedding was more likely in badgers in poorer body condition and younger than 5 years or older than 7; while in juveniles, virus shedding is more likely in females and individuals in better body condition. However, living in social groups with more cubs was a risk factor for all badgers. We discuss possible explanations for these risk factors and their links to stress in badgers.Entities:
Keywords: epidemiology; seasonal effect; sexually transmittable infections; weather conditions; wildlife disease
Year: 2021 PMID: 34064759 PMCID: PMC8151406 DOI: 10.3390/biom11050716
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomolecules ISSN: 2218-273X
Summary of sampling effort (badgers with unknown age were assigned to age group by tooth wear according to the method described by Bright Ross et al. [46]).
| Spring | Summer | Autumn | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age Group | Age | Female | Male | Female | Male | Female | Male | Total |
| Cub | 0 | 15 | 15 | 10 | 4 | 9 | 9 | 62 |
| Yearling | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 11 | |
| Young | 2 | 7 | 7 | 7 | 9 | 5 | 6 | 41 |
| 3 | 4 | 8 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 8 | 30 | |
| 4 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 8 | 26 | |
| Old | 5 | 2 | 1 | 6 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 14 |
| 6 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 11 | ||
| 7 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 6 | ||||
| Unknown | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 6 | ||
| Very old | 8 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 19 |
| 9 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 | |
| 10 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 11 | |||
| 11 | 0 | |||||||
| 12 | 0 | |||||||
| 13 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | |||
| Unknown | 1 | 1 | 2 | |||||
| Total | 45 | 51 | 45 | 35 | 31 | 44 | 251 | |
Overview of MusGHV-1 DNA detection rate in badger genital tract and univariate logistic regression analysis. Formula: MusGHV-1 ~ Variate + (1|Tattoo); number of observations: 251; groups by tattoo number: 150.
| Variable | Positive | Total | % | 95% CI | Odds Ratio (OR) | OR 95% CI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | |||||||
| Male | 45 | 130 | 34.62% | 27–43.1% | |||
| Female | 44 | 121 | 36.36% | 28.3–45.2% | 0.93 | 0.55–1.56 | 0.774 |
| Season | |||||||
| Spring | 33 | 96 | 34.38% | 25.6–44.3% | 1.36 | 0.7–2.65 | 0.368 |
| Summer | 35 | 80 | 43.75% | 33.4–54.7% | 2.02 | 1.02–4.03 | 0.044 |
| Autumn | 21 | 75 | 28.00% | 19.1–39% | |||
| Age group | |||||||
| Juvenile (<2 years old) | 33 | 73 | 45.21% | 34.3–56.6% | 5.28 | 1.85–15.08 | 0.001 |
| Young (2–4 years old) | 30 | 97 | 30.93% | 22.6–40.7% | 2.87 | 1.02–8.08 | 0.046 |
| Old (5–7 years old) | 5 | 37 | 13.51% | 5.9–27.8% | |||
| Very old (>7 years old) | 21 | 44 | 47.73% | 33.8–62% | 5.9 | 1.92–17.78 | 0.002 |
| Body condition a | |||||||
| Body condition score (1–5) | 182 | 0.64 | 0.45–0.9 | 0.012 | |||
| Social group size | |||||||
| Total | 251 | 1.02 | 0.94–1.1 | 0.653 | |||
| Adult | 251 | 0.96 | 0.88–1.05 | 0.405 | |||
| Cub | 251 | 1.18 | 1.01–1.38 | 0.035 | |||
| Cub percentage per sett | |||||||
| Low (<30%) | 58 | 191 | 30.37% | 24.3–37.2% | |||
| High (>30%) | 31 | 60 | 51.67% | 39.3–63.8% | 2.35 | 1.03–4.24 | 0.004 |
| Lactational status bc | |||||||
| Not Lactated | 3 | 10 | 30.00% | 10.8–60.3% | |||
| Lactated | 6 | 18 | 33.33% | 16.3–56.3% | 0.9 | 0.16–4.92 | 0.856 |
a: Only adults were included in this analysis; b: only females captured in spring were included in this analysis; c: Fisher exact test.
Final general mixed effect model of multivariable logistic regression analysis for juveniles. Formula: MusGHV-1 ~ Sex + Body condition + (1|Tattoo); number of observations: 72; groups by tattoo number: 48.
| Group | Estimate | Standard Error | Adjusted OR | 95% CI | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Intercept) | −1.204 | 0.813 | −1.482 | |||
| Sex | ||||||
| Female | ||||||
| Male | −0.985 | 0.528 | −1.863 | 0.37 | 0.13–1.05 | 0.062 |
| Body Condition | ||||||
| BCS | 0.785 | 0.306 | 2.565 | 2.19 | 1.2–3.99 | 0.01 |
| Cub percentage | ||||||
| Low (<30%) | −0.977 | 0.539 | −1.812 | 0.38 | 0.13–1.08 | 0.07 |
| High (>30%) |
Final general mixed effect model of multivariable logistic regression analysis for adults. Formula: MusGHV-1 ~ Sex + Season + AgeGroup + Cub percentage + Sex * Cub percentage + (1|Tattoo); number of observations: 171; groups by tattoo number: 99.
| Group | Estimate | Standard Error | Adjusted OR | 95% CI | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Intercept) | 0.059 | 1.075 | 0.055 | |||
| Season | ||||||
| Spring | −0.289 | 0.584 | −0.495 | 0.74 | 0.24–2.35 | 0.62 |
| Summer | 0.684 | 0.520 | 1.318 | 1.98 | 0.72–5.48 | 0.188 |
| Autumn | ||||||
| Age Group | ||||||
| Young | 1.767 | 0.673 | 2.627 | 5.85 | 1.57–21.87 | 0.009 |
| Old | ||||||
| Very old | 1.75 | 0.695 | 2.522 | 5.77 | 1.48–22.55 | 0.012 |
| Body condition | ||||||
| BCS | −0.60 | 0.238 | −2.513 | 0.54 | 0.34–0.88 | 0.012 |
| Cub percentage | ||||||
| Low (<30%) | −1.15 | 0.544 | −2.115 | 0.31 | 0.11–0.92 | 0.034 |
| High (>30%) |