It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
The presence of many pathogens varies in a predictable manner with latitude, with infections decreasing from the equator towards the poles. We investigated the geographic trends of pathogens infecting a widely distributed carnivore: the gray wolf (Canis lupus). Specifically, we investigated which variables best explain and predict geographic trends in seroprevalence across North American wolf populations and the implications of the underlying mechanisms. We compiled a large serological dataset of nearly 2000 wolves from 17 study areas, spanning 80° longitude and 50° latitude. Generalized linear mixed models were constructed to predict the probability of seropositivity of four important pathogens: canine adenovirus, herpesvirus, parvovirus, and distemper virus—and two parasites: Neospora caninum and Toxoplasma gondii. Canine adenovirus and herpesvirus were the most widely distributed pathogens, whereas N. caninum was relatively uncommon. Canine parvovirus and distemper had high annual variation, with western populations experiencing more frequent outbreaks than eastern populations. Seroprevalence of all infections increased as wolves aged, and denser wolf populations had a greater risk of exposure. Probability of exposure was positively correlated with human density, suggesting that dogs and synanthropic animals may be important pathogen reservoirs. Pathogen exposure did not appear to follow a latitudinal gradient, with the exception of N. caninum. Instead, clustered study areas were more similar: wolves from the Great Lakes region had lower odds of exposure to the viruses, but higher odds of exposure to N. caninum and T. gondii; the opposite was true for wolves from the central Rocky Mountains. Overall, mechanistic predictors were more informative of seroprevalence trends than latitude and longitude. Individual host characteristics as well as inherent features of ecosystems determined pathogen exposure risk on a large scale. This work emphasizes the importance of biogeographic wildlife surveillance, and we expound upon avenues of future research of cross-species transmission, spillover, and spatial variation in pathogen infection.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Pennsylvania State University, Center for Infectious Disease Dynamics, Department of Biology, Huck Institutes of the Life Sciences, University Park, USA (GRID:grid.29857.31) (ISNI:0000 0001 2097 4281)
2 U.S. Geological Survey, Northern Rocky Mountain Science Center, Bozeman, USA (GRID:grid.29857.31)
3 University of Minnesota, Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior, Saint Paul, USA (GRID:grid.17635.36) (ISNI:0000000419368657)
4 Yellowstone Center for Resources, Yellowstone National Park, USA (GRID:grid.17635.36)
5 Cornell University, Animal Health Diagnostic Center, College of Veterinary Medicine, Ithaca, USA (GRID:grid.5386.8) (ISNI:000000041936877X)
6 University of Minnesota, Department of Veterinary Population Medicine, Saint Paul, USA (GRID:grid.17635.36) (ISNI:0000000419368657)
7 Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, Trent University, Peterborough, Canada (GRID:grid.52539.38) (ISNI:0000 0001 1090 2022)
8 Grand Teton National Park, Moose, USA (GRID:grid.52539.38)
9 U.S. Geological Survey, Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, Jamestown, USA (GRID:grid.52539.38)
10 Denali National Park and Preserve, Central Alaska Inventory and Monitoring Network, Denali Park, USA (GRID:grid.52539.38)
11 Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve, Central Alaska Inventory and Monitoring Network, Fairbanks, USA (GRID:grid.52539.38)
12 Yellowstone Center for Resources, Yellowstone National Park, USA (GRID:grid.52539.38)
13 Government of the Northwest Territories, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Fort Smith, Canada (GRID:grid.451269.d)
14 British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development, Prince George, Canada (GRID:grid.451269.d)
15 Government of the Northwest Territories, Environment and Natural Resources, North Slave Region, Canada (GRID:grid.451269.d)
16 Utah State University, Department of Wildland Resources, Logan, USA (GRID:grid.53857.3c) (ISNI:0000 0001 2185 8768)
17 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Kenai National Wildlife Refuge, Soldotna, USA (GRID:grid.53857.3c)
18 Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Wildlife Conservation, Douglas, USA (GRID:grid.417842.c) (ISNI:0000 0001 0698 5259)
19 British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development, Wildlife and Habitat Branch, Nanaimo, Canada (GRID:grid.417842.c)
20 University of Montana, Wildlife Biology Program, Department of Ecosystem and Conservation Sciences, Franke College of Forestry and Conservation, Missoula, USA (GRID:grid.253613.0) (ISNI:0000 0001 2192 5772)
21 Division of Wildlife Conservation, Dept of Fish and Game, Fairbanks, USA (GRID:grid.253613.0)