Animal migrations are often spectacular, and migratory species harbor zoonotic pathogens of importance to humans. Animal migrations are expected to enhance the global spread of pathogens and facilitate cross-species transmission. This does happen, but new research has also shown that migration allows hosts to escape from infected habitats, reduces disease levels when infected animals do not migrate successfully, and may lead to the evolution of less-virulent pathogens. Migratory demands can also reduce immune function, with consequences for host susceptibility and mortality. Studies of pathogen dynamics in migratory species and how these will respond to global change are urgently needed to predict future disease risks for wildlife and humans alike.

Abstract. Seasonal migration occurs in many animal systems and is likely to influence interactions between animals and their parasites. Here, we focus on monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus) and a protozoan parasite (Ophryocystis elektroscirrha) to investigate how host migration affects infectious disease processes. Previous work showed that parasite prevalence was lower among migratory than nonmigratory monarch populations; two explanations for this pattern are that (1) migration allows animals to periodically escape contaminated habitats (i.e., migratory escape), and (2) long-distance migration weeds out infected animals (i.e., migratory culling). We combined field-sampling and analysis of citizen science data to examine spatiotemporal trends of parasite prevalence and evaluate evidence for these two mechanisms. Analysis of within-breeding-season variation in eastern North America showed that parasite prevalence increased from early to late in the breeding season, consistent with the hypothesis of migratory escape. Prevalence was also positively related to monarch breeding activity, as indexed by larval density. Among adult monarchs captured at different points along the east coast fall migratory flyway, parasite prevalence declined as monarchs progressed southward, consistent with the hypothesis of migratory culling. Parasite prevalence was also lower among monarchs sampled at two overwintering sites in Mexico than among monarchs sampled during the summer breeding period. Collectively, these results indicate that seasonal migration can affect parasite transmission in wild animal populations, with implications for predicting disease risks for species with threatened migrations.

No abstract

Animal migrations are spectacular and migratory species have been shown to transmit pathogens that pose risks to human health. Although migration is commonly assumed to enhance pathogen dispersal, empirical work indicates that migration can often have the opposite effect of lowering disease risk.Key to assessing disease threats to migratory species is the ability to predict how migratory behaviour influences pathogen invasion success and impacts on migratory hosts, thus motivating a mechanistic understanding of migratory host-pathogen interactions.Here we develop a quantitative framework to examine pathogen transmission in animals that undergo two-way directed migrations between wintering and breeding grounds annually.Using the case of a pathogen transmitted during the hosts’ breeding season, we show that a more extreme migratory strategy (defined by the time spent away from the breeding site and the total distance migrated) lowers the probability of pathogen invasion. Moreover, if migration substantially lowers the survival probability of infected animals, then populations that spend comparatively less time at the breeding site or that migrate longer distances are less vulnerable to pathogen-induced population declines.These findings provide theoretical support for two non-exclusive mechanisms proposed to explain how seasonal migration can lower infection risk: (i) escape from habitats where parasite transmission stages have accumulated, and (ii) selective removal of infected hosts during strenuous journeys. Our work further suggests that barriers to long distance movement could increase pathogen prevalence for vulnerable species, an effect already seen in some animal species undergoing anthropogenically induced migratory shifts.

We evaluated whether ecosystem engineers can accomplish two conservation goals simultaneously: (1) indirectly maintain populations of an endangered animal through habitat modification and (2) increase riparian plant diversity. We tested for effects of a prominent ecosystem engineer, the beaver Castor canadensis, on populations of St. Francis' satyr butterfly Neonympha mitchellii francisci and plant species richness and composition. We performed our test by surveying riparian vegetation communities in all stages of beaver‐influenced wetland succession. We found that beavers created wetland habitats that supported plant species not found elsewhere in riparian zones and increased plant species diversity across the landscape by creating a novel combination of patch types. Our results confirmed what others have found about engineering effects on plant diversity, but these results further demonstrated a case where ecosystem engineers indirectly maintain populations of rare animals by modifying the composition and diversity of plant communities within wetlands. Our research demonstrates how an ecosystem engineer can influence habitat availability and composition of plant communities important for an endangered insect, and maintain overall plant species diversity by increasing habitat heterogeneity.