A Review of Non-Invasive Sampling in Wildlife Disease and Health Research: What’s New?

Abstract

In the last decades, wildlife diseases and the health status of animal populations have gained increasing attention from the scientific community as part of a One Health framework. Furthermore, the need for non-invasive sampling methods with a minimal impact on wildlife has become paramount in complying with modern ethical standards and regulations, and to collect high-quality and unbiased data. We analysed the publication trends on non-invasive sampling in wildlife health and disease research and offer a comprehensive review on the different samples that can be collected non-invasively. We retrieved 272 articles spanning from 1998 to 2021, with a rapid increase in number from 2010. Thirty-nine percent of the papers were focussed on diseases, 58% on other health-related topics, and 3% on both. Stress and other physiological parameters were the most addressed research topics, followed by viruses, helminths, and bacterial infections. Terrestrial mammals accounted for 75% of all publications, and faeces were the most widely used sample. Our review of the sampling materials and collection methods highlights that, although the use of some types of samples for specific applications is now consolidated, others are perhaps still underutilised and new technologies may offer future opportunities for an even wider use of non-invasively collected samples.

Comparing copromicroscopy to intestinal scraping to monitor red fox intestinal helminths with zoonotic and veterinary importance

“…Monitoring pathogens in wild species is particularly relevant where wildlife acts as the epidemiological reservoir of parasites with potential high impact on human and veterinary health ( 1 ). Copromicroscopy is widely employed in monitoring infections during surveillance of zoonotic helminthiases in different animal species ( 2 – 4 ). Contrary to necropsy-based approaches, which are necessarily associated with culling campaigns or passive surveillance plans, copromicroscopy allows the analysis of a larger number of hosts with limited logistic needs, with relatively low cost and time effort.…”

“…Copromicroscopy is widely employed in monitoring infections during surveillance of zoonotic helminthiases in different animal species (2)(3)(4). Contrary to necropsy-based approaches, which are necessarily associated with culling campaigns or passive surveillance plans, copromicroscopy allows the analysis of a larger number of hosts with limited logistic needs, with relatively low cost and time effort.…”

Host, environment, and anthropogenic factors drive landscape dynamics of an environmentally transmitted pathogen: Sarcoptic mange in the bare‐nosed wombat

“…However, pathogens which cause visually apparent diseases have the unique potential to enhance insight into landscape‐scale disease dynamics (e.g. Carricondo‐Sanchez et al, 2017) by informing pathogen distribution without requiring costly and invasive individual captures or opportunistic sampling from deceased hosts (Schilling et al, 2022; Valldeperes et al, 2019). When paired with advances in remote‐surveillance technologies, passive observations of visually identifiable diseases in wildlife can greatly advance landscape epidemiology and provide a framework for understanding spatial pathogen dynamics (Burgess et al, 2023; Ryser‐Degiorgis, 2013; Stallknecht, 2007).…”

“…A revolution in disease detection and passive surveillance technologies—such as with remotely triggered cameras, citizen‐science surveys, automated computer‐learning techniques for processing images, and geo‐spatial and distribution modelling methods—has supported significant advances in understanding the ecology of (and what constitutes risky landscapes for) wildlife disease (e.g. Orusa et al, 2020; Schilling et al, 2022; Whytock et al, 2021). These advances enable early detection of pathogen outbreaks and allow practitioners to make informed decisions to manage landscape‐scale disease problems in wildlife (Carella et al, 2022; MacDonald et al, 2022).…”

Wildlife Disease Monitoring: Methods and Perspectives

“…Finally, Schilling et al [ 13 ] reviewed the literature on non-invasive methods in wildlife disease and health research. In their contribution, they analyse the publication trends on the topic, revealing the growing interest of researchers in employing non-invasive methods, then offer a comprehensive review of the different types of samples that can be collected non-invasively from wildlife, listing their potential uses and methods for collection and analysis.…”