Evaluating wildlife-cattle contact rates to improve the understanding of dynamics of bovine tuberculosis transmission in Michigan, USA

Lavelle, Michael J.; Kay, Shannon L.; Pepin, Kim M.; Grear, Daniel A.; Campa, Henry; VerCauteren, Kurt C.

doi:10.1016/j.prevetmed.2016.10.009

Cited by 19 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 50 publications

(75 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The livestock sector is affected through increased mortality and reduced livestock productivity, as well as indirect losses associated with cost of surveillance, decreased market values, food insecurity, and impacts on farmers’ livelihood (Dehove, Commault, Petitclerc, Teissier, & Macé, ). The recreational manipulation of the natural environment to increase the density of wildlife beyond its normal carrying capacity, together with agricultural intensification and deforestation, have resulted in interactions between wildlife and livestock becoming more frequent (Berentsen, Miller, Misiewicz, Malmberg, & Dunbar, ; Cowie et al, ; Jones et al, ; Lavelle et al, ; Skuce, Allen, McDowell, & McDowell, ), creating a dynamic and bidirectional opportunity for pathogens to circulate freely within and across species (Bengis, Kock, & Fischer, ), via direct and/or indirect routes (use of communal environment, shared resources, etc). The control of infectious diseases at the wildlife‐livestock interface is particularly challenging because of the differences in disease control efforts aimed respectively at both livestock and wildlife populations (Bird & Mazet, ; Gortazar et al, ), as these are usually managed by different organisational entities (Mcbeth & Shanahan, ; Miller, Farnsworth, & Malmberg, ; Welburn, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disease management at the wildlife‐livestock interface: Using whole‐genome sequencing to study the role of elk in Mycobacterium bovis transmission in Michigan, USA

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of wildlife in the persistence and spread of livestock diseases is difficult to quantify and control. These difficulties are exacerbated when several wildlife species are potentially involved. Bovine tuberculosis (bTB), caused by Mycobacterium bovis, has experienced an ecological shift in Michigan, with spillover from cattle leading to an endemically infected white-tailed deer (deer) population. It has potentially substantial implications for the health and well-being of both wildlife and livestock and incurs a significant economic cost to industry and government. Deer are known to act as a reservoir of infection, with evidence of M. bovis transmission to sympatric elk and cattle populations. However, the role of elk in the circulation of M. bovis is uncertain; they are few in number, but range further than deer, so may enable long distance spread. Combining Whole Genome Sequences (WGS) for M. bovis isolates from exceptionally well-observed populations of elk, deer and cattle with spatiotemporal locations, we use spatial and Bayesian phylogenetic analyses to show strong spatiotemporal admixture of M. bovis isolates. Clustering of bTB in elk and cattle suggests either intraspecies transmission within the two populations, or exposure to a common source. However, there is no support for significant pathogen transfer amongst elk and cattle, and our data are in accordance with existing evidence that interspecies transmission in Michigan is likely only maintained by deer. This study demonstrates | 2193 SALVADOR et AL.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disease management at the wildlife‐livestock interface: Using whole‐genome sequencing to study the role of elk in Mycobacterium bovis transmission in Michigan, USA

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We considered a 3-month seasonal time interval for two reasons. First, previous work has shown that contact rates in this system vary with season (Lavelle et al, 2016). Second, bTB has an incubation and infectious period on the order of months to years such that contacts over a 3-month period are epidemiologically relevant for bTB transmission (Ramsey et al, 2014;Renwick, White, & Bengis, 2007).…”

Section: Data Processingmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Previous experimental work has shown that bTB can be transmitted by direct contact with infected hosts and indirect contact with bTB shed into the environment by consuming contaminated foodstuffs, mineral supplements, and soil while feeding (Fine et al, 2011;Kaneene, Hattey, Bolin, Averill, & Miller, 2017;Palmer, Waters, & Whipple, 2004a;Schmitt et al, 2002). It is important to simultaneously consider both routes of bTB transmission when constructing and managing contact networks, as wildlife and cattle come into direct and indirect contact (Lavelle et al, 2016).…”

Section: Wildlife-livestock Interfacementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Theoretical studies have illustrated the importance of this specieslevel variability in connectedness in community-level pathogen persistence Holt et al, 2003), but few empirical studies have measured variability in between-species contact rates (Craft, 2015;White et al, 2017, but see Böhm et al 2009;Lavelle et al 2016). Species-level heterogeneity in contact can be particularly important at the wildlife-livestock interface, where identifying highly connected species can inform targeted management action for mitigating the risk of disease spillover (Miller, Farnsworth, & Malmberg, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Intra-and inter-specific contact is difficult to measure (Webster, Borlase, & Rudge, 2016). Over the last decade advances in GPS radiocollars and proximity logger technology have improved our ability to directly measure contact rates among community members (Böhm, et al 2009;Lavelle et al, 2016;Prange, Jordan, Hunter, & Gehrt, 2006). Use of proximity logger data to infer epidemiologically relevant contacts is challenging as it requires careful thought about the biology of the host-parasite interaction of interest (Craft, 2015;VanderWaal, Enns, Picasso, Packer, & Craft, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Modelling multi‐species and multi‐mode contact networks: Implications for persistence of bovine tuberculosis at the wildlife–livestock interface

Wilber

Pepin

Campa

et al. 2019

Journal of Applied Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1 Individual-and species-level heterogeneity in contact rates can alter the ability of a pathogen to invade a host community. Many pathogens have multiple modes of transmission-by direct or indirect contact. It is important to identify the role of heterogeneity in different types of transmission when managing the risk of disease spillover at the interface among different host species.2 We developed a network-based analysis to explore how individual-and specieslevel heterogeneity shape multi-mode contact networks. We applied this networkbased approach to contact data from proximity loggers collected in a multi-species host community that contributes to the spillover of the disease bovine tuberculosis (bTB) to cattle populations in Michigan, USA. We used this approach to (a) quantify how individual-and species-level heterogeneity influence direct and indirect contacts in this system, (b) explore how management interventions to control spillovers, such as the installation of deer fences, can alter observed contact networks and c) predict the role that wildlife species have in maintaining bTB in the community.3 We found that individual-and species-level heterogeneity disproportionately influenced indirect and direct contact networks, with individual-level heterogeneity having a greater effect on indirect contact networks and species-level heterogeneity having a greater effect on direct contact networks. We also found that the installation of deer fences significantly reduced deer-specific indirect contacts.We used the results from our network analysis to show that white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) could act as the sole reservoir host for bTB in this community with important implications for understanding past bTB dynamics and managing the persistence of bTB in the future.4 Synthesis and applications. Analyses of epidemiological networks rarely account for multiple modes of contact, which can lead to an incomplete understanding of how individual-and species-level heterogeneity affect disease transmission. The

show abstract

Quantifying the errors in animal contacts recorded by proximity loggers

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Automated contact detection by means of proximity loggers permits the measurement of encounters between individuals (animal-animal contacts) and the time spent by individuals in the proximity of a focal resource of interest (animal-fixed logger contacts). The ecological inference derived from contact detection is intrinsically associated with the distance at which the contact occurred. But no proximity loggers currently exist that record this distance and therefore all distance estimations are associated with error. Here we applied a probabilistic approach to model the relationship between contact detection and inter-logger distance, and quantify the associated error, on free-ranging animals in semi-controlled settings. The probability of recording a contact declined with the distance between loggers, and this decline was steeper for weaker radio transmission powers.

show abstract

Evaluating wildlife-cattle contact rates to improve the understanding of dynamics of bovine tuberculosis transmission in Michigan, USA

Cited by 19 publications

References 50 publications

Disease management at the wildlife‐livestock interface: Using whole‐genome sequencing to study the role of elk in Mycobacterium bovis transmission in Michigan, USA

Disease management at the wildlife‐livestock interface: Using whole‐genome sequencing to study the role of elk in Mycobacterium bovis transmission in Michigan, USA

Modelling multi‐species and multi‐mode contact networks: Implications for persistence of bovine tuberculosis at the wildlife–livestock interface

Quantifying the errors in animal contacts recorded by proximity loggers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About