The association between diet of periurban wild dogs and zoonotic pathogen carriage

Abstract

Established wildlife populations in periurban environments provide an opportunity to spread zoonotic pathogens within human-associated environments. Characteristics of prevalent pathogens harboured by periurban wild dogs suggest that dietary preference could influence their infection status; however, data comparing diet composition and pathogen presence are rarely available. We analysed the stomach contents of 170 periurban wild dogs (Canis familiaris) for the occurrence and biomass of prey items, and then associated this with their known infection status of key zoonotic pathogens. The staple prey items detected were mammalian prey species, most commonly swamp wallabies (Wallabia bicolor) (20.6±6.1%), canines (C. familiaris) (prey) (10.6±4.6%), eastern grey kangaroos (Macropus giganteus) (10.0±4.5%), and deer (various species) (10.0±4.5%). Unidentified bird species (10.0±4.5%) were also common. Wild dogs that were positive for Echinococcus granulosus were significantly more likely to have consumed swamp wallabies. These findings demonstrate the importance of managing both the definitive and intermediate stages of E. granulosus, and suggest that diet correlates with pathogen presence in some cases. This information may assist the development of specific strategies to manage zoonotic pathogens of wild dogs, which are currently lacking.

Geographical distribution and risk factors for Echinococcus granulosus infection in peri-urban wild dog populations

“…Novel data have detailed the movement and home-range patterns of peri-urban wild dogs, assisting our understanding of potential impacts to human health (Allen et al., 2013; McNeill et al., 2016). Swamp wallabies are a staple food source for peri-urban wild dogs (Allen et al., 2016) and consumption of this prey has been found to be positively associated with E. granulosus infection in wild dogs (Harriott et al., 2019a). It is likely that climatic and physical environment variables, as well as individual level traits of each dog (i.e.…”