Coccidian Parasites and Conservation Implications for the Endangered Whooping Crane (Grus americana)

被引:11
|
作者
Bertram, Miranda R. [1 ]
Hamer, Gabriel L. [2 ]
Snowden, Karen F. [3 ]
Hartup, Barry K. [4 ,5 ]
Hamer, Sarah A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Texas A&M Univ, Dept Vet Integrat Biosci, College Stn, TX 77843 USA
[2] Texas A&M Univ, Dept Entomol, College Stn, TX 77843 USA
[3] Texas A&M Univ, Dept Vet Pathobiol, College Stn, TX 77843 USA
[4] Int Crane Fdn, Baraboo, WI USA
[5] Univ Wisconsin, Dept Surg Sci, Madison, WI USA
来源
PLOS ONE | 2015年 / 10卷 / 06期
关键词
DISSEMINATED VISCERAL COCCIDIOSIS; SANDHILL CRANES; EIMERIA SPP; OOCYSTS; DNA; FECES; ASSAY; TIME;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0127679
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
While the population of endangered whooping cranes (Grus americana) has grown from 15 individuals in 1941 to an estimated 304 birds today, the population growth is not sufficient to support a down-listing of the species to threatened status. The degree to which disease may be limiting the population growth of whooping cranes is unknown. One disease of potential concern is caused by two crane-associated Eimeria species: Eimeria gruis and E. reichenowi. Unlike most species of Eimeria, which are localized to the intestinal tract, these crane-associated species may multiply systemically and cause a potentially fatal disease. Using a non-invasive sampling approach, we assessed the prevalence and phenology of Eimeria oocysts in whooping crane fecal samples collected across two winter seasons (November 2012-April 2014) at the Aransas National Wildlife Refuge along the Texas Gulf coast. We also compared the ability of microscopy and PCR to detect Eimeria in fecal samples. Across both years, 26.5%(n = 328) of fecal samples were positive for Eimeria based on microscopy. Although the sensitivity of PCR for detecting Eimeria infections seemed to be less than that of microscopy in the first year of the study (8.9% vs. 29.3%, respectively), an improved DNA extraction protocol resulted in increased sensitivity of PCR relative to microscopy in the second year of the study (27.6% and 20.8%, respectively). The proportion of positive samples did not vary significantly between years or among sampling sites. The proportion of Eimeria positive fecal samples varied with date of collection, but there was no consistent pattern of parasite shedding between the two years. We demonstrate that non-invasive fecal collections combined with PCR and DNA sequencing techniques provides a useful tool for monitoring Eimeria infection in cranes. Understanding the epidemiology of coccidiosis is important for management efforts to increase population growth of the endangered whooping crane.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Haemosporida prevalence and diversity are similar in endangered wild whooping cranes (Grus americana) and sympatric sandhill cranes (Grus canadensis)
    Bertram, Miranda R.
    Hamer, Gabriel L.
    Hartup, Barry K.
    Snowden, Karen F.
    Medeiros, Matthew C.
    Hamer, Sarah A.
    PARASITOLOGY, 2017, 144 (05) : 629 - 640
  • [22] Isolation and characterization of 14 polymorphic microsatellite DNA loci for the endangered Whooping Crane (Grus americana) and their applicability to other crane species (vol 2, pg 251, 2010)
    Jones, Kenneth L.
    Henkel, Jessica R.
    Howard, Jerome J.
    Lance, Stacey L.
    Hagen, Chris
    Glenn, Travis C.
    CONSERVATION GENETICS RESOURCES, 2010, 2 (01) : 255 - 255
  • [23] Management implications of habitat selection by whooping cranes (Grus americana) on the Texas coast
    Lehnen, Sarah E.
    Sesnie, Steven E.
    Butler, Matthew J.
    Pearse, Aaron T.
    Metzger, Kristine L.
    ECOSPHERE, 2024, 15 (04):
  • [24] Comparison of the population viability analysis packages GAPPS, INMAT, RAMAS and VORTEX for the whooping crane (Grus americana)
    Brook, Barry W.
    Cannon, John R.
    Lacy, Robert C.
    Mirande, Claire
    Frankham, Richard
    ANIMAL CONSERVATION, 1999, 2 (01) : 23 - 31
  • [25] A roundtrip long-distance movement within one season by a nonmigratory Whooping Crane (Grus americana)
    Szyszkoski, Eva K.
    Thompson, Hillary L.
    WILSON JOURNAL OF ORNITHOLOGY, 2022, 134 (01): : 97 - +
  • [26] SURGICAL REMOVAL OF A TRACHEAL FOREIGN-BODY FROM A WHOOPING-CRANE (GRUS-AMERICANA)
    HOWARD, PE
    DEIN, FJ
    LANGENBERG, JA
    FRISCHMEYER, KJ
    BRUNSON, DB
    JOURNAL OF ZOO AND WILDLIFE MEDICINE, 1991, 22 (03) : 359 - 363
  • [27] Clinical use of recombinant human bone morphogenic protein-2 in a whooping crane (Grus americana)
    Sample, Susannah
    Cole, Gretchen
    Paul-Murphy, Joanne
    Hartup, Barry K.
    Clyde, Victoria
    Seeherman, Howard J.
    Schaefer, Susan
    VETERINARY SURGERY, 2008, 37 (06) : 552 - 557
  • [28] MANIFESTATIONS OF HYPERPARATHYROIDISM IN JUVENILE WHOOPING CRANES (GRUS AMERICANA)
    Parkinson, Lily
    Hartup, Barry K.
    JOURNAL OF ZOO AND WILDLIFE MEDICINE, 2019, 50 (03) : 731 - 734
  • [29] Parasites of the Common Crane Grus grus (L.) in Europe
    Gottschalk, C
    Prange, H
    BERLINER UND MUNCHENER TIERARZTLICHE WOCHENSCHRIFT, 2002, 115 (5-6): : 203 - 206
  • [30] Whooping Crane (Grus americana) .Be patterns in relation to an ecotope aassmcation in the Central Platte River Valley, Nebrask USA
    Baasch, David M.
    Caven, Andrew J.
    Jorgensen, Joel G.
    Grosse, Roger
    Rabbe, Matt
    Varner, Dana M.
    LaGrange, Ted
    AVIAN CONSERVATION AND ECOLOGY, 2022, 17 (02)