Food Supplementation Reduces Nematode Super-Shedding in a Wild Mammal

Résumé fourni par la source

Abstract Anthropogenic changes to the environment, including altered food resource availability, influence host physiology, behaviour, and population dynamics, which can have strong downstream consequences on wildlife disease dynamics. Additionally, some individuals within a population contribute disproportionately to infection as ‘super-shedders’ of infection, but the extent to which food availability alters the likelihood of super-shedding and overall parasite infection patterns is poorly understood. We conducted a three-year field experiment in southern Finland to investigate how food supplementation and parasite removal affect nematode infection measures and the relationship between nematode infection and fitness of wild bank voles ( Clethrionomys glareolus ). Using a factorial design across 12 populations, we manipulated food availability and administered anthelmintic treatments to assess effects on nematode infection status, intensity, and two measures of super-shedding (abundance super-shedding, intensity super-shedding). We also examined parasite impacts on host fitness, including apparent survival probability and reproductive status. Food supplementation did not affect likelihood of infection, intensity or intensity super-shedding, but did reduce the likelihood of abundance super-shedding, suggesting an effect of food availability on infection heterogeneity. We also identified an interaction between nematode infection status and host age on fitness. Notably, infected younger individuals had reduced survival and reproduction, but infected older individuals had greater survival and reproduction compared to their uninfected counterparts. Our study provides novel empirical evidence on how anthropogenic changes in food availability can influence parasite transmission dynamics and the fitness consequences of these sub-lethal parasites in a wildlife system.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.