Infectious Disease and Grouping Patterns in Mule Deer

Salazar, María Fernanda Mejía; Waldner, Cheryl L.; Stookey, J. M.; Bollinger, Trent K.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0150830

Cited by 15 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Disease can also influence social relationships through strategies that restrict pathogen spread, such as behavioural immunity [23] and sickness behaviour [24]. For example, deer infected with CWD have a reduced likelihood of being found in groups [25], probably as a result of behavioural changes caused by brain injury (e.g. diminished alertness, and ataxia) [26].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The social life of mule deer is characterized by decisions that change dynamically over time, because ecological context, and group size and composition change on a daily basis [25]. Mule deer have a marked right-skewed distribution of group sizes [25] with obvious seasonality driven by environmental conditions and reproductive behaviour [25, 28–31].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Mule deer have a marked right-skewed distribution of group sizes [25] with obvious seasonality driven by environmental conditions and reproductive behaviour [25, 28–31]. The largest mixed-sex groups are observed in winter, while the smallest are seen during the fawning period [25, 29].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Mule deer spatial association patterns and potential implications for transmission of an epizootic disease

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animal social behaviour can have important effects on the long-term dynamics of diseases. In particular, preferential spatial relationships between individuals can lead to differences in the rates of disease spread within a population. We examined the concurrent influence of genetic relatedness, sex, age, home range overlap, time of year, and prion disease status on proximal associations of adult Rocky Mountain mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus hemionus) in a chronic wasting disease endemic area. We also quantified the temporal stability of these associations across different sex, age, and disease status classes. We used three years of high frequency telemetry data from 74 individuals to record encounters within 25 m of each other, and to calculate seasonal home range overlap measured by volume of intersection (VI). The strength of pairwise spatial association between adult mule deer was independent of genetic relatedness, age and disease status. Seasonal variation in association strength was not consistent across years, perhaps due to annual changes in weather conditions. The influence of home range overlap on association strength varied seasonally, whereby associations were stronger in pre-rut and fawning than in the rest of the seasons. The sexes of individuals also interacted with both VI and season. At increasing levels of VI, associations were stronger between females than between males and between females and males. The strongest associations in pre-rut were between males, while the strongest in rut were between females and males. The temporal stability of associations was markedly dependant on the sex and the diagnosis of the associating pair. Our findings highlight the importance of considering concurrent effects of biological and environmental factors when seeking to understand the role of social preference in behavioural ecology and disease spread. Applying this knowledge in epidemiological modelling will shed light on the dynamics of disease transmission among mule deer.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mule deer spatial association patterns and potential implications for transmission of an epizootic disease

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is not appropriate in studies of group size distribution because that would mean excluding a large proportion (often the majority) of observed individuals, thus greatly falsifying the results. Similar rightskewed frequency distributions characterise herds of many ungulate species (Sinclair 1977;Clutton-Brock 1982;Gueron 1995;Wronski et al 2009;Ramesh et al 2011;Dar et al 2012;Buuveibaatar 2013;Brennan et al 2015;Djaković et al 2015;Semeñiuk 2015), including the subject of our present paper, the Rocky Mountain mule deer (Odocoileus hemiounus hemionus) (Bowyer 2001;Lingle 2003;Mejía Salazar et al 2016).…”

mentioning

confidence: 61%

“…A study on chronic wasting disease (CWD) transmission dynamics was conducted at Antelope Creek (50.66°N, 108.27°W), a 248 km 2 CWD endemic area in south Saskatchewan, Canada (Silbernagel 2011;Mejía Salazar et al 2016). This study site is within the mixed grassland ecoregion and consists of crop (46.6%), grassland (35.6%), shrub (7.6%), woodland (2%) and open water (0.3%).…”

Section: Data Sourcementioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing radio-tracking and visual detection methods to quantify group size measures

Reiczigel¹,

Salazar²,

Bollinger³

et al. 2015

European Journal of Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract1. Average values of animal group sizes are prone to be overestimated in traditional field studies because small groups and singletons are easier to overlook than large ones. This kind of bias also applies for the method of locating groups by tracking previously radio-collared individuals in the wild. If the researcher randomly chooses a collared animal to locate a group to visit, a large group has higher probability to be selected than a small one, simply because it has more members.2. The question arises whether location of groups by means of finding collared animals has smaller or greater bias than searching for groups by visual observation. If the bias is smaller or same, this method can be recommended for finding groups. However, such a comparison cannot be made by speculation, only by empirical investigation.3. The present study compares the two methods empirically, by statistically comparing group size measures (mean, median, quantiles, frequency distribution, and ‘typical group size’) between two data sets. These data sets comprise of Rocky Mountain mule deer group size values collected in the same area during the same period of time, referring either to groups located by the traditional ‘search and observe method’ or located by tracking formerly collared individuals.4. All group size measures are statistically similar in the two samples, thus we conclude that the two methods yielded similar biases. Although the true group size measures are not known, we presume that both methods have overestimated them. We propose that these results do not necessary apply to other species, thus cannot be generalized. The reason for this is that bias may depend on factors specific to the species: bias of visual observation may depend on how well the species conceals itself in the existing habitat, and the bias associated with finding groups using collared animals is likely dependent on group size distribution and also on the proportion of collared animals in the population.

show abstract

Variability in the estimation of ungulate group sizes complicates ecological inference

Kasozi

Montgomery

2020

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Foundational work has examined adaptive social behavior in animals in relation to the costs and benefits of group living. Within this context, a “group” of animals represents an organizational unit that is integral to the study of animal ecology and evolution. Definitions of animal group sizes are often subjective with considerable variability within and across species. However, investigations of both the extent and implications of such variability in the estimation of animal group sizes are currently lacking. Selecting ungulates as a case study, we conducted a literature review to assess prevailing practices used to determine group sizes among terrestrial Cetartiodactyla and Perissodactyla. Via this process, we examined group size definitions for 61 species across 171 peer‐reviewed studies published between 1962 and 2018. These studies quantified group sizes via estimation of ungulate aggregations in space and time. Spatial estimates included a nearest neighbor distance ranging from 1.4 m to 1,000 m, and this variation was partially explained by a weak positive correlation (| r | = .4, p < .003) with the body size of the ungulate research subjects. The temporal extent over which group size was estimated was even broader, ranging from three minutes to 24 hr. The considerable variability in ungulate group size estimation that we observed complicates efforts to not only compare and replicate studies but also to evaluate underlying theories of group living. We recommend that researchers: (a) clearly describe the spatiotemporal extents over which they define ungulate group sizes, (b) highlight foundational empirical and ecological rationale for these extents, and (c) seek to align such extents among individual species so as to facilitate cross‐system comparisons of ungulate group size dynamics. We believe an integrative approach to ungulate group size estimation would readily facilitate replication, comparability, and evaluation of competing hypotheses examining the tradeoffs of animal sociality.

show abstract

Infectious Disease and Grouping Patterns in Mule Deer

Cited by 15 publications

References 71 publications

Mule deer spatial association patterns and potential implications for transmission of an epizootic disease

Mule deer spatial association patterns and potential implications for transmission of an epizootic disease

Comparing radio-tracking and visual detection methods to quantify group size measures

Variability in the estimation of ungulate group sizes complicates ecological inference

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About