James G Booth, Brenda J Hanley, Noelle E Thompson, Carlos Gonzalez Crespo, Sonja A Christensen, Chris S Jennelle, Joe N Caudell, Zackary J Delisle, Joseph Guinness, Nicholas A Hollingshead, Cara E Them, Krysten L Schuler
{"title":"Management Agencies Can Leverage Animal Social Structure for Wildlife Disease Surveillance.","authors":"James G Booth, Brenda J Hanley, Noelle E Thompson, Carlos Gonzalez Crespo, Sonja A Christensen, Chris S Jennelle, Joe N Caudell, Zackary J Delisle, Joseph Guinness, Nicholas A Hollingshead, Cara E Them, Krysten L Schuler","doi":"10.7589/JWD-D-24-00079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Wildlife agencies are tasked with sustaining healthy wildlife populations. Advances in understanding health in wildlife, are, however, suppressed by issues with surveillance. Cost and logistical complexity are leading reasons why ideal surveillance implementation is often infeasible. A particularly important issue in surveillance is the sample size necessary to declare a local wildlife population (or social group) disease free. More precisely, how many animals must we sample to conclude with high confidence that prevalence of an infectious disease is below a specified threshold? Here we show that the answer to this question hinges on the ease of transmission between animals, a factor not considered in standard sample-size formulas. When disease statuses of animals in a local population are positively correlated, such as when a species forms social groups, the sample size requirement needed to declare freedom from disease is substantially lower relative to sample sizes suggested by existing hypergeometric and binomial models. Local wildlife populations or social groups must satisfy key properties for scientists to leverage this saving, but a reduction in cost arising in such a scenario is a welcome win in surveillance implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":17602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Wildlife Diseases","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Wildlife Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7589/JWD-D-24-00079","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Wildlife agencies are tasked with sustaining healthy wildlife populations. Advances in understanding health in wildlife, are, however, suppressed by issues with surveillance. Cost and logistical complexity are leading reasons why ideal surveillance implementation is often infeasible. A particularly important issue in surveillance is the sample size necessary to declare a local wildlife population (or social group) disease free. More precisely, how many animals must we sample to conclude with high confidence that prevalence of an infectious disease is below a specified threshold? Here we show that the answer to this question hinges on the ease of transmission between animals, a factor not considered in standard sample-size formulas. When disease statuses of animals in a local population are positively correlated, such as when a species forms social groups, the sample size requirement needed to declare freedom from disease is substantially lower relative to sample sizes suggested by existing hypergeometric and binomial models. Local wildlife populations or social groups must satisfy key properties for scientists to leverage this saving, but a reduction in cost arising in such a scenario is a welcome win in surveillance implementation.
期刊介绍:
The JWD publishes reports of wildlife disease investigations, research papers, brief research notes, case and epizootic reports, review articles, and book reviews. The JWD publishes the results of original research and observations dealing with all aspects of infectious, parasitic, toxic, nutritional, physiologic, developmental and neoplastic diseases, environmental contamination, and other factors impinging on the health and survival of free-living or occasionally captive populations of wild animals, including fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. Papers on zoonoses involving wildlife and on chemical immobilization of wild animals are also published. Manuscripts dealing with surveys and case reports may be published in the Journal provided that they contain significant new information or have significance for better understanding health and disease in wild populations. Authors are encouraged to address the wildlife management implications of their studies, where appropriate.