» Articles » PMID: 11356314

Contact Rates Between Wild and Domestic Canids: No Evidence of Parvovirus or Canine Distemper Virus in Crab-eating Foxes

Overview
Journal Vet Microbiol
Date 2001 May 18
PMID 11356314
Citations 16
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Evaluating the risk of disease spill-over from domestic dogs to wildlife depends on knowledge of inter-specific contact rates and/or exposure to aetiological agents in dog environments. Here, contact rates of crab-eating foxes (Cerdocyon thous) with sympatric domestic dog populations were measured over 25months in Amazon Brazil. Foxes and dogs were serologically and clinically monitored for exposure to canine parvovirus (CPV-2) and canine distemper virus (CDV), pathogens known to have caused wildlife population declines elsewhere. Twenty-two of 24 (92%) tagged foxes visited one or more houses in a median 2 (range 1-3) villages per night where dog densities ranged from 7.2 to 15.4 per km(2) (mean 9.5 per km(2)). Foxes spent an average 6.4% (0-40.3%) of their 10h nocturnal activity period in villages, the equivalent of 38m (range 0-242) per night. The rate of potential exposure to disease agents was thus high, though varied by 3 orders of magnitude for individual foxes. Overall, 46% of the fox population was responsible for 80% of all contacts. None of the 37 monitored foxes however showed serological or clinical evidence of infection with CPV-2 or CDV. Seroprevalences for CPV-2 and CDV antibodies in the local domestic dog population were 13% (3/23) and 9% (2/23), respectively, and 89% of 97 monitored pups born during the study presented clinical signs consistent with active CPV-2 infection (haemorrhagic diarrhoea, vomiting, rapid morbidity and emaciation). Although there was no evidence for infection with either virus in foxes, the high level of contact of foxes with peridomestic habitats suggests that the probability of potential spill-over infections from dogs to foxes is high.

Citing Articles

Serological Survey for Three Canine Viruses in Brazilian Wild Carnivores : Antibodies Against Canine Viruses in Wild Carnivores.

Lavorente F, Spera C, Miyabe F, Lorenzetti E, Fritzen J, Alfieri A Ecohealth. 2023; 20(4):349-354.

PMID: 38110612 DOI: 10.1007/s10393-023-01665-4.


Risky business in Georgia's wild birds: contact rates between wild birds and backyard chickens is influenced by supplemental feed.

Ayala A, Haas L, Williams B, Fink S, Yabsley M, Hernandez S Epidemiol Infect. 2022; 150:e102.

PMID: 35508913 PMC: 9128352. DOI: 10.1017/S0950268822000851.


Patterns of Exposure and Infection with Microparasites in Iberian Wild Carnivores: A Review and Meta-Analysis.

Millan J, Becker D Animals (Basel). 2021; 11(9).

PMID: 34573674 PMC: 8469010. DOI: 10.3390/ani11092708.


Domestic Dogs and Wild Foxes Interactions in a Wildlife-Domestic Interface of North-Central Chile: Implications for Multi-Host Pathogen Transmission.

Hernandez F, Manqui J, Mejias C, Acosta-Jamett G Front Vet Sci. 2021; 8:631788.

PMID: 33634181 PMC: 7899968. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2021.631788.


Phylogenetic and Geospatial Evidence of Canine Parvovirus Transmission between Wild Dogs and Domestic Dogs at the Urban Fringe in Australia.

Kelman M, Harriott L, Carrai M, Kwan E, Ward M, Barrs V Viruses. 2020; 12(6).

PMID: 32575609 PMC: 7354627. DOI: 10.3390/v12060663.