Cargando…

Revisiting Ophidiomycosis (Snake Fungal Disease) After a Decade of Targeted Research

Emerging infectious diseases (EIDs) are typically characterized by novelty (recent detection) and by increasing incidence, distribution, and/or pathogenicity. Ophidiomycosis, also called snake fungal disease, is caused by the fungus Ophidiomyces ophidiicola (formerly “ophiodiicola”). Ophidiomycosis...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Davy, Christina M., Shirose, Leonard, Campbell, Doug, Dillon, Rachel, McKenzie, Christina, Nemeth, Nicole, Braithwaite, Tony, Cai, Hugh, Degazio, Tarra, Dobbie, Tammy, Egan, Sean, Fotherby, Heather, Litzgus, Jacqueline D., Manorome, Pilar, Marks, Steve, Paterson, James E., Sigler, Lynne, Slavic, Durda, Slavik, Emily, Urquhart, John, Jardine, Claire
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8200636/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34136555
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2021.665805
_version_ 1783707650640314368
author Davy, Christina M.
Shirose, Leonard
Campbell, Doug
Dillon, Rachel
McKenzie, Christina
Nemeth, Nicole
Braithwaite, Tony
Cai, Hugh
Degazio, Tarra
Dobbie, Tammy
Egan, Sean
Fotherby, Heather
Litzgus, Jacqueline D.
Manorome, Pilar
Marks, Steve
Paterson, James E.
Sigler, Lynne
Slavic, Durda
Slavik, Emily
Urquhart, John
Jardine, Claire
author_facet Davy, Christina M.
Shirose, Leonard
Campbell, Doug
Dillon, Rachel
McKenzie, Christina
Nemeth, Nicole
Braithwaite, Tony
Cai, Hugh
Degazio, Tarra
Dobbie, Tammy
Egan, Sean
Fotherby, Heather
Litzgus, Jacqueline D.
Manorome, Pilar
Marks, Steve
Paterson, James E.
Sigler, Lynne
Slavic, Durda
Slavik, Emily
Urquhart, John
Jardine, Claire
author_sort Davy, Christina M.
collection PubMed
description Emerging infectious diseases (EIDs) are typically characterized by novelty (recent detection) and by increasing incidence, distribution, and/or pathogenicity. Ophidiomycosis, also called snake fungal disease, is caused by the fungus Ophidiomyces ophidiicola (formerly “ophiodiicola”). Ophidiomycosis has been characterized as an EID and as a potential threat to populations of Nearctic snakes, sparking over a decade of targeted research. However, the severity of this threat is unclear. We reviewed the available literature to quantify incidence and effects of ophidiomycosis in Nearctic snakes, and to evaluate whether the evidence supports the ongoing characterization of ophidiomycosis as an EID. Data from Canada remain scarce, so we supplemented the literature review with surveys for O. ophidiicola in the Canadian Great Lakes region. Peer-reviewed reports of clinical signs consistent with ophidiomycosis in free-ranging, Nearctic snakes date back to at least 1998, and retrospective molecular testing of samples extend the earliest confirmed record to 1986. Diagnostic criteria varied among publications (n = 33), confounding quantitative comparisons. Ophidiomycosis was diagnosed or suspected in 36/121 captive snakes and was fatal in over half of cases (66.7%). This result may implicate captivity-related stress as a risk factor for mortality from ophidiomycosis, but could also reflect reporting bias (i.e., infections are more likely to be detected in captive snakes, and severe cases are more likely to be reported). In contrast, ophidiomycosis was diagnosed or suspected in 441/2,384 free-ranging snakes, with mortality observed in 43 (9.8 %). Ophidiomycosis was only speculatively linked to population declines, and we found no evidence that the prevalence of the pathogen or disease increased over the past decade of targeted research. Supplemental surveys and molecular (qPCR) testing in Ontario, Canada detected O. ophidiicola on 76 of 657 free-ranging snakes sampled across ~136,000 km(2). The pathogen was detected at most sites despite limited and haphazard sampling. No large-scale mortality was observed. Current evidence supports previous suggestions that the pathogen is a widespread, previously unrecognized endemic, rather than a novel pathogen. Ophidiomycosis may not pose an imminent threat to Nearctic snakes, but further research should investigate potential sublethal effects of ophidiomycosis such as altered reproductive success that could impact population growth, and explore whether shifting environmental conditions may alter host susceptibility.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8200636
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82006362021-06-15 Revisiting Ophidiomycosis (Snake Fungal Disease) After a Decade of Targeted Research Davy, Christina M. Shirose, Leonard Campbell, Doug Dillon, Rachel McKenzie, Christina Nemeth, Nicole Braithwaite, Tony Cai, Hugh Degazio, Tarra Dobbie, Tammy Egan, Sean Fotherby, Heather Litzgus, Jacqueline D. Manorome, Pilar Marks, Steve Paterson, James E. Sigler, Lynne Slavic, Durda Slavik, Emily Urquhart, John Jardine, Claire Front Vet Sci Veterinary Science Emerging infectious diseases (EIDs) are typically characterized by novelty (recent detection) and by increasing incidence, distribution, and/or pathogenicity. Ophidiomycosis, also called snake fungal disease, is caused by the fungus Ophidiomyces ophidiicola (formerly “ophiodiicola”). Ophidiomycosis has been characterized as an EID and as a potential threat to populations of Nearctic snakes, sparking over a decade of targeted research. However, the severity of this threat is unclear. We reviewed the available literature to quantify incidence and effects of ophidiomycosis in Nearctic snakes, and to evaluate whether the evidence supports the ongoing characterization of ophidiomycosis as an EID. Data from Canada remain scarce, so we supplemented the literature review with surveys for O. ophidiicola in the Canadian Great Lakes region. Peer-reviewed reports of clinical signs consistent with ophidiomycosis in free-ranging, Nearctic snakes date back to at least 1998, and retrospective molecular testing of samples extend the earliest confirmed record to 1986. Diagnostic criteria varied among publications (n = 33), confounding quantitative comparisons. Ophidiomycosis was diagnosed or suspected in 36/121 captive snakes and was fatal in over half of cases (66.7%). This result may implicate captivity-related stress as a risk factor for mortality from ophidiomycosis, but could also reflect reporting bias (i.e., infections are more likely to be detected in captive snakes, and severe cases are more likely to be reported). In contrast, ophidiomycosis was diagnosed or suspected in 441/2,384 free-ranging snakes, with mortality observed in 43 (9.8 %). Ophidiomycosis was only speculatively linked to population declines, and we found no evidence that the prevalence of the pathogen or disease increased over the past decade of targeted research. Supplemental surveys and molecular (qPCR) testing in Ontario, Canada detected O. ophidiicola on 76 of 657 free-ranging snakes sampled across ~136,000 km(2). The pathogen was detected at most sites despite limited and haphazard sampling. No large-scale mortality was observed. Current evidence supports previous suggestions that the pathogen is a widespread, previously unrecognized endemic, rather than a novel pathogen. Ophidiomycosis may not pose an imminent threat to Nearctic snakes, but further research should investigate potential sublethal effects of ophidiomycosis such as altered reproductive success that could impact population growth, and explore whether shifting environmental conditions may alter host susceptibility. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-05-31 /pmc/articles/PMC8200636/ /pubmed/34136555 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2021.665805 Text en Copyright © 2021 Davy, Shirose, Campbell, Dillon, McKenzie, Nemeth, Braithwaite, Cai, Degazio, Dobbie, Egan, Fotherby, Litzgus, Manorome, Marks, Paterson, Sigler, Slavic, Slavik, Urquhart and Jardine. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Veterinary Science
Davy, Christina M.
Shirose, Leonard
Campbell, Doug
Dillon, Rachel
McKenzie, Christina
Nemeth, Nicole
Braithwaite, Tony
Cai, Hugh
Degazio, Tarra
Dobbie, Tammy
Egan, Sean
Fotherby, Heather
Litzgus, Jacqueline D.
Manorome, Pilar
Marks, Steve
Paterson, James E.
Sigler, Lynne
Slavic, Durda
Slavik, Emily
Urquhart, John
Jardine, Claire
Revisiting Ophidiomycosis (Snake Fungal Disease) After a Decade of Targeted Research
title Revisiting Ophidiomycosis (Snake Fungal Disease) After a Decade of Targeted Research
title_full Revisiting Ophidiomycosis (Snake Fungal Disease) After a Decade of Targeted Research
title_fullStr Revisiting Ophidiomycosis (Snake Fungal Disease) After a Decade of Targeted Research
title_full_unstemmed Revisiting Ophidiomycosis (Snake Fungal Disease) After a Decade of Targeted Research
title_short Revisiting Ophidiomycosis (Snake Fungal Disease) After a Decade of Targeted Research
title_sort revisiting ophidiomycosis (snake fungal disease) after a decade of targeted research
topic Veterinary Science
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8200636/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34136555
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2021.665805
work_keys_str_mv AT davychristinam revisitingophidiomycosissnakefungaldiseaseafteradecadeoftargetedresearch
AT shiroseleonard revisitingophidiomycosissnakefungaldiseaseafteradecadeoftargetedresearch
AT campbelldoug revisitingophidiomycosissnakefungaldiseaseafteradecadeoftargetedresearch
AT dillonrachel revisitingophidiomycosissnakefungaldiseaseafteradecadeoftargetedresearch
AT mckenziechristina revisitingophidiomycosissnakefungaldiseaseafteradecadeoftargetedresearch
AT nemethnicole revisitingophidiomycosissnakefungaldiseaseafteradecadeoftargetedresearch
AT braithwaitetony revisitingophidiomycosissnakefungaldiseaseafteradecadeoftargetedresearch
AT caihugh revisitingophidiomycosissnakefungaldiseaseafteradecadeoftargetedresearch
AT degaziotarra revisitingophidiomycosissnakefungaldiseaseafteradecadeoftargetedresearch
AT dobbietammy revisitingophidiomycosissnakefungaldiseaseafteradecadeoftargetedresearch
AT egansean revisitingophidiomycosissnakefungaldiseaseafteradecadeoftargetedresearch
AT fotherbyheather revisitingophidiomycosissnakefungaldiseaseafteradecadeoftargetedresearch
AT litzgusjacquelined revisitingophidiomycosissnakefungaldiseaseafteradecadeoftargetedresearch
AT manoromepilar revisitingophidiomycosissnakefungaldiseaseafteradecadeoftargetedresearch
AT markssteve revisitingophidiomycosissnakefungaldiseaseafteradecadeoftargetedresearch
AT patersonjamese revisitingophidiomycosissnakefungaldiseaseafteradecadeoftargetedresearch
AT siglerlynne revisitingophidiomycosissnakefungaldiseaseafteradecadeoftargetedresearch
AT slavicdurda revisitingophidiomycosissnakefungaldiseaseafteradecadeoftargetedresearch
AT slavikemily revisitingophidiomycosissnakefungaldiseaseafteradecadeoftargetedresearch
AT urquhartjohn revisitingophidiomycosissnakefungaldiseaseafteradecadeoftargetedresearch
AT jardineclaire revisitingophidiomycosissnakefungaldiseaseafteradecadeoftargetedresearch