Cargando…

The performance of field sampling for parasite detection in a wild passerine

Parasites can impact the behavior of animals and alter the interplay with ecological factors in their environment. Studying the effects that parasites have on animals thus requires accurate estimates of infections in individuals. However, quantifying parasites can be challenging due to several facto...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Abdu, Salamatu, Chimento, Michael, Alarcón‐Nieto, Gustavo, Zúñiga, Daniel, Aplin, Lucy M., Farine, Damien R., Brandl, Hanja B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9398886/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36016817
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.9242
_version_ 1784772415481446400
author Abdu, Salamatu
Chimento, Michael
Alarcón‐Nieto, Gustavo
Zúñiga, Daniel
Aplin, Lucy M.
Farine, Damien R.
Brandl, Hanja B.
author_facet Abdu, Salamatu
Chimento, Michael
Alarcón‐Nieto, Gustavo
Zúñiga, Daniel
Aplin, Lucy M.
Farine, Damien R.
Brandl, Hanja B.
author_sort Abdu, Salamatu
collection PubMed
description Parasites can impact the behavior of animals and alter the interplay with ecological factors in their environment. Studying the effects that parasites have on animals thus requires accurate estimates of infections in individuals. However, quantifying parasites can be challenging due to several factors. Laboratory techniques, physiological fluctuations, methodological constraints, and environmental influences can introduce measurement errors, in particular when screening individuals in the wild. These issues are pervasive in ecological studies where it is common to sample study subjects only once. Such factors should be carefully considered when choosing a sampling strategy, yet presently there is little guidance covering the major sources of error. In this study, we estimate the reliability and sensitivity of different sampling practices at detecting two internal parasites—Serratospiculoides amaculata and Isospora sp.—in a model organism, the great tit Parus major. We combine field and captive sampling to assess whether individual parasite infection status and load can be estimated from single field samples, using different laboratory techniques—McMaster and mini‐FLOTAC. We test whether they vary in their performance, and quantify how sample processing affects parasite detection rates. We found that single field samples had elevated rates of false negatives. By contrast, samples collected from captivity over 24 h were highly reliable (few false negatives) and accurate (repeatable in the intensity of infection). In terms of methods, we found that the McMaster technique provided more repeatable estimates than the mini‐FLOTAC for S. amaculata eggs, and both techniques were largely equally suitable for Isospora oocysts. Our study shows that field samples are likely to be unreliable in accurately detecting the presence of parasites and, in particular, for estimating parasite loads in songbirds. We highlight important considerations for those designing host–parasite studies in captive or wild systems giving guidance that can help select suitable methods, minimize biases, and acknowledge possible limitations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9398886
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93988862022-08-24 The performance of field sampling for parasite detection in a wild passerine Abdu, Salamatu Chimento, Michael Alarcón‐Nieto, Gustavo Zúñiga, Daniel Aplin, Lucy M. Farine, Damien R. Brandl, Hanja B. Ecol Evol Research Articles Parasites can impact the behavior of animals and alter the interplay with ecological factors in their environment. Studying the effects that parasites have on animals thus requires accurate estimates of infections in individuals. However, quantifying parasites can be challenging due to several factors. Laboratory techniques, physiological fluctuations, methodological constraints, and environmental influences can introduce measurement errors, in particular when screening individuals in the wild. These issues are pervasive in ecological studies where it is common to sample study subjects only once. Such factors should be carefully considered when choosing a sampling strategy, yet presently there is little guidance covering the major sources of error. In this study, we estimate the reliability and sensitivity of different sampling practices at detecting two internal parasites—Serratospiculoides amaculata and Isospora sp.—in a model organism, the great tit Parus major. We combine field and captive sampling to assess whether individual parasite infection status and load can be estimated from single field samples, using different laboratory techniques—McMaster and mini‐FLOTAC. We test whether they vary in their performance, and quantify how sample processing affects parasite detection rates. We found that single field samples had elevated rates of false negatives. By contrast, samples collected from captivity over 24 h were highly reliable (few false negatives) and accurate (repeatable in the intensity of infection). In terms of methods, we found that the McMaster technique provided more repeatable estimates than the mini‐FLOTAC for S. amaculata eggs, and both techniques were largely equally suitable for Isospora oocysts. Our study shows that field samples are likely to be unreliable in accurately detecting the presence of parasites and, in particular, for estimating parasite loads in songbirds. We highlight important considerations for those designing host–parasite studies in captive or wild systems giving guidance that can help select suitable methods, minimize biases, and acknowledge possible limitations. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-08-23 /pmc/articles/PMC9398886/ /pubmed/36016817 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.9242 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Abdu, Salamatu
Chimento, Michael
Alarcón‐Nieto, Gustavo
Zúñiga, Daniel
Aplin, Lucy M.
Farine, Damien R.
Brandl, Hanja B.
The performance of field sampling for parasite detection in a wild passerine
title The performance of field sampling for parasite detection in a wild passerine
title_full The performance of field sampling for parasite detection in a wild passerine
title_fullStr The performance of field sampling for parasite detection in a wild passerine
title_full_unstemmed The performance of field sampling for parasite detection in a wild passerine
title_short The performance of field sampling for parasite detection in a wild passerine
title_sort performance of field sampling for parasite detection in a wild passerine
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9398886/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36016817
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.9242
work_keys_str_mv AT abdusalamatu theperformanceoffieldsamplingforparasitedetectioninawildpasserine
AT chimentomichael theperformanceoffieldsamplingforparasitedetectioninawildpasserine
AT alarconnietogustavo theperformanceoffieldsamplingforparasitedetectioninawildpasserine
AT zunigadaniel theperformanceoffieldsamplingforparasitedetectioninawildpasserine
AT aplinlucym theperformanceoffieldsamplingforparasitedetectioninawildpasserine
AT farinedamienr theperformanceoffieldsamplingforparasitedetectioninawildpasserine
AT brandlhanjab theperformanceoffieldsamplingforparasitedetectioninawildpasserine
AT abdusalamatu performanceoffieldsamplingforparasitedetectioninawildpasserine
AT chimentomichael performanceoffieldsamplingforparasitedetectioninawildpasserine
AT alarconnietogustavo performanceoffieldsamplingforparasitedetectioninawildpasserine
AT zunigadaniel performanceoffieldsamplingforparasitedetectioninawildpasserine
AT aplinlucym performanceoffieldsamplingforparasitedetectioninawildpasserine
AT farinedamienr performanceoffieldsamplingforparasitedetectioninawildpasserine
AT brandlhanjab performanceoffieldsamplingforparasitedetectioninawildpasserine