DOI: 10.5061/dryad.n5tb2rc12
title: Bacterial zoonoses impacts to conservation of wildlife populations: A global synthesis

description: Emerging infectious diseases have significantly increased in recent years;
 approximately 60% of these emerging diseases are of zoonotic origin, and
 of those, around 70% were identified to start with wild animals. To better
 understand the impacts of zoonotic diseases on wildlife, there is a need
 to identify the distribution and impact of zoonotic pathogens in wildlife,
 particular those species with threatened populations. To investigate this
 question, we constructed a zoonotic disease database identifying wildlife
 hosts for each bacterial zoonotic disease and recorded clinical signs of
 disease for each host-pathogen relationship if found. Species of least
 concern were found to have a significantly higher prevalence and richness
 of zoonotic bacterial diseases (n= 0.0608, x2= 5.898, p=0.01516). The
 taxonomic level Order was found to be the best predictor for pathogen
 richness, and the Artiodactyla and Carnivora contain a significantly
 higher pathogen richness than other vertebrate Orders. Species with the
 greatest pathogen richness include the wild boar (Sus scrofa, n=66),
 Northern raccoon (Procyon lotor, n=16) and the red fox (Vulpes vulpes,
 n=41). Our results indicate bacterial zoonoses are not likely to be a
 driving factor of species population declines, and future zoonotic disease
 surveillance efforts should target species in the Artiodactyla and
 Carnivora families. The wild boar (Sus scrofa) in particular may be a good
 candidate for zoonotic disease monitoring due to its high pathogen
 richness, wide range, and large population. Understanding the impacts and
 distribution of bacterial zoonoses in wildlife populations can help in
 planning for future wildlife management efforts, particularly in species
 of conservation concern and wildlife disease monitoring.
description: <strong>Literature Review</strong>
 From July 2020 to December 2022, We performed a literature review
 to identify wildlife hosts and clinical signs of bacterial zoonotic
 disease infection using Web of Science as the primary search engine.
 Supplemental searches were also conducted using PubMed, Google Scholar,
 and books or articles from the University of Missouri libraries. We
 identified zoonotic bacteria species using an updated version of a
 previously published pathogen database. We included pathogens that have
 been reported to cause disease in humans once and those found to cause
 disease only in immunocompromised patients. We excluded pathogen
 infections as a result of deliberate laboratory exposure, and pathogens
 found only in domestic species. In addition, we included recently
 recognized pathogen species from the Center for Diseases Control (CDC),
 Merck Veterinary Manual, and published literature. Two
 separate database searches were conducted, the first to identify the
 wildlife host ranges of each zoonotic bacteria and the second to identify
 clinical signs as a result of zoonotic bacterial infection in each
 individual wildlife species. Titles and abstracts were examined, and
 articles were retained for further review when there was evidence of
 zoonotic bacterial pathogen infection in wildlife but not as a result of
 artificial inoculation. <strong>Wildlife Hosts of
 Zoonotic Bacteria</strong> To identify the
 wildlife hosts for zoonotic bacterial diseases, We used the following
 terms to identify host species: “Pathogen genus name” and “Wildlife” or
 “Pathogen species name” and “Animal.” If pathogen genus and species names
 had changed recently, both names were searched to ensure all available
 information was found. For the purpose of this research, “Wildlife” is
 defined as wild animals but also captive animals that would typically be
 wild such as zoo animals, privately owned animals, or those on nature
 preserves. Wildlife common names and scientific names were standardized
 using the red list of International Union for the Conservation of Nature
 (IUCN). Signs of disease were recorded from the first search if they were
 described in the articles. <strong>Clinical
 Signs</strong> To identify clinical signs for
 each wildlife species associated pathogen, We used the following terms to
 identify signs of disease: “Pathogen species name” and “Species scientific
 name” or “Species common name.” In cases where scientific name has changed
 recently, or there are multiple common names for the species, each
 variation was searched to ensure all available information was identified.
 “Signs” were defined as physical or mental abnormalities wildlife
 experience as a result of bacterial infection (i.e., vomiting, pyrexia,
 lesions, depression, etc.). Signs were included when they were identified
 as a result of the zoonotic pathogen infection. In many cases signs of
 disease and living animals has not been observed, so necropsy and
 histology findings were also included as signs of disease.
 <strong>Exclusion criteria</strong>
 Animals used for agriculture were not included as host species;
 however, clinical signs described in agricultural animals may have been
 used when the zoonotic pathogen had already been identified in wildlife
 populations. Signs of disease were included when they were definitively
 linked to the bacterial pathogen infection. Bacterial species that are
 normally found as a part of an animal’s microbiota such as bacteria of the
 <em>Enterobacteriaceae</em> family were not included unless
 they were linked to an infection or were found in an abnormal location.
 Articles were limited to the English language only. Duplicate articles
 were removed when necessary. For both searches, reference lists of the
 identified studies were also checked for additional studies.
description: # Bacterial Zoonosis Prevalence and Clinical Symptoms This is a zoonotic
 disease database that identified all documented wildlife hosts for each
 zoonotic bacterium including recorded signs of disease species experienced
 associated with the pathogens for mammals, birds and reptiles and recorded
 source. ## Description of the data and file structure Each CSV is labeled
 with the bacteria genus species and contains the class, host general name,
 genus and species name, the full pathogen species name, a list of the
 recorded clinical signs, and the citation for the source in which the
 information was found. N/A values indicate no data was found. ##
 Sharing/Access information Data was derived from the following sources:
 Sources in cs files. ## Code/Software Not Applicable