Wolfe Nathan D, Karesh William B, Kilbourn Annelisa M, Cox-Singh Janet, Bosi Edwin J, Rahman Hasan A, Prosser Adria Tassy, Singh Balbir, Andau Mahedi, Spielman Andrew
Department of Immunology and Infectious Disease, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2002 Summer;2(2):97-103. doi: 10.1089/153036602321131896.
Contemporary human land use patterns have led to changes in orangutan ecology, such as the loss of habitat. One management response to orangutan habitat loss is to relocate orangutans into regions of intact, protected habitat. Young orangutans are also kept as pets and have at times been a valuable commodity in the illegal pet trade. In response to this situation, government authorities have taken law enforcement action by removing these animals from private hands and attempted to rehabilitate and release these orangutans. In relocating free-ranging orangutans, the animals are typically held isolated or with family members for <48 h and released, but during the course of rehabilitation, orangutans often spend some time in captive and semicaptive group settings. Captive/semicaptive groups have a higher density of orangutans than wild populations, and differ in other ways that may influence susceptibility to infectious disease. In order to determine the impact of these ecological settings on malaria, the prevalence of malaria was compared between 31 captive and semicaptive orangutans in a rehabilitation program at the Sepilok Orangutan Rehabilitation Centre and 43 wild orangutans being moved in a translocation project. The prevalence of malaria parasites, as determined by blood smear and Plasmodium genus-specific nested-polymerase chain reaction, was greater in the captive/semicaptive population (29 of 31) than in the wild population (5 of 43) even when accounting for age bias. This discrepancy is discussed in the context of population changes associated with the management of orangutans in captive/semicaptive setting, in particular a 50-fold increase in orangutan population density. The results provide an example of how an ecological change can influence pathogen prevalence.
当代人类的土地利用模式已导致红毛猩猩生态发生变化,例如栖息地丧失。针对红毛猩猩栖息地丧失的一种管理应对措施是将红毛猩猩迁移到完整的、受到保护的栖息地地区。幼年红毛猩猩还被当作宠物饲养,有时在非法宠物贸易中是一种有价值的商品。针对这种情况,政府当局采取了执法行动,从私人手中没收这些动物,并试图对这些红毛猩猩进行康复和放归。在迁移自由放养的红毛猩猩时,这些动物通常被单独关押或与家庭成员关押不到48小时后就被放归,但在康复过程中,红毛猩猩经常会在圈养和半圈养群体环境中度过一段时间。圈养/半圈养群体中的红毛猩猩密度高于野生种群,并且在其他可能影响传染病易感性的方面也有所不同。为了确定这些生态环境对疟疾的影响,对塞皮洛克红毛猩猩康复中心一个康复项目中的31只圈养和半圈养红毛猩猩以及一个迁移项目中正在迁移的43只野生红毛猩猩的疟疾患病率进行了比较。通过血涂片和疟原虫属特异性巢式聚合酶链反应确定,即使考虑到年龄偏差,圈养/半圈养种群(31只中的29只)中的疟原虫患病率也高于野生种群(43只中的5只)。在圈养/半圈养环境中与红毛猩猩管理相关的种群变化背景下,特别是红毛猩猩种群密度增加了50倍的情况下,讨论了这种差异。研究结果提供了一个生态变化如何影响病原体患病率的例子。