Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-npj9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T07:11:14.209Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Is there a cost of parasites to caribou?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2008

J. HUGHES*
Affiliation:
Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Hill of Brathens, Banchory, AberdeenshireAB31 4BW, UK
S. D. ALBON
Affiliation:
Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Hill of Brathens, Banchory, AberdeenshireAB31 4BW, UK
R. J. IRVINE
Affiliation:
Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Hill of Brathens, Banchory, AberdeenshireAB31 4BW, UK
S. WOODIN
Affiliation:
Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Hill of Brathens, Banchory, AberdeenshireAB31 4BW, UK
*
*Corresponding author: Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Zoology Department, University of Oxford, UK. E-mail: joelene.hughes@zoo.ox.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Macroparasites potentially play a significant but often ignored role in the ecology and dynamics of wild ruminant populations. In the Arctic, parasites may impact on host populations by exacerbating the effects of seasonal and limited forage availability on the condition, fecundity and survival of individuals. We studied the effects of abomasal nematode parasites and warble flies, Hypoderma tarandi, on condition and pregnancy of caribou Rangifer tarandus in the Dolphin-Union herd, Nunavut, Canada. By the end of winter, female caribou over 2 years old showed a significant decrease in body weight with increasing nematode burden, and a decrease in back fat depth with increasing warble abundance. These effects were exaggerated in the non-pregnant fraction of the population. High warble larvae burdens were also associated with significantly reduced probability of being pregnant. Our research demonstrates a negative relationship between parasites and caribou condition that may have consequences for their fitness. Additionally, we discuss the possibility that muskox Ovibos moschatus share some parasite species with the caribou and could lead to elevated burdens in the sympatric host. Parasites may have been a contributory factor in a previous winter range-shift of the caribou herd and this may reflect a form of apparent competition between the two ungulate species.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Table 1. Descriptive data for 82 caribou sampled in April 2001, 2002 and 2003

Figure 1

Fig. 1. Abomasal nematodes in the Dolphin-Union Caribou herd. The bars show the mean abundance of nematodes per caribou from the negative binomial distribution model of parasite abundance at each stage (Adults, Lumen Larvae and Mucosal larvae) where the model included a single parameter for sample year and sample sizes varied between groups.

Figure 2

Table 2. Parasite abundance in caribou sampled in April(Median and ranges are given for counts of warbles and abomasal nematodes per caribou. The abundances of larvae and adults found in the lumen for (a) all samples and (b) the subset with additional mucosal larvae counts recorded. The negative binomial dispersion index, k, was estimated by maximum likelihood.)

Figure 3

Fig. 2. (A and B). Correlation between caribou standard weight and abundance of parasites in (A) the lumen (N=64) and (B) the mucosa (N=31). Lines show the predicted weight of pregnant and non-pregnant caribou as estimated by the general linear model and points show caribou weights corrected for differences between years.

Figure 4

Table 3. The relationship of body weight and backfat depth to: (a) lumen parasite abundance and (b) mucosal larvae abundance(The Type 1 test results for sum of squares (SS) or 2∗log likelihood, degrees of freedom (d.f.) and P values are given for significant terms used in the best-fit model (figures in bold). Other terms were added individually to the model, with interactions (denoted by *) added after both first order terms had been included. N indicates the total number of samples available for analysis.)(a)

Figure 5

Table 4. The relationship of body weight and back fat with the abundance of warbles and lumen parasites(The Type 1 test results for sum of squares (SS) or 2∗log likelihood, degrees of freedom (d.f.) and P value are given for significant terms used (figures in bold) in the best-fit model. Other terms were added individually to the model, with interactions (denoted by *) added after both first order terms had been included. N indicates the total number of samples available for analysis with the 2 highest, outlying warble counts removed.)

Figure 6

Fig. 3. (A and B) Relationship between parasites and the probability of being pregnant. The ‘Predicted’ lines show model estimates for the probability of caribou being pregnant at increasing (A) warble abundance and (B) lumen parasite abundance. Predicted values were calculated by centring the model around a mean weight of 62·02 kg, mean back fat depth of 0 mm and either, for (A) a mean lumen parasite count of 4161·4 or (B) a mean warble count of 90·5. Sample estimate probabilities were calculated from model parameters.

Figure 7

Table 5. The probability of being pregnant in relation to the condition, expressed as weight or back fat, and parasite burden of caribou(Significant terms in the model are shown in bold.)

Figure 8

Fig. 4. (A) Counts of strongyle eggs from muskox faeces during 2002 and 2003. Median (geometric mean) eggs per gram of faeces are shown with their ranges. Data come from 3 g samples taken between 28 July and 19 October 2002, and 13 June and 28 August 2003. Days are given in Julian days where July 1=182 Julian days. (B) Species profile of adult male strongylate nematodes found in the abomasums of the caribou (culled in: April, N=22; and October, N=17), and Svalbard reindeer culled in late summer (August–October, N=112) and Late Winter (February–May, N=72).