Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-fx4k7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-19T09:41:33.603Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Haemosporida prevalence and diversity are similar in endangered wild whooping cranes (Grus americana) and sympatric sandhill cranes (Grus canadensis)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 December 2016

MIRANDA R. BERTRAM
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Integrative Biosciences, Texas A&M University, 4458 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843, USA
GABRIEL L. HAMER
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Texas A&M University, 2475 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843, USA
BARRY K. HARTUP
Affiliation:
International Crane Foundation, E-11376 Shady Lane Rd., Baraboo, WI 53913, USA Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Wisconsin, 2015 Linden Dr., Madison, WI 53706, USA
KAREN F. SNOWDEN
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Pathobiology, Texas A&M University, 4467 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843, USA
MATTHEW C. MEDEIROS
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Texas A&M University, 2475 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843, USA
SARAH A. HAMER*
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Integrative Biosciences, Texas A&M University, 4458 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843, USA
*
*Corresponding author: Department of Veterinary Integrative Biosciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843-4458, (979) 847-5693, USA. E-mail: shamer@cvm.tamu.edu

Summary

The population growth of endangered whooping cranes (Grus americana) is not consistent with species recovery goals, and the impact of parasite infection on whooping crane populations is largely unknown. Disease ecology and epidemiology research of endangered species is often hindered by limited ability to conduct invasive sampling on the target taxa. Accordingly, we hypothesized that sandhill cranes (Grus canadensis) would be a useful surrogate species to investigate the health impacts of Haemosporida infection in whooping cranes. Our goal was to compare the prevalence and diversity of Haemosporida infection between whooping cranes and sandhill cranes. We detected an overall infection prevalence of 83·6% (n = 61) in whooping cranes and 59·6% (n = 47) and 63·6 (n = 22) in two sympatric sandhill crane populations captured in Texas. Prevalence was significantly lower in allopatric sandhill cranes captured in New Mexico (12·1%, n = 33). Haemoproteus antigonis was the most abundant haemoparasite in cranes, present in 57·4% of whooping cranes and 39·2% of sandhill cranes; Plasmodium and Leucocytozoon were present at significantly lower levels. The high prevalence of Haemosporida in whooping cranes and sympatric sandhill cranes, with shared parasite lineages between the two species, supports sandhill cranes as a surrogate species for understanding health threats to endangered whooping cranes.

Information

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Ranges of the Mid-continent and Rocky Mountain populations of sandhill cranes in North America and AWBP whooping cranes. Ranges shown include breeding, winter and migration routes (Gil-Weir et al.2012; Krapu et al.2011). Locations where sandhill cranes included in this study were harvested are indicated.

Figure 1

Table 1. Prevalence of Haemosporida in AWBP whooping cranes (WHCR) and three populations of sandhill cranes (SACR). Overall prevalences (%) are given for each species, and prevalences for age (juvenile or adult) and sex (male, female or unknown) are given for each population

Figure 2

Table 2. Prevalence of Haemosporida detected by each PCR assay in 163 whooping crane and sandhill crane blood samples

Figure 3

Fig. 2. Cladogram using avian Haemosporida cyt b sequences (399 bp). The tree was created using the maximum-likelihood method with a GTR + G model of evolution. Bootstrap values are based on 1000 replicates, and nodes with <50% support are collapsed. Sequences in bold were generated in this study. NOCA – positive control sample from a northern cardinal. W – AWBP whooping crane, STP – sandhill crane harvested in the Texas, SGC – sandhill crane harvested on the Texas Gulf Coast, SNM – sandhill crane harvested in New Mexico.

Figure 4

Fig. 3. Cladogram using avian Haemosporida coI sequences (370 bp). The tree was created using the maximum-likelihood method with a GTR + G model of evolution. Bootstrap values are based on 1000 replicates, and nodes with <50% support are collapsed. Sequences in bold were generated in this study. NOCA – positive control sample from a northern cardinal. W – AWBP whooping crane, STP – sandhill crane harvested in the Texas, SGC – sandhill crane harvested on the Texas Gulf Coast, SNM – sandhill crane harvested in New Mexico.

Figure 5

Fig. 4. Cladogram using Leucocytozoon cyt b sequences (617 bp). A) Tree showing samples that do not fall in the novel crane Haemosporida clade. B) Tree showing samples that are included in the novel clade. The tree was created using the maximum-likelihood method with a GTR + G model of evolution. Bootstrap values are based on 1000 replicates, and nodes with <50% support are collapsed. Leucocytozoon A and B are positive control samples. Sequences in bold were generated in this study, and Leucocytozoon sequences are underlined. W – AWBP whooping crane, STP – sandhill crane harvested in the Texas, SGC – sandhill crane harvested on the Texas Gulf Coast, SNM – sandhill crane harvested in New Mexico.