4.8 Article

Anthropogenic disturbance favours generalist over specialist parasites in bird communities: Implications for risk of disease emergence

Journal

ECOLOGY LETTERS
Volume 24, Issue 9, Pages 1859-1868

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ele.13818

Keywords

amplification effect; avian; dilution effect; disease ecology; emerging infectious disease; epidemiology; Haemosporidian; infection dynamics; pathogen; vector-borne disease

Categories

Funding

  1. Science and Engineering Research Board
  2. U.S. Department of Energy [DE-EM0004391]
  3. National Geographic Society

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Research shows that anthropogenic disturbance reduces the prevalence of specialist parasites and increases that of generalist parasites, leading to parasite communities dominated by generalist species.
Niche theory predicts specialists which will be more sensitive to environmental perturbation compared to generalists, a hypothesis receiving broad support in free-living species. Based on their niche breadth, parasites can also be classified as specialists and generalists, with specialists infecting only a few and generalists a diverse array of host species. Here, using avian haemosporidian parasites infecting wild bird populations inhabiting the Western Ghats, India as a model system, we elucidate how climate, habitat and human disturbance affects parasite prevalence both directly and indirectly via their effects on host diversity. Our data demonstrate that anthropogenic disturbance acts to reduce the prevalence of specialist parasite lineages, while increasing that of generalist lineages. Thus, as in free-living species, disturbance favours parasite communities dominated by generalist versus specialist species. Because generalist parasites are more likely to cause emerging infectious diseases, such biotic homogenisation of parasite communities could increase disease emergence risk in the Anthropocene.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available