Artificial Attractants: Implications for Disease Management in Deer

ABSTRACTChronic wasting disease (CWD) is a prion disease that infects cervid species by direct and environmental transmission and is invariably fatal. CWD spread can be promoted by the attraction of animals to “hotspots” such as hay bales and grain bags stored in fields and at farm sites. The densit...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kelsey Gritter, Margo Pybus, Mark A. Lewis, Evelyn Merrill
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2025-02-01
Series:Ecology and Evolution
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.71013
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849387607228678144
author Kelsey Gritter
Margo Pybus
Mark A. Lewis
Evelyn Merrill
author_facet Kelsey Gritter
Margo Pybus
Mark A. Lewis
Evelyn Merrill
author_sort Kelsey Gritter
collection DOAJ
description ABSTRACTChronic wasting disease (CWD) is a prion disease that infects cervid species by direct and environmental transmission and is invariably fatal. CWD spread can be promoted by the attraction of animals to “hotspots” such as hay bales and grain bags stored in fields and at farm sites. The density and location of hotspots may impact contact rates. We used an individual‐based movement model of mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) to investigate the effects of density and configuration of hotspots (hereafter artificial attractants, AA) on contact rates at a constant density of 1 deer/km2 during winter. The model tracks when two deer from the same or different groups come into contact under 6 AA densities (0–1 AA/km2) and 6 AA configurations. We compared placing AA randomly versus clustered around farms, and removing them randomly versus biased by proximity to preferred habitat. Overall, the number of unique contacts per individual and the number of unique deer visiting an AA increased, and the number of AAs used by each deer decreased as AA density declined. Selectively removing field attractants near preferred habitat resulted in a larger increase in contacts per deer, with deer contacting more and different individuals, fewer deer using the remaining AA, and fewer visits per AA than random removal. There was a greater increase in contact rates when reducing AA density at farms by randomly removing all AA at a farm compared to randomly removing individual AA across farms. Deer responses to AA removal may not be as straightforward as originally believed. Deer contacts may increase, not decrease, with AA removal because deer are attracted to the remaining AA. Under moderate deer densities, AA removal may require a broad‐scale, “all or nothing” approach to prevent deer from concentrating at remaining AA, but concomitantly lowering deer density needs further assessment.
format Article
id doaj-art-d4c01509b8a2411cb865028620954b48
institution Kabale University
issn 2045-7758
language English
publishDate 2025-02-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Ecology and Evolution
spelling doaj-art-d4c01509b8a2411cb865028620954b482025-08-20T03:51:30ZengWileyEcology and Evolution2045-77582025-02-01152n/an/a10.1002/ece3.71013Artificial Attractants: Implications for Disease Management in DeerKelsey Gritter0Margo Pybus1Mark A. Lewis2Evelyn Merrill3Department of Biological SciencesUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonAlbertaCanadaDepartment of Biological SciencesUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonAlbertaCanadaDepartment of Biological SciencesUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonAlbertaCanadaDepartment of Biological SciencesUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonAlbertaCanadaABSTRACTChronic wasting disease (CWD) is a prion disease that infects cervid species by direct and environmental transmission and is invariably fatal. CWD spread can be promoted by the attraction of animals to “hotspots” such as hay bales and grain bags stored in fields and at farm sites. The density and location of hotspots may impact contact rates. We used an individual‐based movement model of mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) to investigate the effects of density and configuration of hotspots (hereafter artificial attractants, AA) on contact rates at a constant density of 1 deer/km2 during winter. The model tracks when two deer from the same or different groups come into contact under 6 AA densities (0–1 AA/km2) and 6 AA configurations. We compared placing AA randomly versus clustered around farms, and removing them randomly versus biased by proximity to preferred habitat. Overall, the number of unique contacts per individual and the number of unique deer visiting an AA increased, and the number of AAs used by each deer decreased as AA density declined. Selectively removing field attractants near preferred habitat resulted in a larger increase in contacts per deer, with deer contacting more and different individuals, fewer deer using the remaining AA, and fewer visits per AA than random removal. There was a greater increase in contact rates when reducing AA density at farms by randomly removing all AA at a farm compared to randomly removing individual AA across farms. Deer responses to AA removal may not be as straightforward as originally believed. Deer contacts may increase, not decrease, with AA removal because deer are attracted to the remaining AA. Under moderate deer densities, AA removal may require a broad‐scale, “all or nothing” approach to prevent deer from concentrating at remaining AA, but concomitantly lowering deer density needs further assessment.https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.71013attractantschronic wasting diseasecontactsindividual‐based modelmule deerOdocoileus
spellingShingle Kelsey Gritter
Margo Pybus
Mark A. Lewis
Evelyn Merrill
Artificial Attractants: Implications for Disease Management in Deer
Ecology and Evolution
attractants
chronic wasting disease
contacts
individual‐based model
mule deer
Odocoileus
title Artificial Attractants: Implications for Disease Management in Deer
title_full Artificial Attractants: Implications for Disease Management in Deer
title_fullStr Artificial Attractants: Implications for Disease Management in Deer
title_full_unstemmed Artificial Attractants: Implications for Disease Management in Deer
title_short Artificial Attractants: Implications for Disease Management in Deer
title_sort artificial attractants implications for disease management in deer
topic attractants
chronic wasting disease
contacts
individual‐based model
mule deer
Odocoileus
url https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.71013
work_keys_str_mv AT kelseygritter artificialattractantsimplicationsfordiseasemanagementindeer
AT margopybus artificialattractantsimplicationsfordiseasemanagementindeer
AT markalewis artificialattractantsimplicationsfordiseasemanagementindeer
AT evelynmerrill artificialattractantsimplicationsfordiseasemanagementindeer