Geology topics

Meredith C. VanAcker

Publications and source records attributed to Meredith C. VanAcker.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2026

Interacting effects of human presence and landscape modification on birds and mammals

Sustainable human–wildlife coexistence requires a mechanistic understanding of the many ways that humans affect animals. However, progress is hampered by the lack of accessible data measuring the dynamic presence of people. Here, we leverage mobile-device data to disentangle how human presence and landscape modification differentially influence the use of geographic and environmental space for 37 mammal and bird species across the United States. Human presence affected more than 65% of species, with substantial variation across species. For ~60% of species that responded to human activities, the effects were interdependent—animals tended to react more strongly to human presence in less modified habitats. Our results demonstrate that human presence and landscape modification have complex combined effects on wildlife, which need to be considered for effective management.

Science↗

USGS2025

Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection methods for wild Cervidae

Wildlife surveillance programs often use serological data to monitor exposure to pathogens. Diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of a serological assay quantify the true positive and negative rates of the diagnostic assay, respectively. However, an assay’s accuracy can be affected by wild animals’ pathogen exposure history and quality of the sample collected, requiring separate estimates of an assay’s detection ability for wild-sampled animals where an animal’s true disease status is unknown (referred to hereafter as sampling sensitivity and specificity). We assessed the sampling sensitivity and specificity of a Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT) and conventional virus neutralization tests (cVNT) to detect antibodies for ancestral and Omicron B.1.1.529 variants of SARS-CoV-2 in wild white-tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ) and mule deer ( Odocoileus hemionus ). We studied the influence of sample collection method using paired blood samples collected in serum separator tubes and on Nobuto strips from the same animal. Mean estimates of sampling sensitivity and specificity ranged from 0.21–0.95 and 0.94–1.00, respectively, varying by sample collection method, host species, and SARS-CoV-2 variant targeted by the assay. Broadly, sampling sensitivity was estimated to be higher for 1) sera collected in tubes, 2) detecting pre-Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants, and 3) sVNT relative to cVNT assays. Sampling specificity tended to be high for all tests. We augmented our study with SARS-CoV-2 spike protein sequences derived from sampling locations and times coincident with white-tailed deer captures, finding common amino acid mutations relative to the sVNT Omicron antigen variant. The mutations may indicate that the SARS-CoV-2 variants circulating in cervids from 2021 through 2024 may be better adapted to cervid hosts and more closely related to variants that circulated in humans prior to Omicron variants. We conclude our study with an inter-test comparison of sVNT results, revealing that 40 % inhibition is an optimal threshold for test positivity when testing deer sera for responses to Omicron variant B.1.1.529, compared to the 30 % inhibition recommended for ancestral variants.

Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, New York, Pennsylva↗

USGS2019

The expectations and challenges of wildlife disease research in the era of genomics: Forecasting with a horizon scan-like exercise

The outbreak and transmission of disease-causing pathogens are contributing to the unprecedented rate of biodiversity decline. Recent advances in genomics have coalesced into powerful tools to monitor, detect, and reconstruct the role of pathogens impacting wildlife populations. Wildlife researchers are thus uniquely positioned to merge ecological and evolutionary studies with genomic technologies to exploit unprecedented ‘Big Data’ tools in disease research; however, many researchers lack the training and expertise required to use these computationally intensive methodologies. To address this disparity, the inaugural ‘Genomics of Disease in Wildlife’ workshop assembled early to mid-career professionals with expertise across scientific disciplines (e.g., genomics, wildlife biology, veterinary sciences, and conservation management) for training in the application of genomic tools to wildlife disease research. A horizon scanning-like exercise, an activity to identify forthcoming trends and challenges, performed by the workshop participants identified and discussed five themes considered to be the most pressing to the application of genomics in wildlife disease research: i) “Improving Communication”, ii) “Methodological and Analytical Advancements”, iii) “Translation into Practice”, iv) “Integrating Landscape Ecology and Genomics”, and v) “Emerging New Questions”. Wide-ranging solutions from the horizon scan were international in scope, itemized both deficiencies and strengths in wildlife genomic initiatives, promoted the use of genomic technologies to unite wildlife and human disease research, and advocated best practices for optimal use of genomic tools in wildlife disease projects. The results offer a glimpse of the potential revolution in human and wildlife disease research possible through multi-disciplinary collaborations at local, regional, and global scales.

Journal of Heredity↗