Search USGSSearch

USGS · 70198103

Effect of climate change on disease spread in wildlife

Abstract

A growing body of evidence indicates that climate change alone, or acting synergistically with current anthropogenic threats, is affecting the health of wild populations of aquatic and terrestrial wildlife. Measurable by-products of climate change include elevated atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases, higher average global temperatures; variations in global precipitation patterns, rising and warming oceans, altered hydrographs of rivers, and increased mid-continental drying during summer. These consequences affect the terrestrial environment through shifts in phenology, vegetation cover, and fire regimes. Warmer ocean temperatures, increased acidification, rise in sea levels, and reduction in sea ice cover are also leading to widespread ecological changes in marine systems. Wildlife populations face a variety of climate-related pressures, such as changes in animal distribution or density, limitation of food resources, and alteration to critical habitats. The increased potential for emergence and resurgence of diseases that are responsive to environmental conditions also has implications for wildlife populations. Shifts in temperature or other climatic factors may directly affect the incidence of disease in wildlife by altering host-pathogen interactions, promoting vector populations or allowing new ranges for vectors, or reducing development times for parasites. A number of examples from both field and laboratory studies have demonstrated a clear link between warming environments and disease spread. Many climate-related environmental changes also influence wildlife health indirectly. For example, increasing temperatures, in combination with shifts in rainfall and humidity, may aggravate current trends for water resource limitation and habitat degradation or destruction and lead to increased crowding of animal populations, thereby promoting transmission opportunities of pathogens within populations or across species. Although it may be difficult to disentangle the influences of other anthropogenic changes from the direct effects of warming, some ecosystems provide especially useful models for studying climate-related disease spread in wildlife. For example, the effects of climate change on parasite dynamics may be easily observed in the Arctic, where environmental changes are occurring rapidly, anthropogenic influences are relatively limited, and biodiversity is generally low. Marine ecosystems are also undergoing rapid rates of change and may be vulnerable to a variety of natural and anthropogenic perturbations. Although many factors affect the health of organisms in ocean environments, temperature has been clearly linked to an increase in disease prevalence among sessile organisms such as corals. In this chapter, we discuss observed and predicted changes to wildlife health resulting from climate change. Our review will not include all aspects of wildlife health, but will instead focus on established or suspected links between climate drivers and disease spread and discuss examples from the current literature. Here, we define disease spread to include: 1) change in geographical or altitudinal distribution of pathogens, parasites, and vectors and the diseases they cause; 2) change in prevalence or severity of disease; and 3) emergence of novel diseases. Additionally, because wildlife species serve as reservoirs for zoonotic diseases that affect both animals and humans, we include select examples of the effect of climate change on the capacity of wildlife to harbor and spread these disease agents.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Erik K. Hofmeister, Caroline R. Van Hemert. 2018. Effect of climate change on disease spread in wildlife. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70198103

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Loma salmonae and related species

Loma salmonae is a microsporidium that infects Pacific salmon and causes a gill inflammatory syndrome known as microsporidial gill disease of salmon. This disease has been mostly associated with netpen-farmed Chinook salmon ( Oncorhynchus tshawytscha ) in British Columbia, Canada. Clinical, diagnostic, pathological aspects of disease, as well as approaches for disease avoidance in salmon aquaculture are discussed. A laboratory infection model in rainbow trout was used to determine life cycle-stages, transmission dynamics, pathophysiology, influence of temperature, and to test therapeutics applicable to aquaculture. This experimental model has been informative on various approaches of disease control, including the development of a promising vaccine. In addition to improving fish health in salmon farming in North America, this L. salmonae model will be applicable to other microsporidial diseases that may be encountered in emerging aquaculture regions.

Book chapter

Cumulative effects of multiple stressors on marine mammals: Elephant seals as a model system

Noise exposure is a potential stressor for free-ranging marine mammals and is often studied in the absence of other environmental factors. Here, a multi-investigator, interdisciplinary effort was undertaken to examine the response of elephant seals to multiple stressors. An integrated physiological and ecological approach was taken, including immunology, stress physiology, toxicology, animal behavior, population biology, and life history theory, to examine the cumulative effects of exposure to multiple stressors in elephant seals. While we measured the response of individual animals, a population response can be predicted by incorporating these results into the long-term data on elephant seal demographics.

Book chapter

When is a parasite a problem?

A parasite’s perceived societal impact depends on the disease it causes and the perception of the affected host species. For instance, doctors and veterinarians have a mission to treat parasites that infect humans or that impact host species that have some utilitarian or aesthetic value for society. Marine scientists have different concerns than doctors. Although the number of parasites that marine scientists should be concerned about may vary, only 13% of parasites and 6% of host–parasite links might be considered “problematic” in a kelp forest food web. With regard to the many threats to marine ecosystems, these percentages suggest that most parasites and infectious diseases are inconsequential. A related issue is the common expectation that parasites and the impacts that they cause are increasing under stress as ocean environments across the globe degrade. Yet, reports of disease have not increased due to human impacts on the marine environment, where the factors that influence parasitism are more complex. Thus, the expectation that marine parasites create problems, and that the diseases they cause are getting worse, is more likely the exception than the rule.

Book chapter