A Comparison of Disease Risk Analysis Tools for Conservation Translocations

Genetic mixing in conservation translocations increases diversity of a keystone threatened species, Bettongia lesueur

Translocation programmes are increasingly being informed by genetic data to monitor and enhance conservation outcomes for both natural and established populations. These data provide a window into contemporary patterns of genetic diversity, structure and relatedness that can guide managers in how to best source animals for their translocation programmes. The inclusion of historical samples, where possible, strengthens monitoring by allowing assessment of changes in genetic diversity over time and by providing a benchmark for future improvements in diversity via management practices. Here, we used reduced representation sequencing (ddRADseq) data to report on the current genetic health of three remnant and seven translocated boodie (Bettongia lesueur) populations, now extinct on the Australian mainland. In addition, we used exon capture data from seven historical mainland specimens and a subset of contemporary samples to compare pre-decline and current diversity. Both data sets showed the significant impact of population founder source (whether multiple or single) on the genetic diversity of translocated populations. Populations founded by animals from multiple sources showed significantly higher genetic diversity than the natural remnant and single-source translocation populations, and we show that by mixing the most divergent populations, exon capture heterozygosity was restored to levels close to that observed in pre-decline mainland samples. Relatedness estimates were surprisingly low across all contemporary populations and there was limited evidence of inbreeding. Our results show that a strategy of genetic mixing has led to successful conservation outcomes for the species in terms of increasing genetic diversity and provides strong rationale for mixing as a management strategy.

A review of qualitative risk assessment in animal health: Suggestions for best practice

Qualitative risk assessment (QRA) can provide decision support in line with the requirement for an objective, unbiased assessment of disease risk according to the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures of the World Trade Organization. However, in order for a QRA to be objective and consistently applied it is necessary to standardize the approach as much as possible. This review considers how QRAs have historically been used for the benefit of animal health, what problems have been encountered during their progression, and considers best practice for their future use. Four main elements were identified as having been the subject of some proposed standard methodology: (i) the description of risk levels, (ii) combining probabilities, (iii) accounting for trade volume and time period, and (iv) uncertainty. These elements were addressed in different ways but were highlighted as being fundamental to improving the robustness in estimating the risk and conveying the results to the risk manager with minimal ambiguity. In line with this, several tools have been developed which attempt to use mathematical reasoning to incorporate uncertainty and improve the objectivity of the qualitative framework. This represents an important advance in animal health QRA. Overall, animal health QRAs have established their usefulness by providing a tool for rapid risk estimation which can be used to identify important chains of events and critical control points along risk pathways and inform risk management programmes as to whether or not the risk exceeds a decision-making threshold above which action should be taken. Ensuring a robust objective methodology is used and that the reasons for differences in results, such as assumptions and uncertainty are clearly described to the customer with minimal ambiguity is essential to maintain confidence in the QRA process. However, further work needs to be done to determine if one objective uniform methodology should be developed and considered best practice. To this end, a set of best practice guidelines presenting the optimal way to conduct a QRA and regulated by bodies such as the World Organization for Animal Health or the European Food Safety Authority would be beneficial.

Streamlining Disease Risk Analysis for Wildlife Using the Shark Bay Bandicoot as a Model

Disease risk analysis (DRA) is a process for identifying significant disease risks and proposing measures to mitigate those risks. Although numerous methodologies for DRA exist, the IUCN Disease Risk Analysis Manual Jakob-Hoff et al. (World Organisation for Animal Health, Paris, pp 160, 2014) remains the gold standard for wild animal translocations. In some cases, however, constraints of time or resources demand compromises on the ideal methodology, and a cost-benefit assessment is required to determine the best approach. We propose a methodology modified from Jakob-Hoff et al. (World Organisation for Animal Health, Paris, pp 160, 2014) and Sainsbury and Vaughan-Higgins (Conserv Biol 26:442-452, 2012), using translocations of the Shark Bay bandicoot (SBB) (Perameles bougainville) as an example. In this study, 44 hazards were identified and described for Peramelidae species. We used hazard prioritization and "scoping" to develop a shortlist of hazards for detailed risk assessment, which excluded 35 of these hazards from further assessment. This approach enabled timely, efficient and cost-effective completion of the DRA while maintaining transparent evaluation of all disease risks. We developed a disease risk management strategy for SBB based on structured, evidence-based analysis of current information and established biosecurity practices and disease screening recommendations for future translocations. Our approach demonstrates a practical process for DRA and risk mitigation, which delivered management outcomes despite limited resources, variable knowledge of disease epidemiology and uncertain translocation pathways for the target species. Limitations are acknowledged, and further research will aim to objectively test this methodology compared to other available methods.

Wildlife diseases in New Zealand: recent findings and future challenges

Our knowledge of diseases in New Zealand wildlife has expanded rapidly in the last two decades. Much of this is due to a greater awareness of disease as a cause of mortality in some of our highly threatened species or as a limiting factor to the successful captive rearing of intensely managed species such as hihi (Notiomystis cincta), kiwi (Apteryx spp.) and kakapo (Strigops habroptilus). An important factor contributing to the increase of our knowledge has been the development of new diagnostic techniques in the fields of molecular biology and immunohistochemistry, particularly for the diagnosis and epidemiology of viral and protozoan diseases. Although New Zealand remains free of serious exotic viruses there has been much work on understanding the taxonomy and epidemiology of local strains of avipox virus and circoviruses. Bacterial diseases such as salmonellosis, erysipelas and tuberculosis have also been closely investigated in wildlife and opportunist mycotic infections such as aspergillosis remain a major problem in many species. Nutritional diseases such as hyperplastic goitre due to iodine deficiency and metabolic bone disease due to Ca:P imbalance have made significant impacts on some captive reared birds, while lead poisoning is a problem in some localities. The increasing use of wildlife translocations to avoid the extinction of threatened species has highlighted the need for improved methods to assess the disease risks inherent in these operations and other intensive conservation management strategies such as creching young animals. We have also become more aware of the likelihood of inbreeding suppression as populations of many species decrease or pass through a genetic bottleneck. Climate change and habitat loss, however, remain the greatest threats to biodiversity and wildlife health worldwide. Temperature changes will affect our wildlife habitats, alter the distribution of disease vectors and wildlife predators, or directly harm threatened species in vulnerable localities.