Abstract

Wild mammals in ex situ captivity experience substantially different environmental conditions compared to free-ranging conspecifics, e.g., in terms of diet, climatic conditions, social factors, movement space, and direct anthropogenic disturbance. Moreover, animals in captivity frequently undergo management interventions such as medical treatments which may influence pathogen pressure. Captivity is known to affect immunological responses in some terrestrial and marine mammals; however, it is unclear whether this can be generalized to other taxa. Furthermore, little is known about how energetically costly life history stages such as lactation influence the immune system in wildlife. We measured expression of components of the constitutive and induced innate immunity and of the adaptive immune system in plains and mountain zebras (Equus quagga and E. zebra), including lactating and non-lactating individuals. As a proxy for general immune function, we screened for lytic equine herpesvirus (EHV) infection, a common and often latent pathogen which is reactivated in response to stress and immune challenge. Both energetically cheap markers of the constitutive innate immunity were lower in captive than in wild zebras, whereas energetically costly markers of the induced innate immunity were more highly expressed in captive zebras. Lactation was associated with higher titers of natural antibodies and lysozyme. Lytic EHV infection was not significantly correlated with any of the measured immune markers. Our results suggest that captivity and lactation may influence immune functions in zebra mares.

Highlights

  • Maintaining captive wildlife populations has become an important conservation strategy for many species (SchulteHostedde and Mastromonaco 2015)

  • We provide reference values of five immune markers in two zebra species, measured in individuals in their natural habitats and in ex situ captivity

  • Our results suggest that both ex situ captivity and lactation affect distinct aspects of the immune system in zebra mares

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Maintaining captive wildlife populations has become an important conservation strategy for many species (SchulteHostedde and Mastromonaco 2015). Ex situ captivity reflects a substantial deviation from the natural environment for many free-ranging wildlife species, with key differences such as diet, climate, social factors, or movement space. (Boyd 1986; Morgan and Tromborg 2007; Schulte-Hostedde and Mastromonaco 2015), all of which may affect immune functions. Anthropogenic interventions such as medical care and prophylaxes may affect pathogen pressure. The multiple differences between ex situ captivity and natural settings could be expected to alter immune functions

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call