데이터셋 상세
미국
Data on Flea Parasitism and Annual Re-encounters of Utah Prairie Dogs at 5 colonies on the Awapa Plateau, Utah, USA, 2013-2016
Data on flea parasitism and annual re-encounters of Utah prairie dogs at 5 colonies on the Awapa Plateau, Utah, USA, June-August 2013-2016. Utah prairie dogs were live-trapped and sampled on 5 colonies along an elevation gradient from 2,645 m to 2,873 m. Upon first capture each year, we anesthetized each prairie dog and fleas on its body and combed the prairie dog as thoroughly as possible for 30 s to collect fleas. We recorded the age (juvenile/adult), sex, and mass (nearest 5 g) of each prairie dog and marked its ears and body with metal tags and passive integrated transponders, respectively, for permanent identification. We indexed each prairie dog's body condition as the ratio between its weight and hind-foot length (nearest 0.10 cm) (weight:foot). Prairie dogs were allowed to recover from anesthesia and released at their trapping locations. Precipitation data for individual prairie dog colonies each year (February through September) are from the Parameter-Elevation Relationships on Independent Slopes Model (Daly et al. 2008; http://www.prism.oregonstate.edu/). The first set of data, Awapa UPD Fleas, includes data on the abundance of fleas on individual Utah prairie dogs. Each line of data is from an individual animal. Data include Utah prairie dog Age and Sex, prairie dog Condition, abundance of Fleas on the prairie dog, precipitation of the prior year (PriorPRISM), and precipitation of the current year (CurrentPRISM). The second set of data, Awapa UPD Reencounter, includes data on annual reencounters of individual Utah prairie dogs. Each line of data is for an individual prairie dog in a given annual interval; an animal must have been captured at the start of an interval to be included in that interval (e.g., a prairie dog captured in 2013 but not captured in 2014 was included in the interval 2013–2014 but was not included in the interval 2014–2015). The response variable (Reencounter) was binomial (e.g., a prairie dog captured in 2013 and 2014 but not in 2015 received a response of 1 for the interval 2013–2014 and a value of 0 for the interval 2014–2015). Predictor variables included: PriorPRISM, CurrentPRISM, prairie dog Age and Sex, prairie dog Condition, and flea parasitism of the prior year (expressed as detection/non-detection of at least 1 flea on a prairie dog in the prior year = FleaPrev). Data also include a information on trapping effort (i.e., number of trap days on a given colony) in the current year. Funding and logistical support were provided by the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS), Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, and Colorado State University. This research was also supported by Grant/Cooperative Agreement Number G14AC00403 from the USGS and Grant number RC-2634, Department of Defense Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program. Fieldwork was completed by the USGS Fort Collins Science Center, and lab work and flea identifications were completed by the USGS National Wildlife Health Center.
데이터 정보
연관 데이터
Data on prairie dog densities, flea abundance, and plague epizootics in Montana and Utah, USA
공공데이터포털
Data on prairie dog densities, flea abundance on prairie dogs, and plague epizootics in Montana and Utah, USA, 2003-2005. Prairie dog species (PDspecies in the data file) included black-tailed prairie dogs (PDs) (BTPD, Cynomys ludovicianus) in north-central Montana, white-tailed PDs (WTPD, Cynomys leucurus) in eastern Utah, and Utah PDs (UPD, Cynomys parvidens) in southwestern Utah. Field research was completed by the U.S. Geological Survey, Fort Collins Science Center, and colleagues. We used summertime visual counts as an index to PD densities (Pddensity in the data file). For each plot, we counted PDs using binoculars and/or spotting scopes from a single location outside the plot that gave the best view of the entire plot and repeated these counts on three (usually consecutive) days. We began counts just after sunrise and continued to conduct repeated systematic scans of the plot until the counts declined to about half the peak number (usually by late morning as PDs went below ground for their typical mid-day break). We converted the counts to density estimates (counts per hectare [ha]).The estimate we used to calculate density was the highest count obtained from a plot for the 3 days within a given year. We analyzed data from colonies experiencing a plague epizootic during this particular study (with an epizootic defined as greater than or equal to 90% decline in PD density). We indexed annual population change (PDpopchgProportion in the data file) by subtracting the count density estimate of the year before a plague epizootic (t1) from the density estimate during an epizootic (t2) for each plot, and dividing that by the density estimate from t1 to summarize population change as a proportionate change. We evaluated the correlation between PD population change and PD density in year t1, because negative plague-effects and the intensity of population decline may be greatest when PD densities are high in year t1 (a potential "density dependent" phenomenon discussed in a wide range of literature on disease ecology). We also evaluated the correlation between PD population change and flea abundance in year t1, because rates of plague transmission and, therefore, PD mortality are expected to increase with increasing flea densities. To assess flea abundance (PDfleas in the data file), we combed live-trapped PDs and counted the number of fleas on each PD. The PDs were live-trapped, individually marked with ear tags, and combed as thoroughly as possible for 30 seconds (s) to collect fleas. Prairie dogs were allowed to recover from anesthesia and released at their trapping locations. For each plot and year, we used the average value of flea counts (defined as flea abundance).
Mean flea counts from prairie dogs and their burrows in Utah (2000), New Mexico (2010-2012), and Montana (2016, 2019)
공공데이터포털
Mean flea counts from prairie dogs and their burrows in Utah (2000), New Mexico (2010-2012), and Montana (2016, 2019). Prairie dogs were live-trapped, anesthetized with isoflurane, and combed thoroughly for 30 or 45 seconds to remove and count fleas. Prairie dogs were allowed to recover from anesthesia and released at their trapping locations. Randomly selected prairie dog burrows were swabbed for fleas using a plumber’s snake to insert a white flannel-cloth as deep as possible into each tunnel; the cable was shook ~30 seconds, and the cloth was removed from the burrow and quickly sealed in a re-sealable zipper storage bag. Fleas were later removed from swabs and counted. Mean flea counts were calculated for each sampling site, and sampling interval, as the total number of fleas collected (from prairie dogs or burrows) divided by the total number of sampling occasions (combings or swabbings). Funding and logistical support were provided by the U.S. Geological Survey; Turner Endangered Species Fund; Turner Enterprises Incorporated; Colorado State University; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge; Shortgrass Steppe Long-Term Ecological Research Project; National Science Foundation; and the U.S. Department of Defense Strategic Environment Research and Development Program.
Mean flea counts from prairie dogs and their burrows in Utah (2000), New Mexico (2010-2012), and Montana (2016, 2019)
공공데이터포털
Mean flea counts from prairie dogs and their burrows in Utah (2000), New Mexico (2010-2012), and Montana (2016, 2019). Prairie dogs were live-trapped, anesthetized with isoflurane, and combed thoroughly for 30 or 45 seconds to remove and count fleas. Prairie dogs were allowed to recover from anesthesia and released at their trapping locations. Randomly selected prairie dog burrows were swabbed for fleas using a plumber’s snake to insert a white flannel-cloth as deep as possible into each tunnel; the cable was shook ~30 seconds, and the cloth was removed from the burrow and quickly sealed in a re-sealable zipper storage bag. Fleas were later removed from swabs and counted. Mean flea counts were calculated for each sampling site, and sampling interval, as the total number of fleas collected (from prairie dogs or burrows) divided by the total number of sampling occasions (combings or swabbings). Funding and logistical support were provided by the U.S. Geological Survey; Turner Endangered Species Fund; Turner Enterprises Incorporated; Colorado State University; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge; Shortgrass Steppe Long-Term Ecological Research Project; National Science Foundation; and the U.S. Department of Defense Strategic Environment Research and Development Program.
Data on the Degree and Duration of Deltamethrin Flea Control on Prairie Dog Colonies in Montana, South Dakota, and Utah, USA
공공데이터포털
Data on the degree and duration of deltamethrin flea control on prairie dog colonies, with 3 prairie dog species at 6 sites across 3 US states. Fleas were combed (COMB) from live-trapped prairie dogs or swabbed (SWAB) from prairie dog burrows on non-treated (Non) sites and nearby sites treated with deltamethrin dust for flea control (Dusted). Each line of data is from an individual prairie dog or burrow. The first set of data, Shortterm BACI, includes data from before-after-control-impact (BACI) experiments comparing the abundance of fleas on prairie dogs at paired non-treated and treated sites in 2 time intervals: before treatments (Before) and 2 to 65 days after treatments (After). The second set of data, Moderate 1 year, includes data on the abundance of fleas on prairie dogs at paired non-treated and treated sites 7 to 13 months after treated sites had been treated with deltamethrin dust. The third set of data, Longterm 2 year, includes data on the abundance of fleas on prairie dogs (COMB) and in burrows (SWAB) at paired non-treated and treated sites 21 to 24 months after treated sites had been treated with deltamethrin. The fourth set of data, Dust days and grams, includes data on the abundance of fleas on prairie dogs at treated sites 7 to 13 months after deltamethrin treatments, and is restricted to sites with known amounts of dust (average grams) infused into prairie dog burrows. Funding and logistical support were provided by U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service; U. S. Geological Survey; U. S. Forest Service; Bureau of Land Management; Denver Zoological Foundation; Utah Division of Wildlife Resources and the Utah Department of Natural Resources Endangered Species Mitigation Fund; Bryce Canyon National Park; Badlands National Park; Dixie National Forest; Bureau of Land Management offices in Utah (Vernal, Cedar City, Richfield, and Torrey), Colorado (Meeker), and Montana (Malta); Colorado State University; Prairie Wildlife Research; National Fish and Wildlife Foundation; World Wildlife Fund; and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Data on the Degree and Duration of Deltamethrin Flea Control on Prairie Dog Colonies in Montana, South Dakota, and Utah, USA
공공데이터포털
Data on the degree and duration of deltamethrin flea control on prairie dog colonies, with 3 prairie dog species at 6 sites across 3 US states. Fleas were combed (COMB) from live-trapped prairie dogs or swabbed (SWAB) from prairie dog burrows on non-treated (Non) sites and nearby sites treated with deltamethrin dust for flea control (Dusted). Each line of data is from an individual prairie dog or burrow. The first set of data, Shortterm BACI, includes data from before-after-control-impact (BACI) experiments comparing the abundance of fleas on prairie dogs at paired non-treated and treated sites in 2 time intervals: before treatments (Before) and 2 to 65 days after treatments (After). The second set of data, Moderate 1 year, includes data on the abundance of fleas on prairie dogs at paired non-treated and treated sites 7 to 13 months after treated sites had been treated with deltamethrin dust. The third set of data, Longterm 2 year, includes data on the abundance of fleas on prairie dogs (COMB) and in burrows (SWAB) at paired non-treated and treated sites 21 to 24 months after treated sites had been treated with deltamethrin. The fourth set of data, Dust days and grams, includes data on the abundance of fleas on prairie dogs at treated sites 7 to 13 months after deltamethrin treatments, and is restricted to sites with known amounts of dust (average grams) infused into prairie dog burrows. Funding and logistical support were provided by U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service; U. S. Geological Survey; U. S. Forest Service; Bureau of Land Management; Denver Zoological Foundation; Utah Division of Wildlife Resources and the Utah Department of Natural Resources Endangered Species Mitigation Fund; Bryce Canyon National Park; Badlands National Park; Dixie National Forest; Bureau of Land Management offices in Utah (Vernal, Cedar City, Richfield, and Torrey), Colorado (Meeker), and Montana (Malta); Colorado State University; Prairie Wildlife Research; National Fish and Wildlife Foundation; World Wildlife Fund; and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Data on finite population change for 3 species of prairie dogs in Montana and Utah, USA, 2000-2005
공공데이터포털
Data on annual population change for prairie dogs in Montana and Utah, USA, 2000-2005. Prairie dog species included black-tailed prairie dogs (PDs) (BTPD, Cynomys ludovicianus) in north-central Montana, white-tailed PDs (WTPD, Cynomys leucurus) in eastern Utah, and Utah PDs (UPD, Cynomys parvidens) in southwestern Utah. Field research was completed by the U.S. Geological Survey, Fort Collins Science Center, and colleagues. Data were collected on paired plots. Each pair included a plot treated annually with deltamethrin dust for flea control and plague mitigation and a plot left untreated as baselines. Paired plots had similar ecological features on the same (split) or nearby (separate) colonies. One plot within each pair was randomly selected for deltamethrin dust treatment. We used summertime visual counts as an index to PD population size.We conducted visual counts annually during June-August, after young PDs were aboveground. We used binoculars and spotting scopes to systematically and repeatedly scan the plots (each plot was 3-9 hectares in area), beginning just after sunrise and continuing until warming temperatures caused a decline in counts. We repeated the procedure for three days, using for analysis the highest count obtained. We counted from the same locations each year, simultaneously counting treated and non-treated plots of each pair. Visual counts were transformed into values of finite population change by dividing the PD count at the end of an annual interval by the count at the beginning of the interval. For example, if year is 2001, then population change was for the interval 2000 to 2001. Primary funding was provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Geological Survey, and Bureau of Land Management, supplemented by the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources and the Utah Department of Natural Resources Endangered Species Mitigation Fund. In-kind support was provided by the Bryce Canyon National Park, Dixie National Forest and BLM offices in Utah (Vernal, Cedar City, Richfield, and Torrey), Colorado (Meeker), and Montana (Malta). R. Reading and B. Miller of the Denver Zoological Foundation provided logistical support for parts of the study.
Data on finite population change for 3 species of prairie dogs in Montana and Utah, USA, 2000-2005
공공데이터포털
Data on annual population change for prairie dogs in Montana and Utah, USA, 2000-2005. Prairie dog species included black-tailed prairie dogs (PDs) (BTPD, Cynomys ludovicianus) in north-central Montana, white-tailed PDs (WTPD, Cynomys leucurus) in eastern Utah, and Utah PDs (UPD, Cynomys parvidens) in southwestern Utah. Field research was completed by the U.S. Geological Survey, Fort Collins Science Center, and colleagues. Data were collected on paired plots. Each pair included a plot treated annually with deltamethrin dust for flea control and plague mitigation and a plot left untreated as baselines. Paired plots had similar ecological features on the same (split) or nearby (separate) colonies. One plot within each pair was randomly selected for deltamethrin dust treatment. We used summertime visual counts as an index to PD population size.We conducted visual counts annually during June-August, after young PDs were aboveground. We used binoculars and spotting scopes to systematically and repeatedly scan the plots (each plot was 3-9 hectares in area), beginning just after sunrise and continuing until warming temperatures caused a decline in counts. We repeated the procedure for three days, using for analysis the highest count obtained. We counted from the same locations each year, simultaneously counting treated and non-treated plots of each pair. Visual counts were transformed into values of finite population change by dividing the PD count at the end of an annual interval by the count at the beginning of the interval. For example, if year is 2001, then population change was for the interval 2000 to 2001. Primary funding was provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Geological Survey, and Bureau of Land Management, supplemented by the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources and the Utah Department of Natural Resources Endangered Species Mitigation Fund. In-kind support was provided by the Bryce Canyon National Park, Dixie National Forest and BLM offices in Utah (Vernal, Cedar City, Richfield, and Torrey), Colorado (Meeker), and Montana (Malta). R. Reading and B. Miller of the Denver Zoological Foundation provided logistical support for parts of the study.
Data on flea control using lufenuron and nitenpyram baits with black-tailed prairie dogs, South Dakota, 2021
공공데이터포털
We collected fleas from a colony of black-tailed prairie dogs on Buffalo Gap National Grassland, South Dakota, 2021. We collected flea data by combing prairie dogs and swabbing their burrows for fleas. Regarding combing, we anesthetized trapped prairie dogs (and their fleas) with isoflurane in induction chambers for processing. We combed each individual with a fine-tooth comb for 30 seconds to remove and count fleas. We released all animals, after they were recovered from anesthesia, at the location where they were captured. Regarding burrow swabbing, we used a plumber’s cable to insert a 20- by 20-centimeter flannel-cloth as deep as possible into burrow tunnels. We then shook the cable for 30 seconds to imitate movement by a host. We removed the cloth from the burrow and counted detected fleas. Total flea counts from individual prairie dogs or burrows were considered an index of flea abundance. Data were collected on four plots treated with lufenuron and nitenpyram "LN-Bit" bait pellets for systemic flea control with prairie dogs. Each LN-Bit contained 75 milligrams lufenuron and 6 milligrams nitenpyram. The LN-Bits were applied at 50 baits/acre on two plots (single treatments) and 100 baits/acre on two plots (two treatments separated by four weeks). The initial treatments were completed on 23 August 2021. The second application (on the latter two plots) was completed on 22 September 2021. Combing flea data were collected 2-21 August 2021 (before treatments) and 27 August–10 September 2021 (after initial treatments). Swabbing flea data were collected 15-17 August 2021 (before treatments) and 15-17 November 2021 (after initial treatments). The first data set (LNBit Combing Data.csv) includes data from captures and combings of individual prairie dogs and lists treatment (TREATMENT = LN50 [50 baits/acre once] or LN100 [100 baits/acre twice]), period of experiment (PERIOD = BEFORE [before treatments] or AFTER [after initial treatments]), and flea abundance (FLEAS). The second data set (LNBit Swabbing Data.csv) includes data from swabbing of individual burrrows and lists treatment (TREATMENT = LN50 [50 baits/acre once] or LN100 [100 baits/acre twice]), period of experiment (PERIOD = BEFORE [before treatments] or AFTER [after initial treatments]), and flea abundance (FLEAS).
Flea abundance and body condition data for black-tailed prairie dogs on sites treated and not treated with “FipBit” fipronil pellets, South Dakota, 2018-2020
공공데이터포털
Flea abundance and body condition data for black-tailed prairie dogs on sites treated and not treated with “FipBit” fipronil pellets. We sampled prairie dogs at Conata Basin, Buffalo Gap National Grassland, and Badlands National Park, South Dakota, USA. We sampled fleas from live-trapped prairie dogs during June–October 2018, May–October 2019, and July-August 2020. Prairie dogs were sampled before and after FipBit treatments. We anesthetized each prairie dog with isoflurane and combed it thoroughly for 30 seconds to dislodge fleas, which fell into a plastic bin. Fleas were counted and allowed to recover from anesthesia and placed back on prairie dogs, to minimize any removal effect. We weighed prairie dogs with spring scales (grams) and measured their right hind feet with measuring tapes (millimeters). We indexed prairie dog body condition as mass:foot ratios. Effects of FipBits on flea abundance and prairie dog condition were assessed during a short-term experiment (2018) and a long-term experiment (2018-2020).
Data on flea larvae survival following exposure to black-tailed prairie dog scat, 2016-2018
공공데이터포털
We collected fecal pellets from six black-tailed prairie dogs in captivity. Prairie dogs were provided free access to non-treated grain (oat groats) or fipronil-treated grain for 5 days. Two prairie dogs received non-treated grain and four prairie dogs received fipronil grain. During each day of the feeding trial, prairie dog fecal pellets were collected, stored in sealable plastic bags, labeled by treatment, and frozen. Fecal pellets from days 2, 3, 4, and 5 were placed in 1.5 milliliter (mL) centrifuge tubes, ground into morsels and powder (fine particles for flea larvae to eat) with a disposable polypropylene pestle, separated as 0.50 milligram (mg) subsamples into pre-labeled centrifuge tubes, and frozen. Oropsylla montana flea larvae were assayed in 6-well microplates (first experiment) or 12-well microplates (second experiment). Small holes were made in the microplate caps, immediately above each well, to allow for air exchange. Each well contained sterilized fine sand substrate (~1/4 to 1/2 of well depth) for larvae locomotion and refuge. During each experiment, wells in some of the test plates received fipronil-laced prairie dog feces and wells in the remaining plates received non-treated feces (0.50 mg/well). The microplates were lidded, loosely covered with aluminum foil, and stored in a dark, cool storage location for 24 hours at ~23 °C and ~85% relative humidity. After 24 hours, the microplates were uncovered and opened. Probes were used to prod each larva for 2 seconds. Live larva responded by coiling and moving away from the prod. Larvae that did not respond within 2 seconds were prodded for 5 additional seconds and considered dead if no movement was observed. A 60x to 120x pocket microscope was used to determine if each larva consumed prairie dog feces (yes = visible meal, colored like prairie dog scat, in the gut; no = no visible meal in the gut). The data set (Fipronil Flea Larvae Survival Data.xlxs) includes data from the two experiments (Experiment = 1 or 2) with four Treatments (non-fipronil grain, no feces consumed by larvae; non-fipronil grain, feces consumed by larvae; fipronil grain, no feces consumed by larvae; fipronil grain, feces consumed by larvae). The data includes the number of larvae tested in each treatment and the number of larvae classified as alive 24 hours after initial exposure to prairie dog feces. Financial and logistical support were provided by U.S. Geological Survey, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Colorado State University. Additional logistical support was provided by Scimetrics Limited Corporation and Genesis Laboratories, Inc.
목록