A parasitological study of the red fox (vulpes vulpes) with a citizen science approach for describing red foxes on Prince Edward Island, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The red fox (Vulpes vulpes) has been described as the widest distributed member of the Order Carnivora and is capable of inhabiting both natural and human-altered (urban or rural) areas. In the Canadian province of Prince Edward Island (PEI), red foxes are found in natural, rural and urban areas. Since red foxes are found in many areas of PEI, the citizens could benefit from a better understanding of the consequences of living in close proximity with foxes. To accomplish this, studies that encompass all aspects of fox biology are necessary. In the studies featured in this thesis, the main objectives were to survey the parasites infecting the red fox in both urban and rural settings. These studies were done to determine if the urban habitat change has influenced the parasite burden. Additionally, these studies attempted to determine what kind of parasites they are shedding into the urban environment as it can influence exposure to pets and humans.\nThe distribution of red foxes on PEI was an aspect of their ecology that was in need of study. The first chapter in this thesis aimed to determine if crowd-sourced data on red fox sightings could be used to document the presence and characteristics of red foxes in smaller urban environments (Charlottetown and Stratford, PEI). From September 20, 2012 to May 31, 2014, the public was requested to record sightings of red foxes on a website (www.upei.ca/redfox). During the study period, recorded sighting numbers increased every year with a total of 2670 red fox sightings on PEI – 2040 of those sightings were recorded in the Charlottetown/Stratford areas. Foxes were present throughout the Charlottetown/Stratford areas and were sighted in many other areas across PEI. The methodology used in this study was able to portray the annual breeding patterns by showing a significant increase in sighting proportions with a young/juvenile fox during the late spring to late summer months. Low recruitment and retention of participants in months without a media appearance was a challenge this study faced. This study illustrated that citizen science data can be used to document the presence of foxes in urban areas; but, the approach is less effective when trying to document the presence of foxes in rural areas.\nThere have been no previous studies on PEI that address the parasites infecting the urban red fox population. From July 2, 2013 to August 20, 2014, a scat survey in Charlottetown and surrounding areas was completed to establish the species of parasites and prevalence by use of both the ZnSO4 centrifugal fecal flotation and modified Baermann technique. During the study period, a total of 263 red fox fecal samples were collected. A total of 21 parasites were detected - thirteen red fox parasites, two potentially spurious and six spurious parasites were found with individual prevalence ranging from 0.3% to 47.5%. Condition of scat and time of year had significant effects on the number of different parasites and/or prevalence of some parasites (p < 0.05). Both significant spatial and spatial-temporal correlations were found for Alaria sp., anoplocephalid, Aonchotheca putorii, Crenosoma vulpis, Cystoisospora canis, Demodex sp., Eimeria sp., and Monocystis sp. (p < 0.05). From this study, the foxes residing in Charlottetown and Stratford were found to be frequently parasitized and is likely to increase parasite exposure to dogs and humans through environmental contamination.\nPrevious studies that surveyed red fox parasites in rural PEI were only done during the trapping/hunting season (November – January) and were narrowly-focused (i.e. only examined a single parasite) and/or used only the fecal flotation technique. Therefore, to better establish the parasites infecting the red fox in rural areas and estimate their prevalence and intensity, parasite recovery techniques during post mortem of red fox carcasses from different sources (hunters, trappers, road kill) were completed. Between 2012 and 2015, 113 trapped red foxes and 16 urban road-killed foxes from central-eastern PEI were searched for parasites. Intestinal flushes, lung flushes, and fecal analyses were performed on all possible animals. Seven different intestinal parasite species and two respiratory parasite species were found in the red foxes on PEI with infection prevalence ranging from 13.2% to 86.5%. This study represents the first record of Himasthla sp. and Stephanoprora sp. infecting red foxes on PEI. Significant spatial and spatial-temporal clusters were also found for Alaria alata and echinostome flukes. Additionally, the sensitivity of the fecal flotation technique was found to range from 20.6% (Cryptocotyle lingua) to 62.5% (Alaria alata). This study has produced a baseline for parasitic infections in red foxes on PEI for the central and eastern parts of the island. Future survey work should be completed regularly to detect new parasites that have entered into the environment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".