Search for: All records

Environmental and climatic factors, as well as host demographics and behaviour, significantly influence the exposure of herbivorous mammalian hosts to pathogens such asBacillus anthracis, the causative agent of anthrax. Until the early 1990s in Kruger National Park (KNP), kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros) was the host species most affected by anthrax, with outbreaks occurring predominantly in the dry season, particularly during drought cycles. However, the most affected host species has shifted to impala (Aepyceros melampus), with more frequent anthrax outbreaks during the wet season. This study investigates the roles of environmental variation and other host species in this shift. Temporal trends in environmental variables such as precipitation, soil moisture, temperature, and normalised difference vegetation index (NDVI) were analyzed in relation to anthrax occurrence (presence/ absence and counts). Additionally, correlations between host species’ densities and anthrax mortalities over time were examined. Anthrax cases in 1990 were concentrated in the central and northern regions of KNP(excluding Pafuri), primarily affected kudus; while subsequent mortalities affected mostly impala and were restricted to the far north, in Pafuri. Significant correlations were found between kudu anthrax mortality and a decrease in NDVI, average temperature, SPI-6 and SPI-12 (Standardised Precipitation Index in various time intervals. Conversely, anthrax occurrence in impalas was associated with a decline in SPI-3, and temperature rise, with increased mortality during the rainy season. Elephant density correlated negatively with kudu mortality, but a positive correlation with both impala mortality and impala density. The study concludes that environmental variables and species’ densities may alter the diversity and frequency of hosts exposed toB.anthracis. Climate extremes and alterations therein may exacerbate anthrax severity by modifying species susceptibility and their probability of exposure over time. 

Excluding large native mammals is an inverse test of rewilding. A 25-year exclosure experiment in an African savanna rangeland offers insight into the potentials and pitfalls of the rewilding endeavor as they relate to the native plant community. A broad theme that has emerged from this research is that entire plant communities, as well as individual plants, adjust to the absence of herbivores in ways that can ill-prepare them for the return of these herbivores. Three lines of evidence suggest that these “naïve” individuals, populations, and communities are likely to initially suffer from herbivore rewilding. First, plots protected from wild herbivores for the past 25 years have developed rich diversity of woody plants that are absent from unfenced plots, and presumably would disappear upon rewilding. Second, individuals of the dominant tree in this system, Acacia drepanolobium , greatly reduce their defences in the absence of browsers, and the sudden arrival of these herbivores (in this case, through a temporary fence break), resulted in far greater elephant damage than for their conspecifics in adjacent plots that had been continually exposed to herbivory. Third, the removal of herbivores favoured the most palatable grass species, and a large number of rarer species, which presumably would be at risk from herbivore re-introduction. In summary, the native communities that we observe in defaunated landscapes may be very different from their pre-defaunation states, and we are likely to see some large changes to these plant communities upon rewilding with large herbivores, including potential reductions in plant diversity. Lastly, our experimental manipulation of cattle represents an additional test of the role of livestock in rewilding. Cattle are in many ways ecologically dissimilar to wildlife (in particular their greater densities), but in other ways they may serve as ecological surrogates for wildlife, which could buffer ecosystems from some of the ecological costs of rewilding. More fundamentally, African savannah ecosystems represent a challenge to traditional Western definitions of “wilderness” as ecosystems free of human impacts. We support the suggestion that as we “rewild” our biodiversity landscapes, we redefine “wildness” in the 21 st Century to be inclusive of (low impact, and sometimes traditional) human practices that are compatible with the sustainability of native (and re-introduced) biodiversity.