Journal of Wildlife Management

Chronic wasting disease prions on deer feeders and wildlife visitation to deer feeding areas

Miranda H. J. Huang 1
Steve Demarais 1
Marc D Schwabenlander 2
Bronson K Strickland 3
Kurt C. VerCauteren 4
William T Mckinley 5
Gage Rowden 2
Corina C. Valencia Tibbitts 2
Sarah C Gresch 2
Stuart S Lichtenberg 2
Tiffany M. Wolf 6
Peter A. Larsen 2
Show full list: 12 authors
1
 
Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Aquaculture Mississippi State University 775 Stone Boulevard, Mississippi State 39762 MS USA
2
 
Department of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine University of Minnesota 301 Vet Science Building, 1988 Fitch Avenue St. Paul 55108 MN USA
3
 
Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Aquaculture, 775 Stone Boulevard Mississippi State University Mississippi State 39762 MS USA
4
 
National Wildlife Research Center, USDA/APHIS/Wildlife Services 4101 Laporte Avenue Fort Collins 80521 CO USA
5
 
Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Parks 1505 Eastover Drive Jackson 39211 MS USA
6
 
Department of Veterinary Population Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine University of Minnesota 1988 Fitch Avenue St. Paul 55108 MN USA
Publication typeJournal Article
Publication date2025-02-10
scimago Q1
SJR0.804
CiteScore4.0
Impact factor1.9
ISSN0022541X, 19372817
Abstract

Eliminating supplemental feeding is a common regulatory action within chronic wasting disease (CWD) management zones. These regulations target the potential for increased animal‐animal contact and environmental contamination with CWD prions. Prions, the causative agent of CWD, have been detected on feeder surfaces in CWD‐positive, captive deer facilities but not among free‐ranging populations, and information on the relative risk of transmission at anthropogenic and natural food sources is limited. In this study, we established and maintained 13 gravity feeders from September 2022 to March 2023 in a CWD zone in northern Mississippi, USA (apparent prevalence ~30%). We set up feeders up in 3 ways: no exclusion (deer feeders, n = 7), exclusion of deer using fencing with holes cut at the ground‐level to permit smaller wildlife to enter (raccoon feeders, n = 3), and environmental control feeders, which were fully fenced and not filled with feed (control feeders, n = 3). We swabbed feeder spouts at setup and at 4 intervals approximately 6 weeks apart to test for prion contamination via real‐time quaking‐induced conversion (RT‐QuIC). We detected prions 12 weeks after setup on all deer and raccoon feeders. We compared relative transmission risk using camera traps at these feeders, 6 agronomic plantings for wildlife forage (i.e., food plots), and 7 oak mast trees. Weekly visitation rate by white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus; hereafter: deer) differed (P = 0.02) among deer feeders (median = 24.5 deer/week, range = 15.6–65.7), food plots (median = 12.7, range = 3.8–24.7), and mast trees (median = 2.0, range = 0.4–5.1). Contact rates between individual deer also differed between site types (P < 0.01): deer feeders (median = 2.1 deer‐to‐deer contacts/week, range = 0–10.1), food plots (median = 0.1, range = 0–4.0), and mast trees (median = 0, range = 0–0.3). Raccoons also visited feeders at greater rates than food plots and mast trees (P < 0.04). Finally, we swabbed 19 feeders in 2 areas where CWD was newly detected, finding prion contamination on swabs from 4 feeders. We show that deer feeders in free‐ranging populations with high CWD prevalence become contaminated with CWD prions quickly, becoming a potential site of exposure of deer to CWD prions. Our results also demonstrate the ability to find evidence of prion contamination on deer feeders, even in areas where CWD is newly detected.

Found 

Are you a researcher?

Create a profile to get free access to personal recommendations for colleagues and new articles.
Share
Cite this
GOST | RIS | BibTex
Found error?