Red pandas are known to be highly susceptible to endoparasites, which can have a prominent impact on the population dynamics of this endangered species. There are very limited published reports on prevalence and risk of parasites in wild populations of red panda, especially localized reports. This study attempts to provide an in-depth insight of the status of endoparasites in red pandas, which is critical for strengthening conservation efforts. A total of 272 fecal samples were collected through systematic sampling across the red panda distribution range in Nepal and coprological examination was completed using standard techniques. It was followed by an estimation of prevalence and mean intensity of parasites, as well as statistical analysis, which was carried out using R statistical software. Parasite prevalence was documented in 90.80% (
The red panda (
Red pandas are known to be highly susceptible to gastrointestinal (GI) parasites (
Studies on gastrointestinal parasites in red panda are particularly scarce in Nepal. Limited localized studies have been done in Rasuwa district (Langtang National Park) (
Based on the previous available species presence data and environmental parameters including 19 bioclimatic variables (11 temperature and eight precipitation metrics) along with altitude, slope, aspect, and land cover, MaxEnt Modeling using MaxEnt version 3.3.3 k was completed to identify potential red panda habitat. Identified potential habitat was overlaid with grids to match the maximum red panda home range recorded in Langtang National Park (
The research approval was granted from the government authorities before the field work was carried out: Department of Forests #2072/73(1220) and Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation: 2072/073Eco237.
A total of 272 fecal samples (unspecified sex) from 21 districts (
GI parasite analysis of fecal samples followed protocol developed and maintained by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Division of Parasitic Diseases and Malaria by US Department of Health and Human Services (
A smear was prepared with 1–2 drops of specimen per slide and warmed at 60 °C until dried and then fixed with absolute methanol for 30 s. The slide was stained with Kinyoun’s carbol fuchsine for one minute. The slide was rinsed briefly with distilled water and drained. Next it was de-stained with acid alcohol for 2 min, afterward rinsed briefly with distilled water and drained. Similarly, it was counter stained with Malachite green for 2 min, rinsed briefly with distilled water and drained. Once again, the slide was warmed at 60 °C for about 5 min until dried and mounted with a cover slip using desired mounting media. The slide was examined 200–300 fields using 40× or higher objectives.
We used photos of different forms: egg and larva, ova, cyst and adult of possible parasites of existing literatures to compare the parasites of red panda scats. The size of the eggs, oocyst, and cyst were measured using an ocular micrometer. Identification of parasitic oocyst, cyst, egg and larva were done on the basis of shape and size along with published literature (
Descriptive analysis was done by estimating the prevalence and mean intensity of parasites. Prevalence was examined by dividing the number of specific samples infected by the total number of infected samples. Whereas, the mean intensity was estimated by dividing the total number of parasites of a particular species by the total number of samples infected with that particular species (
Parasite prevalence was identified in 90.80% (
Parasites name | Number of samples | Prevalence (%) | Mean | SD |
---|---|---|---|---|
227 | 70.06 | 3.45 | 2.88 | |
19 | 5.86 | 5.21 | 1.56 | |
13 | 4.01 | 4.00 | 0.24 | |
1 | 0.31 | 2.00 | 0.12 | |
2 | 0.62 | 2.00 | 0.09 | |
1 | 0.31 | 8.00 | 0.24 | |
24 | 7.41 | 3.33 | 0.89 | |
1 | 0.31 | 6.00 | 0.21 | |
7 | 2.16 | 6.43 | 1.21 | |
4 | 1.23 | 4.75 | 0.51 |
Out of the total infected samples (
Parasitic infestation was recorded throughout the entire red panda range area of Nepal. Out of the eight variables considered for assessing the determinants of infestation, only the distance to settlement displayed significant association when fitted with the quasi-poison regression model (
The best fit model was found to be slightly over dispersed for
Variables | Estimate ( |
Std. error | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
(Intercept) | −9.94E−01 | 6.25E−01 | −1.59 | 0.11302 |
Intercept | −3.754857 | 0.97374 | −3.86 | 0.00012 |
Herding station | −0.000597 | 0.000168 | −3.55 | 0.00039 |
Aspect | 0.013955 | 0.00421 | 3.315 | 0.00092 |
Slope | 0.073975 | 0.027849 | 2.656 | 0.0079 |
Aspect:slope | −0.000319 | 0.000133 | 2.391 | 0.01679 |
(Intercept) | 1.386668 | 0.514031 | 2.698 | 0.00751 |
Settlement | −0.001223 | 0.000414 | −2.96 | 0.00345 |
Slope | −0.04097 | 0.020788 | −1.97 | 0.04995 |
(Intercept) | −13.05 | 4.28 | −3.05 | 0.00257 |
Elevation | 0.002692 | 0.00135 | 1.995 | 0.04729 |
Intercept | 0.1310452 | 0.7191754 | ( |
0.8554100 |
With the representation of 272 samples collected through systematic sampling from the entire red panda range of Nepal, these results are highly representative of the Nepal population. Prevalence of parasites in 90.80% of the examined samples with a very high load of parasites representing three genera and seven species falling under three groups, viz. protozoa, nematodes and cestodes indicates very high transmission within the red panda population. Previous studies on the red panda in Langtang National Park, Rara National Park and Rolpa district in Nepal have also documented the presence of trematode in addition to those three groups, but presence of trematode remained undetected in this study (
Altogether, 18 parasites recorded in former studies remained undetected (
S.N. | GI parasites | Studies detecting presence |
---|---|---|
1 | ||
2 | ||
3 | ||
4 | ||
5 | ||
6 | ||
7 | ||
8 | ||
9 | ||
10 | ||
11 | ||
12 | ||
13 | ||
14 | ||
15 | ||
16 | ||
17 | ||
18 |
The regression model showed a negative association of parasite prevalence with the distance to settlement indicating an anthropogenic source of infestation from associated livestock and pet animals. Prevalence of these parasites have been recorded in yak (
Present study manifested diverse nature of distribution for
Other three nematodes documented in this study were the
Three different genera of protozoans reported during the coprological examination are also very common in livestock which overlaps red panda habitat in the region.
Infestation of
This study reported
One genera (
Animal behavior is the critical factor to be considered while identifying the potential factors influencing parasite transmission (
Direct contact with other individuals is another possible mode of transmission. Although the red panda is a solitary mammal, a male comes in contact with several females during mating season which may be a possible occurrence of transmission through direct contact. The spreading of parasites through infected milk from a mother to her cubs is also possible. Contaminated droppings of a red panda could be the source of infection for other individuals as mostly they defecate on trees where the droppings could remain preserved for several months unless it is washed off by the precipitation. The very interesting behavior of the red panda is licking or nuzzling the urine marks and feces of conspecifics to track their territories which may also be another common mode of parasite transmission (
Direct contact with the contaminated sources e.g., animal droppings, dead animals, and the tree/branch surfaces may also contribute to infection as some larval stage of parasites can directly penetrated through the skin. Ectoparasites like fleas, ticks and mites may also facilitate the transmission through establishing direct contact of parasites with animals.
This study provides an overview of GI parasites infestation in red pandas at the national level and could be used as baseline to assess the status of endoparasite for future works. In general, the parasitic strains in red pandas across their range in Nepal showed very detrimental symptoms. The result of this work has also raised a few questions regarding the prevalence, risk, and implication of endoparasites in red pandas in Nepal. Analysis based on laboratory work limited identification up to generic level for some parasites. A genetic approach should be taken for identifying up to species level influence. This study is also limited to the fecal sample analysis of red pandas. Fecal samples of livestock could not accompany this work which could have revealed better information on host-parasite relationship and mode of transmission. Therefore, incorporation of coprology of co-grazing livestock, and red panda during different seasons is recommended for further study which will provide better insight on the GI status in red pandas as well as livestock and other sympatric species. Furthermore, a thorough ecological study on host-parasite relationship is also critical for better understanding the risk and conservation implication for red pandas. A parasite concern of this degree could critically undermine the heath of the animals. As our findings suggest, livestock herding is a detrimental threat to red panda conservation as they seem to be frequent carriers of GI parasites, and we should manage herding practices in such a manner that the impact could be minimized. Habitat zonation, rotational grazing, proper medication of livestock and dogs, use of toilets in herding sheds and the settlement vicinity to the red panda habitat could be helpful in preventing transmission of zoonotic parasites.
Our genuine appreciation goes to Mr. Ang Phuri Sherpa, Country Director of Red Panda Network whose support and encouragement were instrumental in making this work happen. We are very thankful to Sonam Tashi Lama, Angela Glatston, Brian Williams, Terrance Fleming and Laura Gadziala who provided insights and expertise that greatly assisted to bring the work in this form. Our gratitude also goes to Prakash Kumar Paudel, Suresh Ghimire, Manish Kokh, Chandra Mani Aryal and all the field biologists for their support to materialize this work. Likewise, we are also thankful to Nilam Thakur and Govardhan Joshi for their assistance in laboratory work. Besides, this work would have not been possible without the support from the Ministry of Forest and Soil Conservation, Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation, Department of Forests, Himali Conservation Forum, and Kathmandu Center for Genomics and Research Laboratory.
The authors declare there are no competing interests.
The following information was supplied relating to field study approvals (i.e., approving body and any reference numbers):
The research approval was granted from the government authorities before the field work was carried out: Department of Forests #2072/73 (1220) and Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation: 2072/073Eco237.
The following information was supplied regarding data availability:
The raw data has been uploaded as