<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<item xmlns="http://omeka.org/schemas/omeka-xml/v5" itemId="77" public="1" featured="0" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://omeka.org/schemas/omeka-xml/v5 http://omeka.org/schemas/omeka-xml/v5/omeka-xml-5-0.xsd" uri="https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/items/show/77?output=omeka-xml" accessDate="2026-04-15T01:40:56+00:00">
  <fileContainer>
    <file fileId="111">
      <src>https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/files/original/a58921d8be11b358662f9e441ceaf072.pdf</src>
      <authentication>e3b30eb1b85628e19f87757987687d68</authentication>
      <elementSetContainer>
        <elementSet elementSetId="4">
          <name>PDF Text</name>
          <description/>
          <elementContainer>
            <element elementId="92">
              <name>Text</name>
              <description/>
              <elementTextContainer>
                <elementText elementTextId="1133">
                  <text>The research in this publication was partially or fully funded by Colorado Parks and Wildlife.

Dan Prenzlow, Director, Colorado Parks and Wildlife • Parks and Wildlife Commission: Marvin McDaniel, Chair • Carrie Besnette Hauser, Vice-Chair
Marie Haskett, Secretary • Taishya Adams • Betsy Blecha • Charles Garcia • Dallas May • Duke Phillips, IV • Luke B. Schafer • James Jay Tutchton • Eden Vardy

�Three Pathogens in Sympatric Populations of Pumas,
Bobcats, and Domestic Cats: Implications for Infectious
Disease Transmission
Sarah N. Bevins1*, Scott Carver2, Erin E. Boydston3, Lisa M. Lyren3, Mat Alldredge4, Kenneth A. Logan5,
Seth P. D. Riley6, Robert N. Fisher10, T. Winston Vickers7, Walter Boyce7, Mo Salman8, Michael R. Lappin8,
Kevin R. Crooks9, Sue VandeWoude2
1 USDA National Wildlife Disease Program, Fort Collins, Colorado, United States of America, 2 Department of Microbiology, Immunology, and Pathology, Colorado State
University, Fort Collins, Colorado, United States of America, 3 U.S. Geological Survey, Western Ecological Research Center, Thousand Oaks, California, United States of America,
4 Colorado Parks and Wildlife, Fort Collins, Colorado, United States of America, 5 Colorado Parks and Wildlife, Montrose, Colorado, United States of America, 6 National Park
Service, Thousand Oaks, California, United States of America, 7 Wildlife Health Center, University of California Davis, Davis, California, United States of America, 8 Department
of Clinical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, United States of America, 9 Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology, Colorado State
University, Fort Collins, Colorado, United States of America, 10 U.S. Geological Survey, Western Ecological Research Center, San Diego, California, United States of America

Abstract
Anthropogenic landscape change can lead to increased opportunities for pathogen transmission between domestic and
non-domestic animals. Pumas, bobcats, and domestic cats are sympatric in many areas of North America and share many
of the same pathogens, some of which are zoonotic. We analyzed bobcat, puma, and feral domestic cat samples
collected from targeted geographic areas. We examined exposure to three pathogens that are taxonomically diverse
(bacterial, protozoal, viral), that incorporate multiple transmission strategies (vector-borne, environmental exposure/
ingestion, and direct contact), and that vary in species-specificity. Bartonella spp., Feline Immunodeficiency Virus (FIV),
and Toxoplasma gondii IgG were detected in all three species with mean respective prevalence as follows: puma 16%,
41% and 75%; bobcat 31%, 22% and 43%; domestic cat 45%, 10% and 1%. Bartonella spp. were highly prevalent among
domestic cats in Southern California compared to other cohort groups. Feline Immunodeficiency Virus exposure was
primarily associated with species and age, and was not influenced by geographic location. Pumas were more likely to be
infected with FIV than bobcats, with domestic cats having the lowest infection rate. Toxoplasma gondii seroprevalence
was high in both pumas and bobcats across all sites; in contrast, few domestic cats were seropositive, despite the fact
that feral, free ranging domestic cats were targeted in this study. Interestingly, a directly transmitted species-specific
disease (FIV) was not associated with geographic location, while exposure to indirectly transmitted diseases – vectorborne for Bartonella spp. and ingestion of oocysts via infected prey or environmental exposure for T. gondii – varied
significantly by site. Pathogens transmitted by direct contact may be more dependent upon individual behaviors and
intra-specific encounters. Future studies will integrate host density, as well as landscape features, to better understand
the mechanisms driving disease exposure and to predict zones of cross-species pathogen transmission among wild and
domestic felids.
Citation: Bevins SN, Carver S, Boydston EE, Lyren LM, Alldredge M, et al. (2012) Three Pathogens in Sympatric Populations of Pumas, Bobcats, and Domestic Cats:
Implications for Infectious Disease Transmission. PLoS ONE 7(2): e31403. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0031403
Editor: Justin David Brown, University of Georgia, United States of America
Received October 21, 2011; Accepted January 9, 2012; Published February 8, 2012
This is an open-access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for
any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.
Funding: This study was supported by NSF Ecology of Infectious Disease research program (NSF EF-0723676). The funders had no role in study design, data
collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
* E-mail: bevins@rams.colostate.edu

potentially help bridge the zoonotic infection gap that previously
existed between humans and wildlife [6].
In an attempt to better understand exposure to common
pathogens in overlapping populations of wild and domestic
animals, we examined exposure to three pathogens (two of which
are zoonotic), representing different transmission modes, in three
felid species: pumas (Puma concolor), bobcats (Lynx rufus), and
domestic cats (Felis domesticus). These three species are sympatric in
our study sites, especially along urban edges, and are susceptible to
many of the same diseases, several of which can be transmitted
both within and between species. In addition, bobcats and pumas
vary in degree of contact with domestic cats, as well as in home

Introduction
The effects of infectious diseases on human health have long
been appreciated and their impacts on wildlife, including
threatened and endangered species, are increasingly recognized
[1,2]. Zoonotic diseases are a particular concern for both human
and wildlife populations, and they have been emerging worldwide
with increasing frequency [3]. Disease emergence can be
associated with multiple factors, but anthropogenic landscape
change, often accompanied by habitat fragmentation, has played a
role in several emergence events [4,5]. In some cases, the presence
of domestic animals in and around urban areas could also
PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org

1

February 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 2 | e31403

�Pathogen Exposure in Three Sympatric Felid Species

range and resource requirements [7,8,9,10]. Previous research
suggested that bobcats are more likely than pumas to persist in
fragmented urban habitats [11], and would be more likely to come
into contact with domestic cats. These differences allow an
examination of exposure to our three target pathogens, Bartonella
spp., Feline Immunodeficiency Virus (FIV), and Toxoplasma gondii,
across a broad range of factors. This study design allows insight
into felid infectious disease transmission characteristics by using

basic seroprevalence analysis on an unprecedented scale (see
Figure 1).
The fundamental ecology of the three pathogens evaluated is
relatively well known. Bartonella spp. are vector-borne bacteria
known to be transmitted by Ctenocephalides felis fleas, although ticks
and other arthropods have also been implicated as vectors [12,13].
Bartonella henselae, B. clarridgeiae, and B. koehlerae commonly infect
domestic cats, but infection in non-domestic felids has not been

Figure 1. Capture locations of puma, bobcat, and domestic cat, in relation to urbanized areas, in the different study areas: (a)
Colorado Western Slope, (b) Colorado Front Range, (c) Ventura County California, (d) Orange County California, and (e) Riverside/
San Diego Counties, California. Impervious surface refers to artificial materials found in urban areas (asphalt, concrete, etc.) and highly
compacted soils and is an indicator of urban development intensity.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0031403.g001

PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org

2

February 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 2 | e31403

�Pathogen Exposure in Three Sympatric Felid Species

encysts in multiple tissues, including the muscles and central
nervous system of immunocompetent cats. In domestic cats, the
tissue phase of infection is believed to persist for the life of the host
[33]. It is unknown whether domestic cats shed oocysts more than
once after natural infections; however, repeated oocyst shedding
has been documented in some seropositive, experimentally
infected cats after repeated exposure, during coinfection with
Isospora felis, and under extreme immunosuppression.
In this study we utilized a unique dataset of pathogen exposure
among domestic and non-domestic felids across multiple geographic locations in California and Colorado (Figure 1). The three
different pathogens evaluated in this study represent a broad range
of taxonomic groups (viral, protozoal, bacterial) and diverse
transmission mechanisms (direct contact, environmental/ingestion, vector-borne; Table 1). We evaluated how species, age and
geographic location predicted seroprevalence. Comparison of
pathogens also provides insight into routes by which pathogens
can invade and move within and between species. Accordingly, a
priori hypotheses based on modes of transmission, differ in their
predictions for each pathogen, host species and site. Bartonella spp.
seroprevalence is hypothesized to be more common in areas with
heightened vector activity (i.e. moist and warm climates). Feline
Immunodeficiency Virus strains are primarily species-specific
[18,20] and so it is hypothesized that seroprevalence will differ
among felid species, reflecting species-specific densities and contact
rates. Since FIV is spread through direct contact, especially
aggressive interactions [34,35], it is also likely to be more common
in males. Toxoplasma gondii is ubiquitous in the environment and is
often transmitted through consumption of infected prey
[27,28,29]. Therefore, different locations, species, and sexes are
hypothesized to similar exposure levels. Age is believed to be a
factor related to exposure status for all three pathogens, with older
animals more likely to have experienced infection because of
increased exposure risk over time.

extensively characterized [14,15]. Although domestic cats may not
generally display clinical signs, even when bacteremic, human
infection can cause serious disease including bacillary angiomatosis
and peliosis (‘‘cat scratch disease’’). Domestic cats can influence
human exposure rates by carrying C. felis into the home
environment and by serving as a source of bacteria for C. felis to
acquire and transmit infection to humans [15,16]; however, the
effect of infection on wild felid and feral cat health is thought to be
limited [17].
Feline Immunodeficiency Virus is an enveloped RNA retrovirus
and the feline analogue to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV).
Each felid species is typically infected with a unique monophyletic
FIV strain that is highly divergent from FIVs found in other felid
species [18], supporting the hypothesis that FIV strains do not
readily cross felid species boundaries. While viral genetic analyses
have demonstrated that the vast majority of infections occur as a
result of intra-species transmission, inter-species transmission has
been documented between bobcats and pumas in California and
Florida and in a small number of captive settings [18,19]. Infection
persists throughout the lifetime of the animal [20]. Infected
domestic cats exhibit immunosuppression and opportunistic
infections during advanced stages of the disease (generally after
many years of infection). Clinical disease in non-domestic felids
infected with FIV is still debated and likely is present only after
several years of infection [21,22,23,24,25]. Transmission is
believed to primarily occur via direct contact, especially during
aggressive interactions and mating [20]. Feline Immunodeficiency
Virus is significantly divergent from HIV, and zoonotic transmission of FIV to people has not been recorded [26].
Toxoplasma gondii is a ubiquitous protozoan parasite whose
complex life-cycle culminates in passage of oocysts in feces of
felids, the only known definitive hosts. The oocysts sporulate and
become infectious within one to three days and can persist in soil
and water for months. Oocyst ingestion is a common route of
transmission for intermediate hosts that can include birds and
mammals [27,28] and while cats can be infected by ingestion of
sporulated oocysts, it is believed that felids are most commonly
infected by consuming infected prey that harbor the organism in
muscle and other tissues [29]. Most immunocompetent felids do
not suffer fitness effects from T. gondii infection; however, T. gondii
is a zoonotic pathogen and serious complications can arise when
vertical transmission occurs in humans during pregnancy [30] or
when persons are immunosuppressed from disease or chemotherapy. Domesticated herbivores are routinely exposed to T. gondii via
presumed ingestion of oocysts that contaminate the environment;
as a result, a significant percentage of the meat supply contains
infective T. gondii oocyts [30]. Recent research has also implicated
T. gondii infection as a factor in declining sea otter populations on
the western coast of the U.S. [31].
For the purposes of this study, exposure to each pathogen was
estimated by measuring serum antibodies using previously
validated assays (Table 1) and although antibody presence in
serum does not always correlate with active infection or clinical
disease, all three pathogens in this study have some element of
chronic infections.
Because FIV infection is known to persist for the life of the
animal, seropositivity would typically correlate with ongoing
infection [20]. Similarly, Bartonella spp. infections are generally
chronic, though negative blood cultures can be obtained from
seropositive cats, suggesting either intermittent bacteremia or
natural clearance of the infection [32]. Primary T. gondii in cats
results in a brief period of oocyst shedding (enteroepithelial cycle)
in feces. Systemic infection occurs concurrently, which ultimately
leads to a chronic tissue phase of infection in which the protozoan
PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org

Results
Seroprevalence
Average seroprevalence revealed general trends in pathogen
exposure both within and across felid species and locations
(Figure 2). Bartonella spp. seroprevalence varied considerably, but
in almost all cases, Bartonella spp. seroprevalence was higher in
California than in Colorado (Figure 2). For domestic cats in
California, Bartonella sp. seroprevalence positively reflected proximity of sampling locations to large urban areas. Domestic cats
sampled in Orange County, CA and Ventura County, CA,
directly south and north, respectively, of the major metropolitan
area of Los Angeles, had the highest Bartonella spp. seroprevalence
rates of all locations and species (Figure 1, Figure 2). Feline
Immunodeficiency Virus seroprevalence was higher in nondomestic felids compared to domestic felids. Toxoplasma gondii
IgM seroprevalence (indicative of recent infection) was low in all
species and locations, whereas T. gondii IgG seroprevalence was
higher in non-domestic felids compared to domestic felids
(Figure 2).
The most common pathogen co-occurrence was identified in
pumas infected with both T. gondii and FIV; this condition was
much less common in domestic cats (Figure 3). Bobcats had the
highest occurrence of having been exposed to both T. gondii and
Bartonella spp., although puma T. gondii and Bartonella spp. exposure
levels were similar, while domestic cat levels were much lower
(Figure 3). Interestingly, dual Bartonella spp. and FIV exposure was
relatively rare in the non-domestic species, but were the most
common co-occurring pathogen exposures recorded in domestic
3

February 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 2 | e31403

�Pathogen Exposure in Three Sympatric Felid Species

Table 1. Comparison of the three pathogens under surveillance.

Pathogen

Class

Transmission

Clinical symptoms

Assay

Bartonella spp.

Bacteria

Vector-borne

Often minor, but fever, lethargy,
uveitis, urinary tract disease, and
neurological disease can occur,
especially with chronic infections

Bartonella spp. ELISA
(Lappin et al. 2008)

Feline Immundeficiency Virus

Lentivirus

Direct contact

Immunosuppression after multiple
years of infection or no clinical signs

FIV Western Blot
(Franklin et al. 2007)

Toxoplasma gondii

Protozoan

Ingestion of intermediate
host or oocysts from
environment

Limited symptoms in healthy cats

Toxoplasma gondii ELISA for
both IgM and IgG antibodies
(Vollaire et al. 2005)

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0031403.t001

cats (Figure 3). Only 3.5% of bobcats (95% CI 1.5–6.8), 0% of
domestic cats (95% CI 0.0–1.4), and 4.3% (95% CI 1.7–8.7) of
pumas had evidence of exposure to all three pathogens (Figure 3).

(Figure 2). Pumas and bobcats had substantially higher exposure
rates to T. gondii IgG compared to domestic cats (Table 3),
generating extremely large odds ratios because of the low domestic
cat seroprevalence. Additionally, for pumas, the odds of being
seropositive were 10 times as large as the odds for a bobcat to be
seropositive, with seroprevalence in some areas approaching 100%
(Figure 2, Table 3).

Association with specific variables
Age, location, and species were associated with Bartonella spp.
IgG antibody presence (Table 2, Nagelkerke pseudo-R2 = 0.22).
Sex was also included in another model with slightly less support
(Table 2). Odds ratios for the age effect revealed that the odds of
adult animals being seropositive were 1.6 times as large than the
odds of young animals being seropositive, although adjusted 95%
confidence intervals (CI) showed this to be a borderline effect
(Table 3). Domestic cats were more likely to be seropositive when
compared to both pumas and bobcats, while bobcats and pumas
had similar exposure rates (Table 3). Overall, the three California
locations had substantially and consistently higher Bartonella spp.
seroprevalence rates when compared to Colorado locations
(Table 3). This pattern was consistent for domestic cats and
puma, but not for bobcats (Figure 2). Overall, the similar
seroprevalence of all three California locations to each other, in
concert with the two Colorado locations having similar seroprevalence rates, underscores the association of Bartonella spp. exposure
to broad-scale geographic location. In addition, Bartonella spp. was
highest at the two most urban study locations, Orange County,
CA and Ventura County, CA, particularly for domestic cats
(Figure 2, Table 3).
Feline Immunodeficiency Virus infection models (Table 2,
Nagelkerke pseudo-R2 = 0.18) consisted of age, sex, and species. As
hypothesized, older animals of all species were more likely to be
infected and males were 1.6 times more than the odds of females to
be infected with FIV, although 95% CI showed this effect to be
subtle (Table 3). Domestic cats had consistently lower prevalence
rates compared to the non-domestic species (Figure 2, Table 3);
the odds of being FIV positive for pumas were 8 times as large as
the odds of domestic cats being FIV positive (Table 3). Contrary to
Bartonella spp., FIV infection was not associated with location,
indicating that broad-scale geographic location does not explain
differences in FIV prevalence.
Prevalence of T. gondii IgG was predicted by age, location, and
species (Table 2, Nagelkerke pseudo-R2 = 0.63). Again, as
hypothesized, older adult animals were more likely to have been
exposed to T. gondii compared to younger animals (Table 3).
Geographic seroprevalence of T. gondii antibodies was not as
consistent across locations as Bartonella spp. exposure. In Colorado,
T. gondii seroprevalence was higher in the rural Western Slope
location compared to the urban Front Range location (Table 3). In
California locations, odds ratios and 95% CI for T. gondii exposure
often overlapped (Table 3), suggesting similar exposure rates
PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org

Discussion
The fundamentals of zoonotic disease ecology are often poorly
understood despite the fact that they can have serious public
health consequences and are emerging with alarming frequency
[3,36]. In addition, threatened species, as well as overall
biodiversity, can be negatively impacted by disease [1,2,37,38].
This study incorporated data collected over a ten year period on
791 pumas, bobcats, and domestic cats, sampled across 5 study
areas that varied in both ecosystem characteristics and degree of
urbanization (Figure 1). Data provide new and unanticipated
findings about the distribution of three pathogens capable of
infecting and being transmitted among three felid species whose
ranges overlap, particularly along urban edges. This study
revealed specific associations between variables of interest and
exposure to pathogens, and found that transmission route was
consistently associated with the variables driving exposure. Results
have implications for the routes in which emerging or invading
pathogens could move within and between these species.
Bartonella spp. exposure, as predicted, was generally higher in
California locations when compared to Colorado locations. The
initial prediction was based on the known association between C.
felis and Bartonella spp. known to infect cats, coupled with data on
the relationship between flea distributions and climate [39].
Potential arthropod vectors occur in higher numbers in regions
with warmer temperatures and higher humidity[39] and these
climate differences may drive the higher exposure levels seen in
California felids. Domestic cats in California had substantially
higher Bartonella spp. exposure than non-domestic cats which could
be related to high domestic cat densities in urban areas, leading to
locally amplified flea populations and increased transmission
opportunities. Published densities of domestic cats adjacent to our
Ventura County site are much greater (2–3 orders of magnitude)
than non-domestic cats [8,11,40,41,42], a situation that is
potentially similar in other urban sites as well. Previous research
has demonstrated that Bartonella seroprevalence in domestic cats in
the Los Angeles region is even higher than predicted based on flea
prevalence estimates [39], and while flea and host species richness
is higher in non-urban areas, flea infestation was higher in urban/
disturbed sites with low vector richness [43]. In support of these
4

February 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 2 | e31403

�Pathogen Exposure in Three Sympatric Felid Species

Figure 2. Seroprevalence, with bars representing 95% confidence intervals, of Bartonella spp., FIV, and T. gondii IgG for domestic
cats, bobcats, and pumas at all study locations (FR = Front Range, CO; WS = Western Slope, CO; OC = Orange County, CA; SDRC =
San Diego/Riverside Counties, CA; VC = Ventura County, CA). Sample sizes are listed above columns.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0031403.g002

PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org

5

February 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 2 | e31403

�Pathogen Exposure in Three Sympatric Felid Species

between conspecifics. Despite both pathogens having similar
predictors in the final models, the overall seroprevalence patterns
differed. Pumas had higher T. gondii seroprevalence across all
regions compared to bobcats, suggesting pumas have increased
exposure to the pathogen. This could be reflective of factors
including: (1) larger home range and spatial scales of pumas,
resulting in increased exposures; (2) a larger dietary intake,
resulting in a greater opportunity for ingestion of prey species with
encysted toxoplasmosis intermediate forms; (3) a diet that consists
of prey species with higher T. gondii exposure; or, (4) increased
susceptibility of pumas to T. gondii infection. Dual exposure to both
T. gondii and FIV was substantially higher in pumas compared to
both bobcats and domestic cats. This is likely simply related to
both T. gondii and FIV being independently common and so they
are more likely to co-occur, but is also possible that there may be
an interaction between the two pathogens that increases
opportunities for infection, or that some aspects of puma behavior
are ‘‘risky,’’ leading to increased exposure to both pathogens.
Domestic cats, despite the attention they generate as a source of
T. gondii infections in households, had extremely low seroprevalence overall to this parasite. This is supported by data from
several countries that show human exposure to T. gondii is often
related to the meat supply and meat consumption, rather than
exposure to domestic cats [45], and is likely reflective of the limited
ingestion of intermediate host species around urban areas by
domestic cats versus their free-ranging relatives. It is possible that
stray and/or feral domestic cat populations consisted of disproportionately younger animals, and that this contributed to the
lower than expected T. gondii seroprevalence reported here
[46,47]. The higher seroprevalence in non-domestic felids suggests
that T. gondii could represent a scenario where disease exposure is
higher in undeveloped areas and along an urban edge versus
developed, urban areas. A recent study modeling T. gondii
transmission via environmental contact or intermediate host
suggested that urban transmission was more dependent upon
environmental exposure whereas suburban/rural spread was more
dependent upon ingestion of intermediate hosts [48]. A similar
model of Baylisascaris procyonis transmission in raccoons (Procyon
lotor) also predicted differences in intermediate host exposures in
urban versus rural landscapes [49]. The highest T. gondii
seroprevalence levels seen in this study were in non-domestic
felids from rural study areas, although substantial exposure was
also seen in urban Orange County, CA pumas and bobcats. Our
data would therefore support a robust means of sylvatic infection
(resulting in high infection rates of pumas and bobcats outside of
urban centers) with a less efficient exposure in urban settings (as
reflected by low exposure in feral domestic cats). The broad spatial
scales examined confound a detailed analysis of pathogen exposure
in relation to urbanization and warrant further study on finer
spatial scales.

Figure 3. Coinfection rates, with bars representing 95%
confidence intervals, of FIV/T. gondii IgG coinfection, T. gondii
IgG/Bartonella spp. coinfection, and FIV/Bartonella spp. coinfection, for bobcats (n = 228), pumas (n = 162), and domestic cats
(n = 265).
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0031403.g003

previous findings, we observed higher Bartonella spp. seroprevalence among domestic cat populations nearer large urban centers
in California (i.e. Orange County, CA and Ventura County, CA).
Despite vector research that supports the felid seroprevalence
patterns reported here, flea data was not collected during the
course of this study. Future flea collections, along with sequencing
of bacterial isolates from fleas and feline blood, are needed to
definitively relate host seroprevalence to differences in vector
abundance and distribution. Additional vectors, such as ticks,
should be examined as well based on evidence that other vectors
could be involved in Bartonella spp. transmission [12,13]. These
more detailed data might also help reveal why bobcats from the
rural Colorado Western Slope had substantially higher Bartonella
spp. exposure when compared to sympatric pumas and domestic
cats.
Toxoplasma gondii has received substantial attention because it is a
ubiquitous pathogen with significant zoonotic potential [31,44].
Studies have primarily focused on human infection and disease,
but links to marine mammal population declines have also been
documented [31]. The primary factors associated with T. gondii
seroprevalence in this study were the same factors associated with
Bartonella spp. exposure: age, location, and species. The similarity
between the models for the two pathogens may be related to the
fact that exposure for both is typically indirect (i.e., vector
transmission for Bartonella and ingestion of infected prey or
environmental contact for T. gondii) rather than direct contact

Table 2. Best supported models (DAICc ,2) of seroprevalence for the three pathogens.

Pathogen

Best-Supported Models

K

22 Log Likeli-hood

AICc

D

w

Bartonella spp.

age+location+species

8

702.35

718.58

0

0.59

age+location+sex+species

9

702.18

720.18

1.6

0.26

age+sex+species

5

592.37

602.47

0

0.68

age+species

4

595.93

603.99

1.52

0.32

Feline Immunodeficiency Virus

Toxoplasma gondii IgG

age+location+species

8

451.44

467.67

0

0.73

age +location+ sex +species

9

451.39

469.68

2.01

0.27

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0031403.t002

PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org

6

February 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 2 | e31403

�Pathogen Exposure in Three Sympatric Felid Species

Table 3. Odds ratios and adjusted 95% confidence limits for parameters from best supported models.

Pathogen

Parameter

Comparison

Odds Ratio

Adjusted 95% Confidence Limits

Bartonella spp.
Age

Adult vs. Young

1.6

1.0–2.5

Species

Domestic vs. Bobcat

3.33

2.0–5.0

Domestic vs. Puma

2.6

1.3–4.9

Puma vs. Bobcat

1.1

0.5–2.5

Orange County, CA vs. Front Range, CO

10

5.0–33.3

Location

Orange Couny, CA vs. Western Slope, CO

5.3

2.2–12.5

Orange Couny, CA vs. San Diego/Riverside Counties, CA

1.8

0.7–4.3

Orange County, CA vs. Ventura County, CA

1.2

0.6–2.3

San Diego/Riverside Counties, CA vs. Front Range, CO

10

2.0–16.6

San Diego/Riverside Counties, CA vs. Western Slope, CO

2

1.1–7.8

Ventura County, CA vs. San Diego/Riverside Counties, CA

1.6

0.6–5.0

Ventura County, CA vs. Western Slope CO

2.3

1.7–10.1

Ventura County, CA vs. Front Range, CO

10

3.3–25.0

Western Slope, CO vs. Front Range, CO

2

0.5–6.2

Age

Adult vs. Young

2.8

1.6–5.0

Species

Bobcat vs. Domestic

2.5

1.3–4.7

Puma vs. Bobcat

3.3

2.0–10.0

Puma vs. Domestic

8.3

5–16.6

Male vs. Female

1.6

1.0–2.5

FIV

Sex
Toxoplasma gondii
Age

Adult vs. Young

4.4

2.5–7.8

Species

Bobcat vs. Domestic

72.2

23.1–225.5

Puma vs. Bobcat

10

2.5–12.5

Puma vs. Domestic

333.3

111.1–1000

Orange County, CA vs. Front Range, CO

7.6

2.5–25

Orange Couny, CA vs. Western Slope, CO

1.4

0.4–4.3

Orange Couny, CA vs. San Diego/Riverside Counties, CA

1

0.2–3.5

Location

Orange County, CA vs. Ventrua County, CA

2.8

1.1–6.6

San Diego/Riverside Counties, CA vs. Front Range, CO

7.6

2.5–33.3

San Diego/Riverside Counties, CA vs. Ventura County, CA

2.8

0.8–9.5

San Diego/Riverside Counties, CA vs. Western Slope, CO

1.4

0.4–5.1

Ventura County, CA vs. Front Range, CO

3.3

0.8–8.3

Western Slope, CO vs. Front Range, CO

5

1.6–16.6

Western Slope CO vs. Ventura County, CA

2

0.7–10.0

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0031403.t003

In contrast to bartonellosis and toxoplasmosis, FIV is transmitted horizontally through direct contact, especially aggressive
interactions or mating. Location was associated with Bartonella
spp. and T. gondii seroprevalence, but was not a predictor of FIV
exposure in any species. This does not necessarily rule out spatial
heterogeneity in FIV exposure or focal regions where FIV is more
prevalent, but such associations were not detected here. The FIV
model explained less variation than the models for the other two
pathogens and it is possible that this unexplained variation could
be related to localized clusters that were not accounted for in the
analysis. Future analysis on finer spatial scales may help to
pinpoint additional sources of variation.
While not a strong predictor, males were more likely to be
infected with FIV than females in all three species. This pattern is
PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org

consistent with previous research [35], which has related the
frequency of aggressive interactions among male felids to increased
FIV transmission opportunities. Species-specificity of FIVs has
been well-documented [18,20,50] and we noted substantial
differences in FIV seroprevalence among bobcats, pumas, and
domestic cats. Greater genetic diversity among non-domestic FIV
strains suggests that domestic cat FIV emerged relatively recently
whereas FIV of wild felids has been established for a longer period
of time [18,20]. In this study, FIV exposure was consistently lower
in domestic cats compared to non-domestics, which is consistent
with other serosurveys of domestic cats in the US [20]. While
domestic cat sample collection focused on feral and stray animals,
it is likely that some domestic cats were ‘‘owned’’ at some point
and those conditions, which could include neutering and some
7

February 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 2 | e31403

�Pathogen Exposure in Three Sympatric Felid Species

A majority of samples were collected between 2000 and 2010,
but 25 samples from Ventura County were collected in the late
1990 s. These large temporal and spatial scales allowed for
collection of unprecedented sample sizes and provided information
on essentially chronic infectious diseases that are not thought to be
governed by epizootic dynamics. Bobcats and pumas were
captured using a variety of tranquilizers/sedatives [7,56], sampled,
and released with the permission of cooperating agencies.
Domestic cats were sampled opportunistically during veterinary
examinations. Animal handling and capture was approved by the
Colorado State University Animal Care and Use Committee,
protocol #11-2453A, and procedures underwent extensive review
and discussion in order to institute practices that minimized
suffering. Animal age category was estimated in the field based on
size, weight, and dental wear [7]. Blood from live animals was
collected in ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) or serumseparating tubes, processed according to protocol [57], and stored
at 280uC.

degree of isolation from other cats, resulted in decreased FIV
exposure. Interestingly, the most common pathogen combination
in domestic cats was exposure to both FIV and Bartonella spp.
While previous research has found an association between
Bartonella spp. in felids and another feline pathogen, Feline
Leukemia Virus [51], it is also possible that the association found
here simply reflects similar risk factors.
In summary, this analysis suggests that environment, species,
and individual behaviors are important factors in disease
occurrence, and that anthropogenic influences may alter pathogen
structure in wild populations. Conversely, wild populations of
felids appear to be important reservoirs for some highly prevalent
human diseases. Diseases which spread within species – such as
FIV – are less likely to be influenced by geographic location and
are more likely dependent upon individual behaviors and intraspecific encounters. Pathogens that are spread by vectors, like
Bartonella spp., are more likely to occur in regions supporting
vector success and vector exposure to the pathogen, though
domesticated animals may serve as focal bioaccumulators that
could impact prevalence among susceptible wildlife. Pathogens
transmitted by environmental contamination or ingestion of
infected prey (i.e. toxoplasmosis) can have broad regional
associations, and our studies provide evidence that T. gondii
exposure is substantial in rural settings, and therefore wildlife may
serve as reservoirs for domestic animals and/or human toxoplasmosis when at the urban-wildland interface.
Domestic cat densities are higher in urban areas [52], while
puma and bobcat populations can decrease as a consequence of
urbanization and habitat isolation [53]. Wild felids isolated by
habitat fragmentation exhibit ‘‘home-range pile-up’’ [10] and the
potential for increased contact rates with conspecifics. Contact
between domestic cats and non-domestic felids can lead to crossspecies FIV transmission events, such as has apparently occurred
with feline leukemia virus transmission between domestic cats and
pumas in Florida [54]. Additionally, recent spatial analyses have
suggested that landscape features, and in particular roads, could
impact FIV infections in pumas [55]. Additional studies will focus
on use of chronic pathogen genetic signatures to trace wildlife
movement in fragmented landscapes and predictive modeling for
fine scale analysis of diseases in carnivores impacted by human
development.

Assays
Toxoplasma gondii and Bartonella spp. assays were carried out at
the Center for Companion Animals Studies at Colorado State
University (CSU; Fort Collins, Colorado). Feline Immunodeficiency Virus detection was completed in the Feline Retrovirus
Research Laboratory in the Microbiology, Immunology, and
Pathology Department at CSU. Serum samples were analyzed for
FIV, Bartonella spp., and T. gondii (Table 1). Assays were performed
and interpreted following the standard operating procedures for
individual laboratories as previously described [28,57,58] and
briefly outlined below (Table 1).
Feline Immunodeficiency Virus infection in bobcats and pumas
was determined using western blot analysis designed to detect
puma lentivirus (PLV) 1695, a puma specific FIV strain isolated
from a puma in British Columbia. PLV-1695 western blot analysis
has previously been shown to be the most sensitive detection
system for seropositivity for bobcat and puma FIV strains [57].
Viral stocks were grown in domestic cat Mya-1 cell lines [59], and
viral proteins were isolated as previously described [60]. Antigens
were prepared from viral cultures and 50 mg of viral antigen was
run on a 12% polyacrylamide gel. The antigen was subsequently
transferred to an Immun-BlotTM polyvinylidene difluoride membrane (Bio Rad Laboratories) and analyzed as described in
Franklin et al. [57]. Serum or plasma samples were diluted 1:50 in
phosphate buffered saline. Positive-control sera (cat sera from an
experimentally FIV infected domestic cat) and negative cat sera
were also diluted 1:50. Western blotting was performed as
previously described [57]. Reaction strength was assessed visually
and was scored depending on the affinity of the antibody for the
p24 gag protein: 0, negative; 1, equivocal; 2, positive; 3, strongly
positive. Samples scored as 1 were either re-tested or conservatively recorded as negative.
Feline Immunodeficiency Virus infection in domestic cats was
determined by the above described Western Blot (but using
purified and pelleted FIV from an experimentally infected
domestic cat, 2104) and by ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent
assay) following previously established methods [61]. Briefly,
ELISA plates were coated (100 mL/well) with whole-pelleted
domestic cat FIV (from an experimentally infected domestic cat,
2104) diluted to 750 ng/100 mL in 0.01 M borate buffer (20 g/L
borax, 1 g/L boric acid) containing 0.5% deoxycholic acid and
incubated overnight at 4uC. Plates were then washed five times in
NTE buffer (0.5 M NaCl, 0.05 M Tris, 0.001 M EDTA)
containing 0.2% Tween-20 and blocked (200 mL/well) with
NTE buffer containing 2% BSA at 4uC for 24 hours. Following

Materials and Methods
Ethics Statement
Animal handling and capture was approved by the Colorado
State University Animal Care and Use Committee, protocol #112453A, and procedures underwent extensive review and discussion
in order to institute practices that minimized suffering.

Sample collection and processing
Opportunistic samples from bobcats and pumas were obtained
from collaborators performing ongoing biology and ecology research
on bobcats and puma. Samples from domestic cats were collected
from free-ranging domestic cats on admission to shelters, or through
domestic cat trap, neuter, release programs. Pumas, bobcats, and
domestic cats were sympatrically sampled from study sites that
encompassed both urban and rural locations (Figure 1, urbanization
information derived from 2006 National Land Cover Database and
presented using ArcGIS 9.3.1, ESRI 2010). Three California study
sites included Ventura County, Orange County, and the eastern
portion of San Diego County and Riverside County. In Colorado,
samples were collected across a large part of the Western Slope and
the northern portion of the Front Range (Figure 1).
PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org

8

February 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 2 | e31403

�Pathogen Exposure in Three Sympatric Felid Species

blocking, plates were washed (as above) and feline serum samples
were added in duplicate, along with positive and negative control
sera. All sera (100 mL/well) were first diluted 1:100 in ELISA
buffer (NTE with 2% BSA, 5% FCS and 0.5% Tx-100) and
incubated for 60 minutes at room temperature. Plates were then
washed and incubated (100 mL/well) with goat anti-cat peroxidase
conjugate (Cappel) and diluted 1:2000 in ELISA buffer for
60 minutes at room temperature. Plates were washed again and
incubated with TMB (100 mL/well) for 15 minutes at room
temperature. The reaction was then stopped with 2.5 N H2SO4
(50 mL/well) and optical density read at 450 nm. Samples were
considered to be positive at optical density $0.35 nm, as validated
by Combo SNAPTM test (Idexx Laboratories, Westbrook, Maine,
USA) and immunoblot.
Serum was analyzed for evidence of antibodies to Bartonella spp.,
and T. gondii using previously developed ELISA protocols [28,47].
The T. gondii specific ELISA detected both immunoglobulin M
(IgM), which indicates recent infections and is usually detectable #
16 weeks after initial exposure, as well as immunoglobulin G (IgG)
[62], which is detectable for $52 weeks after infection [63]. Two
measures of T. gondii, IgM and IgG, are often reported because of
the potential for zoonotic transmission in recently exposed (i.e. IgM
positive) animals. The Bartonella spp. ELISA used B. henselae as the
antigen source and detects IgG antibodies for B. henselae, B.
clarridgeiae, and B. koehlerae [14]. The lowest positive titer for both
pathogen assays was 1:64.

determined using the small sample size corrected Akaike’s
information criterion (AICc) for model selection [64]. All
variables were categorical and included location (Western Slope,
CO; Front Range, CO; San Diego/Riverside Counties, CA;
Orange County, CA), species (bobcat, puma, domestic cat), age
(adult animals $2years; young animals 6 months - 2 years), and
sex (male, female) of sample animals. Interaction effects were not
explored because of sample size limitations that arise when overly
partitioning binomial data. A priori hypotheses determined the
factors to be included in each initial set of models, and models for
each pathogen were tested with all combinations of the four factors
(location, species, age, sex). The strongest models with AICc D
values ,2 were identified and reported along with Nagelkerke
pseudo R2 [64,65].
Associations between model-selected risk factors and exposure
to each of the three pathogens – Bartonella spp., FIV, and T. gondii
IgG – were analyzed with SAS version 9.1. Analyses used a logistic
link function and binary error using antibody presence (positive vs.
negative) for each pathogen as the outcome variable. Pairwise
differences in the least square means were analyzed using t tests
with a Tukey-Kramer adjustment for multiple comparisons. Odds
ratios were reported to provide a relative magnitude of the
association of infection with the determinants. Adjusted 95%
confidence intervals were calculated to simultaneously allow for
the effect of the other predictors and are reported as well.

Acknowledgments

Data Analyses
Prevalence estimation. Samples were analyzed from 791
individual animals, although limited sample volume prevented
some animals from being screened for all three pathogens,
resulting in slightly different sample sizes (Figure 2). Missing
location and categorical data for some samples also precluded the
inclusion of all samples in Figure 1 and in logistic regression
models. Recaptured animals were only counted once in
seroprevalence calculations and were considered positive if any
sampling time point was positive. Describing pathogen exposure
was a primary goal of this analysis and this prevented animals with
multiple recaptures from artificially affecting results. Mean
seroprevalence and associated 95% confidence intervals were
calculated using a binomial distribution for each species and
location.
Determinants of exposure to infectious agents. The best
model to describe the association between seroprevalence for each
pathogen and biologically relevant independent variables was

We would like to acknowledge the large group of individuals and groups
that provided invaluable assistance with sample collection, including Jesse
Lewis, Robert Alonso, Laurel Klein, Caroline Krumm, Don Hunter, Linda
Sweanor, Megan Jennings, Jim Bauer, Michael Puzzo, Scott Weldy,
Kristian Krause, Carole Bell, Donna Krucki, Susan Winston, Janene
Colby, and Mark Ehlbroch. Multiple human societies and animal care
centers helped with domestic cat samples, including the Boulder Humane
Society and the Feral Cat Coalition. Alex Griffith, Melissa Brewer, Jen
Hawley, and Arianne Morris guided all laboratory work. Any use of trade,
product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply
an endorsement by the US Government.

Author Contributions
Conceived and designed the experiments: ML KC SV. Performed the
experiments: SB. Analyzed the data: SB. Contributed reagents/materials/
analysis tools: EB LL MA KL SR RF TV WB MS ML. Wrote the paper:
SB SC MS KC SV.

References
9. Beier P (1993) Determining minimum habitat areas and habitat corridors for
cougars. Conservation Biology 7: 94–108.
10. Riley SPD, Sauvajot RM, Fuller TK, York EC, Kamradt DA, et al. (2003)
Effects of urbanization and habitat fragmentation on bobcats and coyotes in
southern California. Conservation Biology 17: 566–576.
11. Ordenana MA, Crooks KR, Boydston EE, Fisher RN, Lyren LM, et al. (2010)
Effects of urbanization on carnivore species distribution and richness. Journal of
Mammalogy 91: 1322–1331.
12. Billeter SA, Levy MG, Chomel BB, Breitschwerdt EB (2008) Vector
transmission of Bartonella species with emphasis on the potential for tick
transmission. Medical and Veterinary Entomology 22: 1–15.
13. Reis C, Cote M, Le RD, Lecuelle B, Levin ML, et al. (2011) Vector competence
of the tick Ixodes ricinus for transmission of Bartonella birtlesii. PLoS NeglTrop
Dis 5: e1186.
14. Lappin MR, Breitschwerdt E, Brewer M, Hawley J, Hegarty B, et al. (2009)
Prevalence of Bartonella species antibodies and Bartonella species DNA in the
blood of cats with and without fever. Journal of Feline Medicine &amp; Surgery 11:
141–148.
15. Lappin MR, Griffin B, Brunt J, Riley A, Burney D, et al. (2006) Prevalence of
Bartonella species, haemoplasma species, Ehrlichia species, Anaplasma phago-

1. McCallum H, Dobson A (2002) Disease, habitat fragmentation and conservation. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 269: 2041–2049.
2. Smith KF, Acevedo-Whitehouse K, Pedersen AB (2009) The role of infectious
diseases in biological conservation. Animal Conservation 12: 1–12.
3. Jones KE, Patel NG, Levy MA, Storeygard A, Balk D, et al. (2008) Global trends
in emerging infectious diseases. Nature 451: 990–993.
4. Goldberg TL, Gillespie TR, Rwego IB, Estoff EL, Chapman CA (2008) Forest
fragmentation and bacterial transmission among nonhuman primates, humans,
and livestock, Uganda. Emerging Infectious Diseases 14: 1375–1382.
5. LoGiudice K, Ostfeld RS, Schmidt KA, Keesing F (2003) The ecology of
infectious disease: Effects of host diversity and community composition on Lyme
disease risk. PNAS 100: 567–571.
6. Chua KB, Bellini WJ, Rota PA, Harcourt BH, Tamin A, et al. (2000) Nipah
Virus: A Recently Emergent Deadly Paramyxovirus. Science 288: 1432–1435.
7. Logan KA, Sweanor LL (2001) Desert puma: evolutionary ecology and
conservation of an enduring carnivore. Washington: Island Press. 512 p.
8. Ruell EW, Riley SPD, Douglas MR, Pollinger JP, Crooks KR (2009) Estimating
Bobcat Population Sizes and Densities in a Fragmented Urban Landscape Using
Noninvasive Capture-Recapture Sampling. Journal of Mammalogy 90:
129–135.

PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org

9

February 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 2 | e31403

�Pathogen Exposure in Three Sympatric Felid Species

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.
21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.
28.

29.

30.

31.

32.
33.
34.
35.

36.

37.
38.
39.

40.

cytophilum, and Neorickettsia risticii DNA in the blood of cats and their fleas in
the United States. Journal of Feline Medicine &amp; Surgery 8: 85–90.
Breitschwerdt EB, Kordick DL (2000) Bartonella Infection in Animals:
Carriership, Reservoir Potential, Pathogenicity, and Zoonotic Potential for
Human Infection. Clinical Microbiology Reviews 13: 428–438.
Chomel BB, Kasten RW, Henn JB, Molia SOPH (2006) Bartonella Infection in
Domestic Cats and Wild Felids. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences
1078: 410–415.
Troyer JL, Pecon-Slattery J, Roelke ME, Johnson W, VandeWoude S, et al.
(2005) Seroprevalence and genomic divergence of circulating strains of Feline
immunodeficiency virus among Felidae and Hyaenidae species. The Journal of
Virology 79: 8282–8294.
Franklin SP, Troyer JL, TerWee JA, Lyren LM, Boyce WM, et al. (2007)
Frequent transmission of immunodeficiency viruses among bobcats and pumas.
The Journal of Virology 81: 10961–10969.
VandeWoude S, Apetrei C (2006) Going wild: Lessons from naturally occurring
T-lymphotropic lentiviruses. Clinical Microbiology Reviews 19: 728–762.
English R, Nelson P, Johnson CM, Nasisse M, Tompkins WA, et al. (1994)
Development Of Clinical Disease In Cats Experimentally Infected With Feline
Immunodeficiency Virus. Journal of Infectious Diseases 170: 543–552.
Roelke ME, Pecon-Slattery J, Taylor S, Citino S, Brown E, et al. (2006) TLymphocyte profiles in FIV-infected wild lions and pumas reveal CD4 depletion.
Journal of Wildlife Diseases 42: 234–248.
Biek R, Ruth TK, Murphy KM, Anderson CR, Poss M (2006) Examining effects
of persistent retroviral infection on fitness and pathogen susceptibility in a
natural feline host. Canadian Journal of Zoology 84: 365–373.
Roelke ME, Brown MA, Troyer JL, Winterbach H, Winterbach C, et al. (2009)
Pathological manifestations of feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) infection in
wild African lions. Virology 390: 1–12.
Brennan G, Podell MD, Wack R, Kraft S, Troyer JL, et al. (2006) Neurologic
Disease in Captive Lions (Panthera leo) with Low-Titer Lion Lentivirus
Infection. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 44: 4345–4352.
Butera ST, Brown J, Callahan ME, Owen SM, Matthews AL, et al. (2000)
Survey of veterinary conference attendees for evidence of zoonotic infection by
feline retroviruses. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 217:
1475–1479.
Frenkel JK, Dubey JP, Miller NL (1970) Toxoplasma gondii in Cats: Fecal
Stages Identified as Coccidian Oocysts. Science 167: 893–896.
Lappin MR, Jacobson ER, Kollias GV, Powell CC, Stover J (1991) Comparison
of serologic assays for the diagnosis of Toxoplasmosis in non-domestic felids.
Jounral of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine 22: 169–174.
Dubey JP, Baker DG, Davis SW, Urban JF, Jr., Shen SK (1994) Persistence of
immunity to toxoplasmosis in pigs vaccinated with a nonpersistent strain of
Toxoplasma gondii. American Journal of Veterinary Research 55: 982–987.
Kapperud G, Jenum PA, Stray-Pedersen B, Melby KK, Eskild A, et al. (1996)
Risk Factors for Toxoplasma gondii Infection in Pregnancy. American Journal
of Epidemiology 144: 405–412.
Miller MA, Gardner IA, Kreuder C, Paradies DM, Worcester KR, et al. (2002)
Coastal freshwater runoff is a risk factor for Toxoplasma gondii infection of
southern sea otters (Enhydra lutris nereis). International Journal for Parasitology
32: 997–1006.
Breitschwerdt EB (2008) Feline bartonellosis and cat scratch disease. Veterinary
Immunology and Immunopathology 123: 167–171.
Dubey JP (2010) Toxoplasmosis of animals and humans. Boca Raton: CRC
Press.
Fromont E, Artois M, Pontier D (1996) Cat population structure and circulation
of feline viruses. Acta Oecologia 17: 609–620.
Pontier D, Fromont E, Courchamp F, Artois M, Yoccoz NG (1998) Retroviruses
and sexual size dimorphism in domestic cats (Felis catus L.). Proceedings of the
Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 265: 167–173.
Bevins SN, Tracey JA, Franklin SP, Schmit VL, Macmillan ML, et al. (2009)
Wild felids as hosts for human plague, Western United States. Emerging
Infectious Diseases 15: 2021–2024.
Crooks KR, Sanjayan M (2006) Connectivity Conservation. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Hess G (1996) Disease in metapopulation models: Implications for conservation.
Ecology 77: 1617–1632.
Jameson P, Greene C, Regnery R, Dryden M, Marks A, et al. (1995) Prevalence
of Bartonella henselae Antibodies in Pet Cats throughout Regions of North
America. Journal of Infectious Diseases 172: 1145–1149.
Beier P, Riley SPD, Sauvajot RM (2010) Mountain Lions (Puma concolor). In:
Gehrt SD, Riley SPD, Cypher BL, eds. Urban Carnivores: Ecology, Conflict,
and Conservation. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.

PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org

41. Dabritz HA, Atwill ER, Gardner IA, Miller MA, Conrad PA (2006) Outdoor
fecal deposition by free-roaming cats and attitudes of cat owners and nonowners
toward stray pets, wildlife, and water pollution. Journal of the American
Veterinary Medical Association 229: 74–81.
42. Riley SPD, Boydston EE, Crooks KR, Lyren LM (2011) Bobcats (Lynx rufus).
In: Gehrt SD, Riley SPD, Cypher BL, eds. Urban Carnivores: Ecology, Conflict,
and Conservation. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
43. Friggens MM, Beier P (2010) Anthropogenic disturbance and the risk of fleaborne disease transmission. Oecologia 164: 809–820.
44. Dabritz HA, Conrad PA (2010) Cats and Toxoplasma: Implications for Public
Health. Zoonoses and Public Health 57: 34–52.
45. Dubey JP, Jones JL (2008) Toxoplasma gondii infection in humans and animals
in the United States. International Journal for Parasitology 38: 1257–1278.
46. Dabritz HA, Gardner IA, Miller MA, Lappin MR, Atwill ER, et al. (2007)
Evaluation of two Toxoplasma gondii serologic tests used in a serosurvey of
domestic cats in California. Journal of Parasitology 93: 806–816.
47. Vollaire MR, Radecki SV, Lappin MR (2005) Seroprevalence of Toxoplasma
gondii antibodies in clinically ill cats in the United States. American Journal of
Veterinary Research 66: 874–877.
48. Lelu M, Langlais M, Poulle ML, Gilot-Fromont E (2010) Transmission
dynamics of Toxoplasma gondii along an urban-rural gradient. Theoretical
Population Biology 78: 139–147.
49. Page LK, Gehrt SD, Robinson NP (2008) Land-use effects on prevalence of
raccoon roundworm (Baylisascaris procyonis). Journal of Wildlife Diseases 44:
594–599.
50. Carpenter MA, Brown EW, Culver M, Johnson WE, PeconSlattery J, et al.
(1996) Genetic and phylogenetic divergence of feline immunodeficiency virus in
the puma (Puma concolor). Journal of Virology. pp 6682–6693.
51. Buchmann AU, Kershaw O, Kempf VAJ, Gruber AD (2010) Does a Feline
Leukemia Virus Infection Pave the Way for Bartonella henselae Infection in
Cats? Journal of Clinical Microbiology 48: 3295–3300.
52. Courchamp F, Say L, Pontier D (2000) Transmission of Feline Immunodeficiency Virus in a population of cats (Felis catus). Wildlife Research 27: 603–611.
53. Crooks KR (2002) Relative sensitivities of mammalian carnivores to habitat
fragmentation. Conservation Biology 16: 488–502.
54. Brown MA, Cunningham MW, Roca AL, Troyer JL, Johnson WE, et al. (2008)
Genetic characterization of feline leukemia virus from Florida panthers.
Emerging Infectious Diseases 14: 252–259.
55. Wheeler DC, Waller LA, Biek R (2010) Spatial analysis of feline immunodeficiency virus infection in cougars. Spatial and Spatio-temporal Epidemiology 1:
151–161.
56. Riley SPD, Foley J, Chomel B (2004) Exposure to feline and canine pathogens in
bobcats and gray foxes in urban and rural zones of a National Park in California.
Journal of Wildlife Diseases 40: 11–22.
57. Franklin SP, Troyer JL, TerWee JA, Lyren LM, Kays RW, et al. (2007)
Variability in assays used for detection of lentiviral infection in bobcats (Lynx
rufus), pumas (Puma concolor) and ocelots (Leopardus pardalis). Journal of
Wildlife Diseases 43: 700–710.
58. Breitschwerdt EB, Kordick DL, Malarkey DE, Keene B, Hadfield TL, et al.
(1995) Endocarditis in a dog due to infection with a novel Bartonella subspecies.
Journal of Clinical Microbiology 33: 154–160.
59. Miyazawa T, Furuya T, Itagaki Si, Tohya Y, Nakano K, et al. (1989)
Preliminary comparisons of the biological properties of two strains of feline
immunodeficiency virus (FIV) isolated in Japan with FIV Petaluma strain
isolated in the United States. Archives of Virology 108: 59–68.
60. Terwee JA, Yactor JK, Sondgeroth KS, VandeWoude S (2005) Puma Lentivirus
Is Controlled in Domestic Cats after Mucosal Exposure in the Absence of
Conventional Indicators of Immunity. The Journal of Virology 79: 2797–2806.
61. Dreitz MJ, Dow SW, Fiscus SA, Hoover EA (1995) Development of monoclonal
antibodies and capture immunoassays for feline immunodeficiency virus.
American Journal of Veterinary Research 56: 764–768.
62. Lappin MR, Greene CE, Prestwood AK, Dawe DL, Tarleton RL (1989)
Diagnosis of recent Toxoplasma gondii infection in cats by use of an enzymelinked immunosorbent assay for immunoglobulin M. American Journal of
Veterinary Research 50: 1580–1585.
63. Lappin MR, Bush DJ, Reduker DW (1994) Feline Serum Antibody Responses to
Toxoplasma gondii and Characterization of Target Antigens. The Journal of
Parasitology 80: 73–80.
64. Burnham K, Anderson D Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical
information-theoretic approach: Springer. pp 1–488.
65. (2007) SAS OnlineDocH 9.2. In: Inc SI, ed. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.

10

February 2012 | Volume 7 | Issue 2 | e31403

�</text>
                </elementText>
              </elementTextContainer>
            </element>
          </elementContainer>
        </elementSet>
      </elementSetContainer>
    </file>
  </fileContainer>
  <collection collectionId="2">
    <elementSetContainer>
      <elementSet elementSetId="1">
        <name>Dublin Core</name>
        <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
        <elementContainer>
          <element elementId="50">
            <name>Title</name>
            <description>A name given to the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="479">
                <text>Journal Articles</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
          <element elementId="41">
            <name>Description</name>
            <description>An account of the resource</description>
            <elementTextContainer>
              <elementText elementTextId="7018">
                <text>CPW peer-reviewed journal publications</text>
              </elementText>
            </elementTextContainer>
          </element>
        </elementContainer>
      </elementSet>
    </elementSetContainer>
  </collection>
  <itemType itemTypeId="1">
    <name>Text</name>
    <description>A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.</description>
  </itemType>
  <elementSetContainer>
    <elementSet elementSetId="1">
      <name>Dublin Core</name>
      <description>The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.</description>
      <elementContainer>
        <element elementId="50">
          <name>Title</name>
          <description>A name given to the resource</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="1104">
              <text>Three pathogens in sympatric populations of pumas, bobcats, and domestic cats: implications for infectious disease transmission</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="47">
          <name>Rights</name>
          <description>Information about rights held in and over the resource</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="1105">
              <text>&lt;a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-NC/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener"&gt;In Copyright - Non-Commercial Use Permitted&lt;/a&gt;</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="56">
          <name>Date Created</name>
          <description>Date of creation of the resource.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="1106">
              <text>2012-02-08</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="49">
          <name>Subject</name>
          <description>The topic of the resource</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="1107">
              <text>Vector-pathogen relationships</text>
            </elementText>
            <elementText elementTextId="1108">
              <text>Puma</text>
            </elementText>
            <elementText elementTextId="1109">
              <text>Bobcat</text>
            </elementText>
            <elementText elementTextId="1110">
              <text>Cats, domestic </text>
            </elementText>
            <elementText elementTextId="1111">
              <text>Infectious diseases</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="41">
          <name>Description</name>
          <description>An account of the resource</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="1112">
              <text>&lt;span&gt;Anthropogenic landscape change can lead to increased opportunities for pathogen transmission between domestic and non-domestic animals. Pumas, bobcats, and domestic cats are sympatric in many areas of North America and share many of the same pathogens, some of which are zoonotic. We analyzed bobcat, puma, and feral domestic cat samples collected from targeted geographic areas. We examined exposure to three pathogens that are taxonomically diverse (bacterial, protozoal, viral), that incorporate multiple transmission strategies (vector-borne, environmental exposure/ingestion, and direct contact), and that vary in species-specificity. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;em&gt;Bartonella&lt;/em&gt;&lt;span&gt; spp., Feline Immunodeficiency Virus (FIV), and &lt;/span&gt;&lt;em&gt;Toxoplasma gondii&lt;/em&gt;&lt;span&gt; IgG were detected in all three species with mean respective prevalence as follows: puma 16%, 41% and 75%; bobcat 31%, 22% and 43%; domestic cat 45%, 10% and 1%. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;em&gt;Bartonella&lt;/em&gt;&lt;span&gt; spp. were highly prevalent among domestic cats in Southern California compared to other cohort groups. Feline Immunodeficiency Virus exposure was primarily associated with species and age, and was not influenced by geographic location. Pumas were more likely to be infected with FIV than bobcats, with domestic cats having the lowest infection rate. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;em&gt;Toxoplasma gondii s&lt;/em&gt;&lt;span&gt;eroprevalence was high in both pumas and bobcats across all sites; in contrast, few domestic cats were seropositive, despite the fact that feral, free ranging domestic cats were targeted in this study. Interestingly, a directly transmitted species-specific disease (FIV) was not associated with geographic location, while exposure to indirectly transmitted diseases – vector-borne for &lt;/span&gt;&lt;em&gt;Bartonella&lt;/em&gt;&lt;span&gt; spp. and ingestion of oocysts via infected prey or environmental exposure for &lt;/span&gt;&lt;em&gt;T. gondii&lt;/em&gt;&lt;span&gt; – varied significantly by site. Pathogens transmitted by direct contact may be more dependent upon individual behaviors and intra-specific encounters. Future studies will integrate host density, as well as landscape features, to better understand the mechanisms driving disease exposure and to predict zones of cross-species pathogen transmission among wild and domestic felids.&lt;/span&gt;</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="39">
          <name>Creator</name>
          <description>An entity primarily responsible for making the resource</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="1114">
              <text>Bevins, Sarah N.</text>
            </elementText>
            <elementText elementTextId="1115">
              <text>Carver, Scott</text>
            </elementText>
            <elementText elementTextId="1116">
              <text>Boydston, Erin E.</text>
            </elementText>
            <elementText elementTextId="1117">
              <text>Lyren, Lisa M.</text>
            </elementText>
            <elementText elementTextId="1119">
              <text>Logan, Kenneth A.</text>
            </elementText>
            <elementText elementTextId="1120">
              <text>Riley, Seth P. D.</text>
            </elementText>
            <elementText elementTextId="1121">
              <text>Fisher, Robert N.</text>
            </elementText>
            <elementText elementTextId="1122">
              <text>Vickers, T. Winston</text>
            </elementText>
            <elementText elementTextId="1123">
              <text>Boyce, Walter</text>
            </elementText>
            <elementText elementTextId="1124">
              <text>Salman, Mo</text>
            </elementText>
            <elementText elementTextId="1125">
              <text>Lappin, Michael R.</text>
            </elementText>
            <elementText elementTextId="1126">
              <text>Crooks, Kevin R.</text>
            </elementText>
            <elementText elementTextId="1127">
              <text>VandeWoude, Sue</text>
            </elementText>
            <elementText elementTextId="1285">
              <text>Alldredge, Mathew W.</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="44">
          <name>Language</name>
          <description>A language of the resource</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="1128">
              <text>English</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="70">
          <name>Is Part Of</name>
          <description>A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="1129">
              <text>PLoS One</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="42">
          <name>Format</name>
          <description>The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="1130">
              <text>application/pdf</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="78">
          <name>Extent</name>
          <description>The size or duration of the resource.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="1131">
              <text>10 pages</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="80">
          <name>Bibliographic Citation</name>
          <description>A bibliographic reference for the resource. Recommended practice is to include sufficient bibliographic detail to identify the resource as unambiguously as possible.</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="1132">
              <text>Bevins, S. N., S. Carver, E. E. Boydston, L. M. Lyren, M. Alldredge, K. A. Logan, S. P. D. Riley, R. N. Fisher, T. W. Vickers, W. Boyce, M. Salman, M. R. Lappin, K. R. Crooks, and S. VandeWoude. 2012. Three Pathogens in Sympatric Populations of Pumas, Bobcats, and Domestic Cats: Implications for Infectious Disease Transmission. PLoS One 7(2):e31403. &lt;a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0031403" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener"&gt;https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0031403&lt;/a&gt;</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
        <element elementId="51">
          <name>Type</name>
          <description>The nature or genre of the resource</description>
          <elementTextContainer>
            <elementText elementTextId="7149">
              <text>Article</text>
            </elementText>
          </elementTextContainer>
        </element>
      </elementContainer>
    </elementSet>
  </elementSetContainer>
</item>
