Study

Host, pathogen, and environmental characteristics predict white-nose syndrome mortality in captive little brown myotis (Myotis lucifugus)

  • Published source details Johnson J.S., Reeder D.M., McMichael J.W. III, Meierhofer M.B., Stern D.W.F., Lumadue S.S., Sigler L.E., Winters H.D., Vodzak M.E., Kurta A., Kath J.A. & Field K.A. (2014) Host, pathogen, and environmental characteristics predict white-nose syndrome mortality in captive little brown myotis (Myotis lucifugus). PLoS ONE, 9, e112502.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Modify bat hibernacula environments to increase survival of bats infected with white-nose syndrome

Action Link
Bat Conservation
  1. Modify bat hibernacula environments to increase survival of bats infected with white-nose syndrome

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2013–2014 in a laboratory in Pennsylvania, USA (Johnson et al 2014) found that bats infected with the white-nose syndrome fungus Pseudogymnoascus destructans were more likely to survive and stayed in hibernation for longer when placed in hibernation chambers at 4°C than at 10°C. A greater proportion of bats infected with the white-nose syndrome survived during hibernation at 4°C (43–67% of 14–15 bats) than at 10°C (7–53% of 14–15 bats). Infected bats also stayed in torpor for longer at 4°C (average 9–12 days) than at 10°C (6–7 days). For uninfected control bats, no significant differences were found between the two temperatures for survival (4°C: 80% of 14–15 bats survived; 10°C: 57% of 14–15 bats survived) or hibernation duration (4°C: average 13 days; 10°C: 11 days). In November 2013, 147 hibernating little brown bats Myotis lucifugus were collected from two mines. Bats were randomly placed into five groups for each of the two temperature treatments (4°C and 10°C; total 14–15 bats/group). Four groups were inoculated with different amounts of the white-nose syndrome fungus (500, 5,000, 50,000, or 500,000 spores). One control group was inoculated with a harmless saline solution. All bats were fitted with temperature dataloggers and placed within flight cages with internal chambers set to 4°C or 10°C (and ≤90% relative humidity) for 148 days.

    (Summarised by: Anna Berthinussen)

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 18

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust