3.8 Article

Hosts and prevalence patterns of avian parasites Philornis (Diptera: muscidae) on the coast of Ecuador

期刊

NEOTROPICAL BIODIVERSITY
卷 9, 期 1, 页码 128-140

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/23766808.2023.2261202

关键词

Host-parasite relationship; parasitic flies; elevation; disturbance; ectoparasites

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study analyzes the factors influencing Philornis parasitism on birds in continental Ecuador, finding that nest shape and habitat alteration significantly affect the prevalence of Philornis parasitism.
Most of the species of the genus Philornis are obligate parasites of birds' nests, especially affecting small populations. However, research on factors influencing its distribution is scarce. This study focuses on analyzing some elements that facilitate the parasitism of this genus on several species of birds in continental Ecuador. From a sample obtained over two years (2019-2020) in five different locations on the country's coast, 693 nests of land birds and raptors were analyzed. Of these, 13% were parasitized. Two Philornis species already reported for Ecuador (Philornis downsi, P. niger) and two morphotypes not previously registered in the country were recorded, preliminarily classified as P. sp. nr. bellus and P. sp. nr. falsificus. The species with the highest proportion was P. downsi, both in terms of nest prevalence and intensity. Each species of the parasite showed an affinity for one or more families of birds and it was evidenced that the shape of the nest facilitates the prevalence of Philornis. The prevalence of Philornis decreases in higher places in the dry coastal forests. The probability of infection was also influenced by habitat alteration: nests from disturbed sites have a higher prevalence of parasites than nests with natural forest (P = 0.002). The present study strengthens the existing knowledge about different environmental factors that influence Philornis parasitism birds of continental Ecuador.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据