WNS found in Missouri

[David Grimes]

It seems odd that we are now finding single bats infected with WNS way outside the normal WNS area. There seems to be allot on info missing from this story maybe more info will be released soon.

Actually David, that is exactly what it's doing. Check out the latest status map compared to bat flight patterns (courtesy of BCI)



I am willing to bet there are many more infections that have not been documented yet. Just like the case at Dunbar. That little northern long ear doesn't have a migratory pattern with that kind of distance, so there has to be other infections in between that have not been sighted and confirmed. And now, low and behold, we have new confirmations in TN which is on federal land and a confirmation in MO which is on state land. There are probably many other infections that haven't been seen or documented either. It's just an opinion, but I am willing to bet its already in KY too.

Well I guess that pretty much answers my question. I wonder how far it has really spread so far I guess we will just have to wait and find out. No signs in any of the caves I have been to in Harrison County Indiana but I have not been caving much over the last couple years especially the last year.

[reeffish1073]

Yet another sad day for Bats and Cavers!

[LukeM]

It seems odd that we are now finding single bats infected with WNS way outside the normal WNS area. There seems to be allot on info missing from this story maybe more info will be released soon.

Actually David, that is exactly what it's doing. Check out the latest status map compared to bat flight patterns (courtesy of BCI)



I am willing to bet there are many more infections that have not been documented yet. Just like the case at Dunbar. That little northern long ear doesn't have a migratory pattern with that kind of distance, so there has to be other infections in between that have not been sighted and confirmed. And now, low and behold, we have new confirmations in TN which is on federal land and a confirmation in MO which is on state land. There are probably many other infections that haven't been seen or documented either. It's just an opinion, but I am willing to bet its already in KY too.

Batgirl, consider that it would be pretty hard for WNS to occur outside of the BCI 'probable transmission paths' (note: not flight patterns, nothing this specific is mentioned on the map). The arrows are broad and imprecise and pretty much just say 'here are where the bats are and here are some arrows that start at the epicenter and radiate outward through where the bats are'. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Incidentally, it would be hard to go caving outside the areas indicated as well. This is not to put down the map. It's pretty useful, especially to a laymen who isn't aware of where karst and bat hibernation sites exist. Unfortunately, there is no description along with the map on the website and as far as I can tell the words 'migration' or 'flight patterns' aren't mentioned along with it.

Also in relation to the map and the spread of WNS, it's important to note that the last 4 counties highlighted trending from east to west are pretty much all in the very early stages of WNS, suggesting a very rapid progression across this distance. Even if there is a long incubation period, as BrianC suggested, this incubation period (I understood what you meant by gestation Brian) has to restart each time a new cave/population is infected, so delays in transmission should result in delays in appearance or stages of infection. If there is a delay of one season in the initial infection between Eastern TN and Pike Co. MO then you would still expect to see at least one season's worth of of devastation in TN while infected bats in MO are infected but as yet still in the beginning stages. This is the pattern that was followed across similar distances in the North East, so I see no reason why we shouldn't expect similar patterns until longer-migrating species like grays get involved.

If you're interested, from looking at a late 2009 WNS summary report by the USGS their data is that fungal growth period from 'field observations' is 2-3wks, 'experimental' is <= 12 wks, and mortality is 8wks - > 1yr. Incubation period was stated as unknown.

Link: http://www.njfishandwildlife.org/pdf/2009/minutes/ensac_docs/wns_diagnostic_summary.pdf

[Bill Putnam]

WNS is killing bats in lots of places we don't know about because we aren't looking.(and keeping cavers from reporting) Thus many of the supposed "jumps" are jumps not in WNS spread but in WNS detection.

A number of people have been expecting and predicting this. I believe we will see more reports from TN, KY, and AL and from IN, MO, and other states in the coming weeks and months of this year.

I'm also expecting some of the usual suspects to come up with a way to blame it on cavers.

[Edit - having been away for the weekend (at the NSS BOG meeting in Cincinnatti) I am still catching up on email. Upon reading TAG-Net I find that one of the usual suspects has already indicted cavers for transporting WNS to Missouri. I guess he will next argue the we are also responsible for Dunbar, and for the two new sites located in TN between there and Worley. As we fill in the map with more identifications, though, it will become more and more difficult to continue to blame cavers for what is clearly a natural process - a wildlife disease spreading via migration paths and home range overlap. Yes, it is possible for humans to inadvertently transmit G. destructans spores. But it is difficult to do so, requiring special conditions, and thus is not the primary mechanism of spread. This has been clear to most of us for some time now, and to biologists almost from the very beginning. Cave closures have done nothing to slow or halt the spread of WNS, and will not make any difference in the ultimate outcome. They are political rather than scientific both in nature and motivation .]

[Batgirl]

Batgirl, consider that it would be pretty hard for WNS to occur outside of the BCI 'probable transmission paths' (note: not flight patterns, nothing this specific is mentioned on the map). The arrows are broad and imprecise and pretty much just say 'here are where the bats are and here are some arrows that start at the epicenter and radiate outward through where the bats are'. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Incidentally, it would be hard to go caving outside the areas indicated as well. This is not to put down the map. It's pretty useful, especially to a laymen who isn't aware of where karst and bat hibernation sites exist. Unfortunately, there is no description along with the map on the website and as far as I can tell the words 'migration' or 'flight patterns' aren't mentioned along with it.

I do not agree that the arrows are random and just say "here are some arrows that start at the epicenter and radiate outward through where the bats are". The arrows depicting "Probable transmission paths" are surely based on known bat migration patterns. The map might not say this, but this seems pretty obvious. However, I could be totally wrong. It's happened before.....once or twice. Perhaps someone else can chime in and clarify. I believe that the map is only meant to provide an understanding of bat migration patterns and where we should expect to see transmission and infection, which seems to be occurring as indicated. I also have it on good authority that there is no real bat migration data west of MO and AR, so the extent of spread to the west is still unknown, which is why the map is only depicting arrows to MO.

[LukeM]

I do not agree that the arrows are random and just say "here are some arrows that start at the epicenter and radiate outward through where the bats are". The arrows depicting "Probable transmission paths" are surely based on known bat migration patterns. The map might not say this, but this seems pretty obvious.

Perhaps I overstated my point of view there. I don't agree that it 'seems pretty obvious' though because, like I said there is no statement by BCI that I could find that goes into detail as to how the map was put together. To me the paths seem a little too perfect and continuous for generalization and common sense to not be playing a part in addition to whatever migratory data might have been involved. One thing I will say is this: if bat migration data was used to make it, you can't determine where one known migration ends and the next starts. I'm willing to bet there isn't data that covers every location that the arrows touch.

[John Lovaas]

Perhaps I overstated my point of view there. I don't agree that it 'seems pretty obvious' though because, like I said there is no statement by BCI that I could find that goes into detail as to how the map was put together.

After about 90 seconds of Googling "wns+probable transmission pathways", I found an ESRI article on BCI's production of the map you are questioning:

http://www.esri.com/news/arcwatch/0909/feature.html

"...we created an integrated geodatabase of critical hibernation sites and mapped the probable routes of future transmission of WNS based on georeferenced band recapture and radio telemetry studies ..."

So there's a bit of metadata. I reckon you could contact Zachary Wilson at BCI for more information.

The BCI map covers the eastern half of the US in 1650 x 1275 pixels- I would expect some generalization. When I look at a map, I don't normally question its accuracy and veracity by questioning the data used to produced it. I didn't question the BCI map in that fashion, either. Gullible, I guess.

[PYoungbaer]

The origins of this map are based on a "species richness" density illustration, including the species named on the map, but not others. The original map did not include arrows. Merlin Tuttle prepared the arrows as part of the House Congressional testimony we gave last June in order to help make the point to Congress that this was not just a northeast regional issue. The motivation for that visual representation - and other testimony - was in large part due to the fact that Congress itself had labeled the hearing as concerning northeastern bats. Just FYI.

[LukeM]

After about 90 seconds of Googling "wns+probable transmission pathways", I found an ESRI article on BCI's production of the map you are questioning:

http://www.esri.com/news/arcwatch/0909/feature.html

"...we created an integrated geodatabase of critical hibernation sites and mapped the probable routes of future transmission of WNS based on georeferenced band recapture and radio telemetry studies ..."

So there's a bit of metadata. I reckon you could contact Zachary Wilson at BCI for more information.

The BCI map covers the eastern half of the US in 1650 x 1275 pixels- I would expect some generalization. When I look at a map, I don't normally question its accuracy and veracity by questioning the data used to produced it. I didn't question the BCI map in that fashion, either. Gullible, I guess.

Thanks for digging that up. Looks like I should have done some more, or more effective searching. It's now clear to me what data was used and that it was somehow interpreted in a way that produced the arrows, but not really how that was done. I guess I'll have to ask Zachary or someone at BCI for clarification.

And to be clear, if you were directing this at me specifically, I wasn't questioning the data used, I was questioning mostly what data was used and how it was used. I would expect some generalization as well, but I also like to have some context, and an explanation of how the data was simplified to produce the accompanying graphics before I feel I can start confidently making conclusions based on it. (as has been done with this map quite a bit already) Obviously, some of this information was available, but not along side the map where it was posted by the BCI.

Peter, thanks for adding to the context surrounding the production of the map. It's helpful to know what its primary purpose was. In the article linked to by John, the use in the Congressional hearing is made out to be more of a secondary matter, and I got the impression that it was more internal BCI motivation that led to it's creation. If it's primary purpose is to educate the public about the potential risks of WNS spreading outside of the Northeast, it does that job wonderfully. Visual interpretation of data is generally going to vary widely based on the intended audience, usually resulting in that interpretation only being useful for certain people. My question in discussing all this is whether or not it's a map that's useful to armchair scientists on Cavechat as well as members of Congress.

[BrianC]

Huh???

merriam-webster dictionary: ges·ta·tion Pronunciation: \je-ˈstā-shən\ Function: noun
Etymology: Latin gestation-, gestatio, from gestare to bear, def: the carrying of young in the uterus

Gestation is the carrying of an embryo or fetus inside a female viviparous animal.
The time interval of a gestation plus 2 weeks is called gestation period.

What are YOU talking about?

Well whip my hide, no splanin necessary!

I got thinking out loud and confused myself. I have been thinking that bat STD's are a possible infection and transmission scenario, and thinking about how bats can absorb an embryo back from development until a later more secure time for development. Then also thinking the incubation time between first contact and full blown WNS must be much longer than first thought, considering the distance and time from older sightings.

[PYoungbaer]

Then also thinking the incubation time between first contact and full blown WNS must be much longer than first thought, considering the distance and time from older sightings.

I think we need to be careful about how definitively we conclude things about incubation periods. Early scientific speculation was for an extended period - one, two, perhaps more years. This past winter's Vermont mine experiments showed that healthy bats exposed to WNS in the environment became sick and died in a matter of weeks and a few months.

Progression through a large colony in a single site or in a region of sites shows population declines over three years. Progression is not to be confused with incubation.

Finally, temperature, humidity, and bat species have also shown to be variables - sometimes dramatic, as in the case of the Williams Hotel Mine in NY, and the Williams Preserve. Williams Hotel went from 24,317 bats counted in 2006-2007 to 17,255 in 2008-2009; Williams Preserve went from 13,014 to 341 for the same years. These two sites are every close to each other, so climate, habitat, food supply, etc. are identical. The major difference is humidity of the two sites.

[wyandottecaver]

Actually Dunbar is a textbook case of cavers NOT being involved in WNS transmission. The cave is highly studied and was surveyed 2 weeks prior with no sign of WNS. 2 weeks later, a individual bat not present 2 weeks earlier shows up with obvious WNS and it is the only bat visually affected. On top of that, this species of bat had NEVER previously been reported in Dunbar. If people were involved in bringing WNS to Dunbar you would hardly expect the first sign to be in 1 bat that had never been in the cave before.

The MO case is also interesting as it seems from antecdotal evidence the landowner may be reluctant to allow regular recreational caving (or maybe any). Similiarly, the Smokey Mtn site was closed to recreational access for at least the last year.

EDIT:
It would be nice to get more particulars about the MO site. If this was 1 bat or an actual infestation. If several individuals were involved then either 1) WNS has progressed westward unseen in many sites 2) bat migration occurs on much larger scales than we thought 3) we may need to re-evaluate the importance of human transmission based on the new data

[reeffish1073]

Todd

That is what i got out of it too! I know those caves in the smokeys are via a special permit only from what i have heard. The permit is for valid scientific work only, not recreational caving.

[Spike]

EDIT:
It would be nice to get more particulars about the MO site. If this was 1 bat or an actual infestation. If several individuals were involved then either 1) WNS has progressed westward unseen in many sites 2) bat migration occurs on much larger scales than we thought 3) we may need to re-evaluate the importance of human transmission based on the new data

From the MDC web page under the Q&A part.

"Is WNS in Missouri yet?
WNS moved from West Virginia through Tennessee in February and March 2010. MDC found the first signs of the fungus in Missouri in a privately owned cave in Pike County, confirmed by laboratory results on April 13. One little brown bat was found with incipient fungal growth on its wing, but it was otherwise healthy. This finding increases the urgency to defend against the spread of this disease. We want reports of many dead or dying bats on the ground or near caves, but we do not want the public to go into caves or mines looking for bats."

(bold added by me)

I'd like to know what the date of the survey was. If it was later than March, I suspect that it may have been a transient bat. I don't do much caving in Northern MO, but in the more central to southern parts fo the states, we've noticed that bats are on the move in March. Grays showing up at summer roosts, and lots of pips moving around. When we didn't get a WNS hit in MO through March I thought we had made it through another season.

[PYoungbaer]

Here's the link to the Missouri WNS Response Plan that we've posted on the NSS WNS website:

http://www.caves.org/WNS/MO_Response_Plan_April_2010.pdf