Conclusion
In summary, we provide the first estimates of synchronicity, magnitude, and timing of seasonal birthing in M. condylurus and M. pumilus , underpinned by high-resolution temporal data in a region of zoonotic significance. We show that synchronicity of the birth pulse inM. condylurus is longer than previously estimated (~8.5 vs 3-4 weeks). This was even wider and less defined for M. pumilus . This is predicted to increase the likelihood of filovirus persistence under conditions of bi-annual birthing and is consistent with an ecological trait of an ebolavirus reservoir host. We also observed proportionally more female M. condylurus , and less female M. pumilus, than expected based on previous estimates of male-to-female ratios, but proportionally fewer reproductively active females. These observations will have countering effects on the potential magnitude of the birth pulse. Species-specific models are needed to interpret how, specifically, these identified attributes of the birth pulse may interact with other features of molossid-ebolavirus ecology to influence infection dynamics. Basic ecological data, such as these presented, are fundamental to research efforts towards understanding the dynamics and drivers of infection in wildlife reservoir hosts and will be imperative to future efforts of epidemic prevention and preparedness.
Acknowledgements
We thank Peter Mwasi, Ben Mwakachola, and Darius Kimuzi for their assistance in data collection. We also thank the Taita Environmental Research and Resource Arc for their logistical assistance, especially Miltone Kimori and Ken Gicheru. We also acknowledge and thank the Taita people of Taita-Taveta County for their enthusiasm and participation with this research. This research was financially supported by the Arkansas Biosciences Institute. Bat fieldwork was conducted under permits from the National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (#NACOSTI/P/21/9267), the Kenya Wildlife Service (#KWS/BRM/500 and WRTI/RP/118.6), the University of Nairobi Biosafety, Animal use and Ethics committee (H84/53146/2018), and the University of Arkansas Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (#22012).
Funding
This study was supported by funding by the Arkansas Biosciences Institute.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
All applicable institutional and/or national guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. Bat fieldwork was conducted under permits from the National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (#NACOSTI/P/21/9267), and the Kenya Wildlife Service (#KWS/BRM/500 and WRTI/RP/118.6). Ethics approval was granted by the University of Nairobi Biosafety, Animal use and Ethics committee (H84/53146/2018), and under Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) protocol #22012, granted by the University of Arkansas Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee. This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.