ArticleEcoHealth2025
Interplay Between Pollution and Avian Influenza Virus in Shorebirds and Waterfowl.
Article in EcoHealth, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Anthropogenic pollution may disrupt wildlife immune function and increase susceptibility to, and ability to withstand, infection. Of particular concern is avian influenza virus (AIV), which in its low-pathogenic form is endemic in many wild bird populations, notably waterfowl and shorebirds, and in its high-pathogenic form poses a threat to wildlife, livestock and people. Many pollutants have immunomodulative properties, yet little is known about how these pollutants affect AIV infection risk specifically. We examined concentrations of known immunomodulatory compounds, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs), and assessed their influence on AIV infection in three reservoir species, red-necked stint (Calidris ruficollis, n = 121), pacific black duck (Anas superciliosa, n = 57) and grey teal (Anas gracilis, n = 62). Using data on viral prevalence (cloacal/oropharyngeal swabs) and seroprevalence (AIV anti-nucleoprotein antibodies), we found no significant effect of PFASs pollution (total PFASs < 0.01-470 ng/g in red-necked stint, < 0.01-600 ng/g in pacific black duck and 0.3-200 ng/g in grey teal) on infection status in our three species. This may be due to relatively low pollutant concentrations, but we cannot rule out possible population culling through a synergy of pollution and infection stressors. We therefore recommend further studies on infection incidence in more polluted populations or species.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.