title: Where to deliver baits for deworming urban red foxes for Echinococcus multilocularis control: new protocol for micro-habitat modeling of fox denning requirements.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Deworming wild foxes by baiting with the anthelmintic praziquantel is being established as a preventive technique against environmental contamination with Echinococcus multilocularis eggs. Improvement of the cost-benefit performance of baiting treatment is required urgently to raise and maintain the efficacy of deworming. We established a spatial model of den site selection by urban red foxes, the definitive host, to specify the optimal micro-habitats for delivering baits in a new modeling approach modified for urban fox populations.
  
  
  METHODS
  The model was established for two cities (Obihiro and Sapporo) in Hokkaido, Japan, in which a sylvatic cycle of E. multilocularis is maintained. The two cities have different degrees of urbanization. The modeling process was designed to detect the best combination of key environmental factors and spatial scale that foxes pay attention to most (here named 'heeding range') when they select den sites. All possible models were generated using logistic regression analysis, with "presence" or "absence" of fox den as the objective variable, and nine landscape categories customized for urban environments as predictor variables to detect the best subset of predictors. This procedure was conducted for each of ten sizes of concentric circles from dens and control points to detect the best circle size. Out of all models generated, the most parsimonious model was selected using Akaike's Information Criterion (AIC) inspection.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Our models suggest that fox dens in Obihiro are located at the center of a circle with 500 m radius including low percentages of wide roads, narrow roads, and occupied buildings, but high percentages of green covered areas; the dens in Sapporo within 300 m radius with low percentages of wide roads, occupied buildings, but high percentages of riverbeds and green covered areas. The variation of the models suggests the necessity of accumulating models for various types of cities in order to reveal the patterns of the model.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Our denning models indicating suitable sites for delivering baits will improve the cost-benefit performance of the campaign. Our modeling protocol is suitable for the urban landscapes, and for extracting the heeding range when they select the den sites.
authors.affiliation: Laboratory of Parasitology, Graduate School of Veterinary Medicine, Hokkaido University, North-18, West-9, Hokkaido, Sapporo 060-0818, Japan. kitsunetsuki@hotmail.com.
authors.forename: Takako
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Ikeda
authors.forename: Masashi
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Yoshimura
authors.forename: Keiichi
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Onoyama
authors.forename: Yuzaburo
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Oku
authors.forename: Nariaki
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Nonaka
authors.forename: Ken
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Katakura
mesh_terms: D063147:Animal Distribution; D000818:Animals; D000871:Anthelmintics / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D001522:Behavior, Animal; D002947:Cities; D004443:Echinococcosis / Q000188:drug therapy / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000662:veterinary*; D048210:Echinococcus multilocularis / Q000187:drug effects*; D017753:Ecosystem; D005589:Foxes / Q000469:parasitology*; D007564:Japan / Q000453:epidemiology; D008954:Models, Biological
chemical_list: D000871:Anthelmintics
references.citation: BMC Infect Dis. 2004 Mar 09;4:9
references.pmid: 15113448
references.citation: Parasitology. 2000 Apr;120 ( Pt 4):423-8
references.pmid: 10811284
references.citation: Int J Health Geogr. 2008 May 22;7:24
references.pmid: 18498647
references.citation: Vet Parasitol. 2007 Nov 30;150(1-2):88-96
references.pmid: 17931786
references.citation: Parasitology. 2002 Aug;125(Pt 2):119-29
references.pmid: 12211605
references.citation: PLoS One. 2010 Feb 24;5(2):e9396
references.pmid: 20195366
references.citation: Clin Microbiol Rev. 2004 Jan;17(1):107-35
references.pmid: 14726458
references.citation: J Appl Ecol. 2008 Apr 1;45(2):415-423
references.pmid: 18784795
references.citation: Prev Vet Med. 2001 Sep 20;51(1-2):95-109
references.pmid: 11530197
references.citation: Malar J. 2009 Dec 23;8:307
references.pmid: 20028559
references.citation: Fed Regist. 1984 Sep 20;49(184):37016-7
references.pmid: 11645519
references.citation: Emerg Infect Dis. 2008 Oct;14(10):1626-8
references.pmid: 18826831
references.citation: J Med Entomol. 2008 Mar;45(2):181-92
references.pmid: 18402133
references.citation: Med Vet Entomol. 2008 Dec;22(4):364-73
references.pmid: 18785934
references.citation: Malar J. 2005 May 13;4:23
references.pmid: 15892886
references.citation: J Wildl Dis. 2011 Apr;47(2):373-80
references.pmid: 21441190
references.citation: Ann Trop Med Parasitol. 1990 Jun;84(3):239-50
references.pmid: 2222026
references.citation: Emerg Infect Dis. 2003 Oct;9(10):1266-72
references.pmid: 14609462
references.citation: Ann Trop Med Parasitol. 1997 Mar;91(2):179-86
references.pmid: 9307660
references.citation: Epidemiol Infect. 2001 Dec;127(3):577-87
references.pmid: 11811893
references.citation: Prev Vet Med. 2007 Jun 15;80(1):65-73
references.pmid: 17324480