Skip to main content

The urban myth: A lack of agreement between definitions of urban environments used in wildlife health research may contribute to inconsistent epidemiological findings

Abstract

Worldwide, urbanization and associated anthropogenic land use change is increasing. This has implications for the ecology of wildlife diseases including zoonoses, and relevance for wildlife management, urban planning, and public health. Therefore, wildlife health in ‘urban’ environments is an increasing focus within the published literature. However, researchers use a variety of different classification strategies since there is no established definition of an ‘urban’ environment. It is unclear the degree to which different interpretations of the term ‘urban’ impact our understanding of wildlife health in these environments. In order to explore the implications of various definitions of ‘urban’ and ‘non-urban’ used in wildlife health research, we performed a review of the literature. We determined that 73% of manuscripts that used the term ‘urban’ did not describe or validate the classification metrics employed. We selected 12 binary definitions of ‘urban’ and ‘non-urban’, identified in our literature search, that could reasonably be employed in an Ontario, Canada context, and applied these definitions to a historical raccoon dataset. Mixed univariable logistic regression models were fitted to investigate the impact of different ‘urban’ criteria on the interpretation of Baylisascaris procyonis and canine distemper epidemiology. The proportion of raccoon carcass coordinates classified as ‘urban’ ranged from 10.0% to 91.5%. Individual pairwise agreement between ‘urban’/’non-urban’ designations ranged from 18.3% to 97.7%. Measures of inter-definition agreement ranged from 0.27 to 0.37 depending on the statistic (Cohen’s kappa, prevalence-adjusted and bias-adjusted kappa, and Gwet’s AC1) and all indicated a fair level of overall agreement. The results of regression analyses were discordant among the definitions. These findings emphasize shortfalls in the degree to which ‘urban’ classification methodology is currently documented in the literature. There are multiple distinct metrics and thresholds associated with the term ‘urban’ that have varying relevance depending on the species, pathogen, context, and research question. Therefore, we emphasize the importance of carefully considering what criteria are relevant in a particular context and providing transparent documentation of these criteria. Moving towards specificity in language by referring to the metric employed, instead of the blanket term ‘urban’, will help to improve clarity, capacity for cross-study comparison, and allow us to develop a more mechanistic understanding of wildlife health in ‘urban’ spaces.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Data availability

Available upon request.

Code availability

Available upon request.

References

  • Aher AM, Caudill D, Caudill G, Butryn RS, Wolf D, Fox M, Blake DP, Cunningham MW (2016) Prevalence, genetic analyses, and risk factors associated with heartworm (Dirofilaria immitis) in wild coyotes (Canis latrans) from Florida, USA. J Wildl Dis 52(4):785–792

  • Banegas SA, Antón A, Morilla-Grasa A, Bogado M, Ayala EM, Moreno-Montañes J (2015) Agreement among spectral-domain optical coherence tomography, standard automated perimetry, and stereophotography in the detection of glaucoma progression. Invest Ophthalmol vis Sci 56(2):1253–1260. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.14-14994

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Becker DJ, Hall RJ (2014) Too much of a good thing: resource provisioning alters infectious disease dynamics in wildlife. Biol Let 10(7):1–5. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2014.0309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blizzard EL, Davis CD, Henke S, Long DB, Hall CA, Yabsley MJ (2010) Distribution, prevalence, and genetic characterization of Baylisascaris procyonis in selected areas of Georgia. J Parasitol 96(6):1128–1133. https://doi.org/10.1645/GE-2518.1

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bradley CA, Altizer S (2007) Urbanization and the ecology of wildlife diseases. Trends Ecol Evol 22(2):95–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2006.11.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brown EL, Roellig DM, Gompper ME, Monello RJ, Wenning KM, Gabriel MW, Yabsley MJ (2010) Seroprevalence of Trypanosoma cruzi among eleven potential reservoir species from six states across the southern United States. Vector-Borne Zoonotic Dis 10(8):757–763

  • Byrt T, Bishop J, Carlin JB (1993) Bias, prevalence and kappa. J Clin Epidemiol 46(5):423–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(93)90018-v

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carter DL, Docherty KM, Gill SA, Baker K, Teachout J, Vonhof MJ (2018) Antibiotic resistant bacteria are widespread in songbirds across rural and urban environments. Sci Total Environ 627:1234–1241

  • Carver S, Bevins SN, Lappin MR, Boydston EE, Lyren LM, Alldredge M, Logan KA, Sweanor LL, Riley SP, Serieys LE, Fisher RN (2016) Pathogen exposure varies widely among sympatric populations of wild and domestic felids across the United States. Ecol Appl 26(2):367–381

  • Farnsworth ML, Wolfe LL, Hobbs NT, Burnham KP, Williams ES, Theobald DM, Conner MM, Miller MW (2005) Human land use influences chronic wasting disease prevalence in mule deer. Ecol Appl 15(1):119–126

  • Ferguson E, Cox T (1993) Exploratory factor analysis: A users’ guide. Int J Sel Assess 1(2):84–94. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.1993.tb00092.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer C, Reperant LA, Weber J, Hegglin D, Deplazes P (2005) Echinococcus multilocularis infections of rural, residential and urban foxes (Vulpes vulpes) in the canton of Geneva, Switzerland. Parasite 12(4):339–346

  • Fischer JD, Schneider SC, Ahlers AA, Miller JR (2015) Categorizing wildlife responses to urbanization and conservation implications of terminology: Terminology and urban conservation. Conserv Biol 29(4):1246–1248. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12451

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • French SK, Pearl DL, Shirose L, Peregrine AS, Jardine CM (2020) Demographic and environmental factors associated with Baylisascaris procyonis infection of raccoons (Procyon lotor) in Ontario. Canada Journal of Wildlife Diseases 56(2):328–337

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Giacinti JAG, Pearl DL, Ojkic D, Jardine CM (2021) Comparison of two surveillance components for investigating the epidemiology of canine distemper virus in raccoons (Procyon lotor). J Wildl Dis 57(1):104–115

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gwet KL (2008) Computing inter-rater reliability and its variance in the presence of high agreement. Br J Math Stat Psychol 61(Pt 1):29–48. https://doi.org/10.1348/000711006X126600

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Haverland MB, Veech J (2017) Examining the occurrence of mammal species in natural areas within a rapidly urbanizing region of Texas, USA. Landsc Urban Plan 157:221–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heuser E, Fischer S, Ryll R, Mayer‐Scholl A, Hoffmann D, Spahr C, Imholt C, Alfa DM, Fröhlich A, Lüschow D, Johne R (2017) Survey for zoonotic pathogens in Norway rat populations from Europe. Pest Manag Sci 73(2):341–348

  • Jardine CM, Pearl DL, Puskas K, Campbell DG, Shirose L, Peregrine AS (2014) The impact of land use, season, age, and sex on the prevalence and intensity of Baylisascaris procyonis infections in raccoons (Procyon lotor) from Ontario, Canada. J Wildl Dis 50(4):784–791

  • König A, Romig T, Holzhofer E (2019) Effective long-term control of Echinococcus multilocularis in a mixed rural-urban area in southern Germany. PloS One 14(4):e0214993

  • Landis J, Koch G (1977) An application of hierarchical kappa-type statistics in the assessment of majority agreement among multiple observers. Biometrics 33(2):363–374. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529786

  • Mathieu A, Flint M, Stent PM, Schwantje HM, Wittum TE (2018) Comparative health assessment of urban and non-urban free-ranging mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) in southeastern British Columbia, Canada. PeerJ 6:e4968

  • McIntyre NE, Knowles-Yánez K, Hope D (2000) Urban ecology as an interdisciplinary field: Differences in the use of “urban” between the social and natural sciences. In J. M. Marzluff, E. Shulenberger, W. Endlicher, M. Alberti, G. Bradley, C. Ryan, U. Simon, & C. ZumBrunnen (Eds.), Urban Ecology (pp. 49–65). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-73412-5_4

  • McKinney ML (2002) Urbanization, biodiversity, and conservation. Bioscience 52(10):883. https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0883:UBAC]2.0.CO;2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKinney ML (2006) Urbanization as a major cause of biotic homogenization. Biol Cons 127(3):247–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2005.09.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moll RJ, Cepek JD, Lorch PD, Dennis PM, Tans E, Robison T, Millspaugh JJ, Montgomery RA (2019) What does urbanization actually mean? A framework for urban metrics in wildlife research. J Appl Ecol 56(5):1289–1300. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray MH, Sánchez CA, Becker DJ, Byers KA, Worsley-Tonks KE, Craft ME (2019) City sicker? A meta-analysis of wildlife health and urbanization. Front Ecol Environ 17(10):575–583. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.2126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (2020) Southern Ontario Land Resource Information System (version 3.0). Ontario GeoHub. https://geohub.lio.gov.on.ca/datasets/0279f65b82314121b5b5ec93d76bc6ba

  • Page LK, Gehrt SD, Titcombe KK, Robinson NP (2005) Measuring prevalence of raccoon roundworm (Baylisascaris procyonis): A comparison of common techniques. Wildl Soc Bull 33(4):1406–1412. https://doi.org/10.2193/0091-7648(2005)33[1406:MPORRB]2.0.CO;2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pipas MJ, Page LK, Kazacos KR (2014) Surveillance for Baylisascaris procyonis in raccoons (Procyon lotor) from Wyoming, USA. J Wildl Dis 50(4):777–783. https://doi.org/10.7589/2013-10-263

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rashed MN, Soltan ME (2005) Animal hair as biological indicator for heavy metal pollution in urban and rural areas. Environ Monit Assess 110(1–3):41–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-005-6288-8

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Robardet E, Giraudoux P, Caillot C, Boue F, Cliquet F, Augot D, Barrat J (2008) Infection of foxes by Echinococcocus multilocularis in urban and suburban areas of Nancy, France: Influence of feeding habits and environment. Parasite (paris, France) 15(1):77–85. https://doi.org/10.1051/parasite/2008151077

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rouffaer LO, Lens L, Haesendonck R, Teyssier A, Hudin NS, Strubbe D, Haesebrouck F, Pasmans F, Martel A (2016) House sparrows do not constitute a significant Salmonella typhimurium reservoir across urban gradients in Flanders, Belgium. Plos One 11(5):e0155366

  • Sim J, Wright CC (2005) The kappa statistic in reliability studies: Use, interpretation, and sample size requirements. Phys Ther 85(3):257–268

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Statistics Canada (2017) Census of population, 2016 [Canada]: Population and dwelling counts [Excel]. – boundary files. http://odesi1.scholarsportal.info/documentation/CENSUS/2016/cen16pop-dwellings.html

  • Statistics Canada (2019, November 13) 2016 census – boundary files. https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/geo/bound-limit/bound-limit-2016-eng.cfm

  • United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2019) World urbanization prospects: The 2018 revision (ST/ESA/SER.A/420). New York: United Nations

  • Verhagen JH, Munster VJ, Majoor F, Lexmond P, Vuong O, Stumpel JB, Rimmelzwaan GF, Osterhaus AD, Schutten M, Slaterus R, Fouchier RA (2012) Avian influenza a virus in wild birds in highly urbanized areas. PLoS One 7(6):e38256

  • Wongpakaran N, Wongpakaran T, Wedding D, Gwet KL (2013) A comparison of Cohen’s Kappa and Gwet’s AC1 when calculating inter-rater reliability coefficients: A study conducted with personality disorder samples. BMC Med Res Methodol 13:61. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-61

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the McLaughlin Library staff for research assistance and support with data analysis. We thank D. Campbell and Canadian Wildlife Health Cooperative staff and volunteers who assisted with data collection as well as Nuisance Wildlife Control Inc., other agencies, and private citizens who submitted carcasses to the Canadian Wildlife Health Cooperative. S.K.F., J.A.G. and S.J.R. were supported by the Ontario Veterinary College and the University of Guelph. S.K.F. was also supported by an Ontario Graduate Scholarship. J.A.G. was also supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council.

Funding

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Shannon K French, Jolene A Giacinti and Sarah J Robinson. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Shannon K French, Jolene A Giacinti and Sarah J Robinson and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jolene A. Giacinti.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

All authors have provided consent for publication.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 183 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

French, S.K., Giacinti, J.A., Robinson, S.J. et al. The urban myth: A lack of agreement between definitions of urban environments used in wildlife health research may contribute to inconsistent epidemiological findings. Urban Ecosyst 25, 999–1005 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-022-01213-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-022-01213-y

Keywords

  • Agreement
  • Non-urban
  • Urban
  • Wildlife health research
  • Wildlife health surveillance