Designing Effective Landscape-Scale Targeted Surveillance for Wildlife Diseases

Abstract

This article provides a comprehensive framework for designing and implementing landscape-scale targeted surveillance (LSTS) systems for wildlife diseases, a critical approach for understanding disease emergence mechanisms and predicting outbreak hotspots. Aimed at researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals, it synthesizes foundational principles, methodological applications, and optimization strategies drawn from recent peer-reviewed research and real-world case studies, including SARS-CoV-2 in deer and raccoon rabies. The content explores how factors like landscape ecology, host behavior, and sampling biases influence surveillance efficacy and details advanced analytical techniques, such as agent-based modeling, to enhance system design. The article concludes by evaluating the integration of surveillance with intelligence systems to generate actionable evidence for proactive public and animal health decision-making.

The Foundation of Landscape-Scale Surveillance: Core Concepts and Ecological Drivers

Defining Landscape-Scale Targeted Surveillance and Its Role in One Health

Conceptual Foundation and Definition

Landscape-scale targeted surveillance is an advanced methodological framework in wildlife disease ecology designed to collect standardized data across individual, population, and landscape scales to understand mechanisms of disease emergence, transmission, and persistence [1]. Unlike opportunistic surveillance that leverages pre-existing activities like hunting or management, targeted surveillance employs intentional, hypothesis-driven sampling designs replicated across diverse ecological contexts [1]. This approach is particularly valuable for understanding complex disease dynamics in free-ranging wildlife systems, which is a critical component of the One Health paradigm that recognizes the interconnectedness of human, animal, and environmental health.

The fundamental objective of this surveillance design is to enable future analyses aimed at identifying ecological drivers of disease transmission and predicting hotspots of disease emergence in wildlife populations [1]. This is achieved through coordinated data collection that aligns information across multiple biological scales, creating a comprehensive understanding of how pathogen transmission depends on ecological factors that interact across individuals, populations, and landscapes [1].

Table: Key Characteristics of Landscape-Scale Targeted Surveillance

Characteristic	Description	Role in One Health
Spatial Scale	Implementation across multiple populations in different ecological contexts [1]	Enables identification of cross-species transmission risks at landscape levels
Sampling Design	Combination of cohort and repeated cross-sectional sampling with standardized protocols [1]	Provides comparable data across human-wildlife-livestock interfaces
Temporal Dimension	Longitudinal data collection to track infection trajectories through time [1]	Facilitates understanding of disease persistence and evolution in reservoir hosts
Primary Strength	Ability to elucidate mechanistic drivers and risk factors for disease emergence [1]	Informs predictive models for zoonotic spillover events

Methodological Framework and Experimental Protocols

Core Sampling Designs

The methodological foundation of landscape-scale targeted surveillance incorporates two primary sampling approaches, each with distinct advantages and applications:

• Cohort Sampling: This design involves repeated sampling of the same individuals within the same population over time [1]. It represents a gold standard for understanding ecological dynamics as it provides critical information on how individual status changes through time, particularly individual transitions from susceptible to infectious to recovered states that determine outbreak trajectories [1]. The principal strength of cohort studies lies in generating accurate estimates of state-transition rates, which are fundamental for predicting disease dynamics in natural populations [1].

• Repeated Cross-Sectional Sampling: This approach involves repeated sampling of different individuals within the same population [1]. While more limited in its ability to estimate state-transition rates compared to cohort sampling, cross-sectional sampling is more cost-effective and logistically simpler to implement across broader spatial scales [1]. It primarily provides information about host disease states within individuals at specific points in time [1].

Table: Comparative Analysis of Surveillance Sampling Designs

Parameter	Opportunistic Sampling	Cross-Sectional Sampling	Cohort Sampling
Primary Use	Characterizing spatial distribution of disease occurrence [1]	Understanding host disease states at specific time points [1]	Tracking individual infection trajectories through time [1]
Infrastructure Requirements	Leverages pre-existing infrastructure (e.g., hunting, management) [1]	Requires designed sampling framework but not individual tracking	Requires significant resources for recapture and resampling of specific individuals [1]
Data Quality Challenges	Variable metadata quality, inconsistent spatial coverage [1]	Limited to state assessment at single time points [1]	Limited sample sizes due to cost and logistical constraints [1]
Cost Efficiency	High (uses existing activities)	Moderate	Low (resource-intensive) [1]

Implementation Protocol: SARS-CoV-2 in Cervids Case Study

The following protocol outlines the methodological workflow for implementing landscape-scale targeted surveillance, derived from the successful deployment for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance in white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) and mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) throughout the United States [1]:

Phase 1: Research Network Establishment

• Develop interdisciplinary partnerships between state and federal public service sectors and academic researchers [1]
• Establish standardized data collection protocols across all participating sites
• Define clear long-term objectives: (1) understand epidemiological risk factors for pathogen emergence; (2) predict landscape-level hotspots of disease emergence; (3) advance methods for predicting spatial disease dynamics [1]

Phase 2: Site Selection and Stratification

• Identify study sites representing different ecological contexts across the species' range
• Ensure sites capture heterogeneity in potential risk factors (e.g., human-wildlife interface, habitat fragmentation, climate variables)
• Implement parallel cohort sampling across multiple populations while combining with broader cross-sectional sampling [1]

Phase 3: Field Sampling Implementation

• For cohort sampling: Capture, tag, and collect baseline samples from target individuals
• Implement regular resampling schedules for marked individuals (e.g., quarterly or seasonally)
• Collect appropriate metadata at individual (age, sex, condition), population (density, demographics), and landscape (habitat, human footprint) levels [1]
• Maintain biological sample integrity through proper storage and chain-of-custody protocols

Phase 4: Laboratory Analysis and Data Integration

• Process samples using standardized diagnostic assays
• Integrate disease diagnostic results with host behavior, population demographics, and environmental metadata
• Implement quality control measures across all participating laboratories

Phase 5: Analytical Framework

• Analyze data to understand factors increasing disease transmission, establishment, and persistence risk [1]
• Develop predictive models for spatial disease dynamics using movement data scaled across geographical contexts [1]

Operational Visualization and Workflow

Landscape-Scale Targeted Surveillance Workflow

Research Reagent Solutions and Essential Materials

Table: Essential Research Materials for Landscape-Scale Targeted Surveillance

Category	Specific Items	Function/Application
Field Sampling Equipment	Biological sample collection kits (swabs, blood collection tubes, preservatives)	Standardized collection of diagnostic samples across sites [1]
Animal Handling Supplies	GPS collars, ear tags, biometric measurement tools	Individual identification and tracking for cohort studies [1]
Diagnostic Assays	PCR reagents, serological test kits, sequencing platforms	Pathogen detection and characterization [1]
Data Management Systems	Mobile data collection apps, centralized databases, metadata standards	Integration of individual, population, and landscape-level data [1]

Strategic Integration with One Health Objectives

Landscape-scale targeted surveillance provides the empirical foundation for several critical One Health applications:

• Zoonotic Risk Assessment: By understanding mechanisms of pathogen emergence and persistence in wildlife reservoirs, this surveillance approach enables identification of factors that increase cross-species transmission risk at the human-wildlife-livestock interface [1].

• Predictive Modeling: The data generated support development of predictive models for spatial disease dynamics, allowing identification of hotspots where disease emergence is most likely to occur [1]. This predictive capability is essential for proactive rather than reactive disease management.

• Informed Resource Allocation: Strategic planning of prevention and surveillance efforts can be optimized using models that account for introduction risk, management costs, and total budget constraints [2]. The optimal strategy maintains prevention and surveillance efforts at stable equilibrium for most of the planning horizon, with initial adjustments to steer the system toward this equilibrium [2].

• Early Detection Systems: Implementation of landscape-scale targeted surveillance can significantly reduce the time to detection of emerging pathogens. For chronic wasting disease in New York State, optimal surveillance strategies could detect disease over 8 months earlier than current practice while reducing cumulative undetected cases by an average of 22% [2].

The integration of landscape-scale targeted surveillance within the One Health framework represents a paradigm shift from reactive to proactive management of emerging infectious diseases, enhancing capacity to protect human, animal, and ecosystem health through coordinated, evidence-based interventions.

Application Notes

Conceptual Foundation and Purpose

Landscape-scale targeted surveillance is a strategic approach in wildlife disease research designed to collect standardized data across multiple biological scales—individual, population, and landscape—to understand disease emergence mechanisms and predict outbreak hotspots. This approach moves beyond passive, opportunistic reporting by implementing an active, hypothesis-driven sampling design that enables researchers to identify ecological drivers of pathogen transmission, evolution, and persistence in free-ranging wildlife populations [1]. The core purpose is to generate mechanistic understanding that supports improved risk assessment for zoonotic or wildlife-livestock disease outbreaks and informs targeted control interventions [1] [3].

This methodology is particularly valuable for addressing critical knowledge gaps in disease systems where the interplay between host movement, environmental factors, and pathogen dynamics remains poorly understood. For instance, during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, this approach was deployed in white-tailed and mule deer across the United States to understand mechanisms of cross-species transmission, within-population spread, and spatial dynamics of viral invasion—questions that opportunistic surveillance alone could not adequately address [1].

Key Advantages and Challenges

Table 1: Advantages and Challenges of Landscape-Scale Targeted Surveillance

Advantages	Challenges
Standardized Data Collection: Enables direct comparison across ecological contexts through consistent sampling protocols [1].	Logistical Complexity: Requires substantial coordination across institutions, disciplines, and geographical regions [1].
Mechanistic Insights: Captures data needed to understand transmission drivers rather than simply documenting occurrence [1] [4].	Resource Intensity: Demands significant financial, personnel, and technical resources for implementation [1].
Hotspot Prediction: Provides spatial and temporal data necessary for modeling and predicting disease emergence risk areas [1] [3].	Technical Limitations: Dependent on appropriate technology and infrastructure for data collection, sharing, and analysis [1].
Proactive Response: Facilitates earlier detection and intervention compared to passive surveillance systems [3].	Analytical Complexity: Requires sophisticated modeling approaches to integrate data across biological scales [1] [4].

Quantitative Framework and Performance Metrics

Table 2: Key Performance Metrics for Evaluating Surveillance System Effectiveness [5]

System Attribute	Definition	Quantitative Measures
Sensitivity	Ability to detect cases or outbreaks when they exist	Proportion of actual cases or outbreaks detected; outbreak detection threshold [5] [3]
Timeliness	Speed between data collection and public health action	Time from case occurrence to reporting; time from outbreak detection to intervention [5]
Representativeness	Accuracy in reflecting the occurrence of health events in the population	Demographic, geographic, and temporal coverage of the surveillance data [5]
Predictive Value Positive	Proportion of reported cases that truly have the health condition	True positives divided by total reported cases [5]
Simplicity	Ease of operation and system structure	Number of reporting sources; staff training requirements; operational complexity [5]

Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: Designing a Landscape-Scale Targeted Surveillance Network

Objective: Establish a research network capable of implementing standardized sampling across multiple populations in different ecological contexts to understand disease emergence mechanisms.

Materials:

• Multi-institutional partnership agreement
• Standardized data collection protocols
• GPS tracking equipment
• Sample collection kits (species-appropriate)
• Data management platform
• Diagnostic testing capacity

Methodology:

• Network Formation: Develop partnerships across state and federal public service sectors, academic researchers, and local wildlife agencies to create a surveillance research network [1].
• Site Selection: Identify study sites that represent the ecological and epidemiological heterogeneity of the host species' range, ensuring coverage of different habitat types, climate conditions, and known risk factors [1].
• Sampling Design Implementation:
  • Deploy parallel cohort sampling (repeated sampling of the same individuals) across multiple populations to track individual infection status changes through time [1].
  • Implement repeated cross-sectional sampling (sampling different individuals in the same population) at regular intervals to characterize population-level disease states [1].
  • Combine with broader-scale opportunistic sampling to extend geographical coverage and contextualize findings [1].
• Data Collection:
  • Collect host behavior, population demographics, and environmental metadata at each sampling event [1].
  • Collect appropriate diagnostic samples (e.g., blood, tissue, swabs) using standardized protocols across all sites [1].
  • Record GPS locations and timestamps for all sampling events and animal captures [1].
• Data Integration: Establish centralized data management system with standardized formats, metadata requirements, and quality control procedures [1].

Troubleshooting:

• Adapt sampling design when encountering implementation challenges while maintaining core standardized elements [1].
• Establish clear communication protocols between network partners to address logistical challenges quickly [1].
• Develop contingency plans for equipment failure, limited animal capture success, or diagnostic test availability issues [1].

Protocol 2: Resource Selection Function (RSF) Modeling for Contact Hotspot Prediction

Objective: Identify landscape features associated with animal contact locations to predict spatial hotspots of disease transmission.

Materials:

• Animal movement data (GPS tracking)
• Environmental data layers (GIS)
• Statistical software with RSF capabilities
• Home range estimation tools

Methodology:

• Data Preparation:
  • Obtain high-resolution GPS tracking data from target host species [6].
  • Process movement data to identify direct contact events between individuals (co-location in space and time) [6].
  • Define contact locations as "used" points and non-contact locations within home range overlaps as "available" points in a use-available framework [6].
• Environmental Variable Selection:
  • Compile relevant landscape predictors (e.g., wetland areas, linear features, food resources, human infrastructure) [6].
  • Ensure spatial alignment and consistent resolution across all data layers [6].
• Model Development:
  • Develop contact-RSF models using logistic regression to compare landscape features at contact locations versus available non-contact locations [6].
  • For comparison, develop individual-level RSF models using the same environmental predictors to assess habitat selection patterns [6].
• Model Validation:
  • Perform k-fold cross-validation (e.g., fivefold) to assess predictive performance [6].
  • Calculate Spearman rank correlation coefficients to evaluate model fit [6].
• Hotspot Mapping:
  • Generate predicted probability surfaces of contact occurrence across the landscape [6].
  • Compare contact-RSF predictions with individual-level RSF predictions to identify areas where contact probability diverges from habitat selection patterns [6].

Troubleshooting:

• If contact events are rare, consider using CTMM (continuous-time movement model) methods to estimate missing contacts from movement data [6].
• If model performance is poor, reevaluate selection of environmental predictors to ensure they capture relevant landscape features [6].
• Address spatial autocorrelation in residuals through appropriate spatial modeling techniques if necessary [6].

Protocol 3: Individual-Based Modeling of Disease Dynamics in Heterogeneous Landscapes

Objective: Investigate how host movement behavior interacts with landscape structure to affect pathogen transmission and persistence.

Materials:

• Individual-based modeling platform
• Landscape structure data
• Host movement parameters
• Epidemiological parameters

Methodology:

• Model Framework:
  • Develop an individual-based susceptible-infected-recovered (SIR) model with a density-dependent transmission function [4].
  • Incorporate a spatially explicit landscape with variable resource availability and clustering [4].
• Movement Parameterization:
  • Define host movement rules based on perceptual range (how far individuals can perceive habitat) and movement capacity [4].
  • Implement resource selection functions (RSFs) that govern how hosts navigate landscapes based on resource availability and conspecific density [4].
• Landscape Structure Variation:
  • Generate landscapes with varying degrees of fragmentation (e.g., clustered, random, uniform resource distribution) [4].
  • Manipulate proportion of available habitat and degree of patchiness across simulation scenarios [4].
• Simulation Experiments:
  • Introduce an infected individual into the population and track disease spread [4].
  • Quantify outbreak dynamics using maximum prevalence and outbreak duration metrics [4].
  • Compare results to homogeneous mixing models to assess the importance of spatial explicitity [4].
• Sensitivity Analysis:
  • Test the effects of key parameters (recovery rate, conspecific density, perceptual range) on outbreak outcomes [4].
  • Identify thresholds where fragmentation promotes versus impedes pathogen persistence [4].

Troubleshooting:

• If simulations show limited disease spread, verify that perceptual range and movement capacity parameters allow sufficient host mixing [4].
• If outbreak dynamics differ significantly from empirical observations, reevaluate transmission probability and recovery rate parameters [4].
• For computational efficiency, implement appropriate boundary conditions and population sizes that balance realism with computational feasibility [4].

Visualizations

Figure 1: Landscape-scale targeted surveillance workflow integrating multi-scale data collection for hotspot prediction.

Figure 2: Resource selection function framework for predicting disease transmission hotspots.

Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Research Materials and Analytical Tools for Landscape-Scale Targeted Surveillance

Category	Specific Tools/Reagents	Function/Application
Field Data Collection	GPS tracking collars	High-resolution movement data collection for contact analysis and space use assessment [6]
	Diagnostic sampling kits	Standardized biological sample collection for pathogen detection and characterization [1]
Laboratory Analysis	Pathogen detection assays	Molecular diagnostic tools for identifying infection status and pathogen variants [1]
	Genetic sequencing platforms	Characterization of pathogen evolution and transmission chains [1]
Spatial Analysis	Geographic Information Systems (GIS)	Spatial data management, landscape variable processing, and map generation [4] [6]
	Remote sensing data	Landscape characterization and habitat classification across broad geographical areas [4]
Statistical Modeling	Resource Selection Function (RSF) frameworks	Analysis of habitat selection patterns and identification of contact hotspots [6]
	Individual-based modeling platforms	Simulation of disease dynamics in heterogeneous landscapes [4]
Data Management	Centralized databases with standardized formats	Data integration across multiple sites and research groups [1]
	Secure electronic data capture platforms	Efficient data collection, storage, and sharing while maintaining data integrity [7]

Emerging infectious diseases pose a growing threat to global health, ecosystem stability, and economic security. A landscape-scale approach to surveillance design must account for critical ecological drivers that fundamentally shape disease dynamics: latitude, seasonality, and habitat. These drivers influence host-pathogen interactions across spatial and temporal scales, determining the probability of pathogen introduction, persistence, and detection. This protocol provides a structured framework for designing targeted wildlife disease surveillance that explicitly incorporates these ecological factors, enabling more efficient resource allocation and earlier detection of pathogen emergence. The guidance synthesizes recent advances in disease ecology, remote sensing, and optimization modeling to translate theoretical understanding into actionable surveillance strategies.

Quantitative Synthesis of Ecological Drivers

Table 1: Documented Effects of Latitude, Seasonality, and Habitat on Wildlife Disease Dynamics

Ecological Driver	Documented Effect on Disease Dynamics	Magnitude/Pattern of Effect	Key Taxa or System	Citation
Latitude	Gradient in raccoon rabies case distribution and association with human population density.	Stronger rabies presence in rural vs. urban counties in the southern US; consistent risk across urbanness in the north.	Raccoons (Procyon lotor) in the eastern United States	[8]
Seasonality	Temporal shift in peak of territorial vocalizations (a potential behavioral proxy for contact rates).	Crepuscular peaks in roaring activity that track seasonal changes in sunset/dawn timing.	Captive Asiatic lions (Panthera leo persica) at high latitudes	[9]
Seasonality & Latitude	Interaction effect on surveillance sampling and case detection.	In the northeastern US: more samples submitted in summer, more positives found, but lower positivity rate. Southern latitudes showed independent trends.	Raccoon rabies surveillance	[8]
Habitat (Land Surface Phenology)	Spatial phenological asynchrony creating ecological discontinuities.	Identified hotspots of asynchrony in tropical mountains and Mediterranean climate regions.	Terrestrial plant communities (as a model for ecosystem drivers)	[10]
Habitat & Topoclimate	Divergent seasonal patterns in potential phenological controls (e.g., water, light) over short distances.	Reported evidence for the hypothesis that climatically similar sites show greater phenological asynchrony within the tropics.	General ecosystem driver	[10]

Experimental Protocols for Targeted Surveillance

Protocol: Landscape-Scale Surveillance Optimization for Chronic Wasting Disease

Application: Proactive allocation of prevention and surveillance resources for a wildlife disease not yet detected in a region (e.g., Chronic Wasting Disease in New York State white-tailed deer) [2].

Background: This protocol uses a Partially Observable Markov Decision Process (POMDP) model to optimally allocate a fixed budget between prevention and surveillance activities across multiple geographical sites (e.g., counties) to minimize the cumulative number of undetected cases.

Materials:

• Software: Optimization software capable of solving POMDPs or deterministic optimal control problems.
• Input Data:
  • Geographical boundaries of all management units (sites).
  • Site-specific data: Introduction risk, host population density, management costs.
  • Epidemiological parameters: Disease progression rates, transmission probabilities between sites, detection probability functions.
  • Total available budget per management period.

Procedure:

• System Definition: Define all N sites under management. For each site i, parameterize:
  • The risk of disease introduction.
  • The cost of prevention and surveillance efforts.
  • The rate of disease spread to and from neighboring sites.
• Model Initialization: Initialize the system state, representing the belief (posterior probability) that each site is disease-free.
• Equilibrium Calculation: Compute the turnpike equilibrium—the stable, long-term allocation of effort between prevention and surveillance for each site. The model predicts that after an initial adjustment phase, maintaining this equilibrium is the most cost-effective strategy [2].
• Resource Allocation: Allocate the annual budget across sites according to the calculated equilibrium efforts. Surveillance effort in each site should be proportional to its specific risk and cost profile.
• Data Collection & Update: Conduct surveillance as allocated. All negative test results must be recorded in a standardized format (see Section 3.2) and used to update the belief state about disease status at each site.
• Iteration: Repeat the allocation process annually, using updated belief states to inform decisions, until the first positive detection triggers a shift to reactive management.

Protocol: Standardized Data Collection for Wildlife Disease Studies

Application: Ensuring wildlife disease data—including negative results—are collected in a findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable (FAIR) manner, which is critical for robust spatial and temporal analysis [11] [12].

Background: Inconsistent data reporting hampers the aggregation and analysis of wildlife disease information. This protocol outlines a minimum data standard for disaggregated data collection.

Materials:

• Data collection forms (digital or paper) pre-formatted with required fields.
• The proposed minimum data standard table (see below).

Procedure:

• Sample & Host Data Collection: For each animal sampled, record the required and relevant recommended fields from Table 2.
• Diagnostic Data Collection: For each diagnostic test performed, record the required and relevant recommended fields from Table 3.
• Data Formatting: Format the data in a "tidy" structure where each row represents a single diagnostic test measurement.
• Metadata Documentation: Complete the required project metadata fields, including project title, creator affiliations, geospatial coverage, and funding source.
• Data Sharing: Deposit the complete dataset, including all negative test results, in an open-access repository using a persistent identifier.

Table 2: Minimum Data Standard for Sample and Host Information

Variable Name	Data Type	Required?	Descriptor
sample_id	String	Yes	A researcher-generated unique ID for the sample.
animal_id	String	No	A researcher-generated unique ID for the individual animal.
date_collected	Date	Yes	The date the sample was collected.
latitude	Number	Yes	Decimal latitude of the sampling location.
longitude	Number	Yes	Decimal longitude of the sampling location.
host_species	String	Yes	Linnaean classification of the host (e.g., Odocoileus virginianus).
host_life_stage	String	No	The life stage of the host (e.g., juvenile, adult).
host_sex	String	No	The sex of the host animal.

Table 3: Minimum Data Standard for Diagnostic and Parasite Information

Variable Name	Data Type	Required?	Descriptor
test_id	String	Yes	A unique ID for the test instance.
test_target_pathogen	String	Yes	The pathogen or parasite the test is designed to detect.
test_name	String	Yes	The name of the diagnostic test (e.g., "PCR", "ELISA").
test_result	String	Yes	The outcome of the test (e.g., "positive", "negative", "inconclusive").
test_date	Date	Yes	The date the test was conducted.

Visualizing the Surveillance Framework

Targeted Surveillance Framework

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 4: Essential Materials and Tools for Landscape-Scale Wildlife Disease Research

Tool/Reagent	Function/Application	Specification/Considerations
Near-Infrared Reflectance of Vegetation (NIRv)	A remote sensing proxy for photosynthetic activity used to map Land Surface Phenology (LSP) and identify habitat asynchrony.	Provides a stronger, less biome-sensitive predictor of seasonal plant productivity compared to traditional vegetation indices, crucial for understanding habitat drivers [10].
Partially Observable Markov Decision Process (POMDP) Model	A mathematical framework for optimizing resource allocation between prevention and surveillance under uncertainty.	Scalable to large landscapes; recommends a stable "turnpike equilibrium" allocation for most of the planning horizon [2].
Minimum Data Standard Framework	A set of 40 data and 24 metadata fields to standardize the collection and sharing of wildlife disease data.	Ensures data is FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable); includes critical fields for spatial (lat/lon), temporal (date), and host (species) context [11] [12].
Animal-Mounted Biologgers	Devices to gather movement, behavior, and physiological data from wild animals for sentinel surveillance.	Can provide near-real-time outbreak alerts and reveal infection-induced behavioral changes; high upfront costs but valuable for catastrophic risk reduction [13].
Harmonic Regression Analysis	A statistical method for modeling complex, multimodal annual phenology cycles from satellite imagery time-series data.	Essential for characterizing subtle phenologies in arid and tropical biomes, moving beyond simple start/end of season metrics [10].

Raccoon rabies virus (RRV) is a significant public health concern in eastern North America, maintained by the raccoon (Procyon lotor) reservoir host [14]. While RRV is now enzootic across a latitudinal gradient of over 20° in the eastern United States, its dynamics are not uniform [8] [15]. Understanding these geographic variations is crucial for designing effective surveillance and control strategies. This application note examines the North-South gradients in RRV dynamics, providing data-driven insights and methodological protocols to enhance landscape-scale targeted surveillance design for wildlife disease research. We synthesize recent findings from long-term surveillance data to elucidate how latitude, urbanness, and seasonal factors influence disease presence and detection, offering evidence-based guidance for public health and wildlife management professionals.

Key Data and Comparative Analysis

North-South Gradients in Rabies Dynamics

Analysis of surveillance data from 20 RRV-enzootic states (2006-2018) reveals distinct latitudinal patterns in disease dynamics. The initial invasion of RRV into the mid-Atlantic United States produced larger, longer, and more pronounced epizootics compared to its historic southern range, suggesting fundamental differences in transmission ecology across latitude [8].

Table 1: Latitudinal Patterns in Raccoon Rabies Surveillance Data (2006-2018)

Surveillance Metric	Northeastern US Pattern	Southern US Pattern
Sample Submission	Marked seasonal variation; higher in summer	Consistent throughout the year
Positive Cases	More positive results obtained in summer	Consistent detection rates year-round
Test Positivity Rate	Lower proportion of submitted samples test positive in summer	Consistent positivity rates across seasons
Urban-Rural Gradient	Consistent rabies risk across urban and rural counties	Greater rabies presence in rural versus urban counties

Spatial Predictors of Rabies Detection

The most consistent predictors of raccoon rabies detection are spatiotemporal effects rather than static environmental variables. Recent detection of cases in a county or its neighbors provides more informative indicators of RRV dynamics than general metrics like latitude and urbanness alone [8] [15]. This finding has significant implications for surveillance design, suggesting that historical case data should inform sampling strategies.

Table 2: Key Predictors of Raccoon Rabies Detection at County Level

Predictor Category	Specific Factors	Influence on Detection
Spatiotemporal	Recent cases in focal county	Strongest predictor of current detection
	Recent cases in neighboring counties	Highly informative for outbreak forecasting
Geographic	Latitude	Moderates seasonal patterns and urban-rural effects
Anthropogenic	Human population density (urbanness)	Effect varies by region; interacts with latitude
Environmental	Proportion of favorable raccoon habitat	Cases drop only at very low habitat levels

Methodological Protocols

Landscape-Scale Surveillance Design

Protocol 1: Multi-Scale Surveillance Grid Establishment

Objective: Implement a dynamic occupancy approach to monitor RRV across regional, disease-free, and local contingency scales [16].

Materials:

• Geographic Information System (GIS) software
• Historical rabies surveillance data
• Gridded sampling framework (100-km² recommended)
• Sample collection kits (vials, labels, preservatives)
• Personal protective equipment

Procedure:

• Regional Assessment: Define sampling grids across the entire management zone, with emphasis on ORV zone boundaries as strong predictors of RRV occupancy [16].
• Disease-Free Monitoring: Establish sentinel grids in RRV-free regions focusing on neighbor effects and temporal variability monitoring.
• Local Contingency Planning: Implement intensive sampling (100-km² grids) around index cases for rapid response.
• Multi-Season Sampling: Conduct surveillance seasonally to capture temporal dynamics, with enhanced summer sampling in northeastern US [8].

Oral Rabies Vaccination (ORV) Strategy Optimization

Protocol 2: Habitat-Tailored ORV Bait Deployment

Objective: Maximize raccoon vaccine uptake through habitat-specific baiting strategies [17].

Materials:

• Placebo ORV baits with biomarkers (tetracycline)
• Aerial bait deployment systems (fixed-wing aircraft)
• Hand-vaccination equipment
• Trapping equipment (live traps, handling tools)
• Sample collection kits for biomarker analysis (whiskers, sera)

Procedure:

• Habitat Assessment: Classify deployment areas into specific habitat types (bottomland hardwood, upland pine, riparian forest, isolated wetlands).
• Strategy Customization:
  • Riparian Forests: Deploy baits in spring across large areas (3 km²) at 75 baits/km²
  • Bottomland Hardwoods: Use higher density (150 baits/km²) in spring on smaller areas (0.16 km²)
  • Upland Pine: Employ standard density (75 baits/km²) regardless of season
• Uptake Monitoring: Collect whisker and serum samples post-deployment to detect tetracycline biomarkers.
• Effectiveness Evaluation: Calculate proportion of raccoons consuming baits; adapt strategies for habitats with uptake <40% [17].

Genomic Surveillance for Transmission Dynamics

Protocol 3: Whole-Genome Sequencing for Phylodynamic Analysis

Objective: Characterize RRV genomic diversity and transmission dynamics across geographic barriers [14].

Materials:

• Rabies-positive brain tissue samples
• TRIzol reagent for RNA extraction
• Multiplex tiling RT-PCR primers specific for RRV
• Illumina sequencing platform (iSeq 100 or MiSeq)
• Bioinformatics tools (FastQC, Trimmomatic, Bowtie2, iVar)

Procedure:

• Sample Preparation: Extract viral RNA from cerebellum, hippocampus, and brainstem using TRIzol reagent [14].
• Library Preparation: Amplify approximately 11 kb of the 12 kb RRV genome using degenerate primers and multiplex RT-PCR.
• Sequencing: Process purified RT-PCR products on Illumina platform with minimum coverage of 17,448x for intra-host variant detection [18].
• Bioinformatic Analysis:
  • Quality control with FastQC
  • Adapter trimming with Trimmomatic
  • Reference mapping with Bowtie2 using Connecticut RRV reference (GenBank ON986428)
  • Consensus generation with iVar
  • Phylodynamic analysis to identify migration patterns across geographic barriers

Visualization and Workflow

Integrated Surveillance and Response Workflow

Contingency Action Implementation Framework

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents for Raccoon Rabies Surveillance

Reagent/Resource	Application	Specifications	Experimental Function
ORV Baits with Biomarkers	Raccoon vaccine uptake studies	Tetracycline hydrochloride biomarker; multiple densities (75-150 baits/km²) [17]	Measures bait consumption and population coverage
Rabies Diagnostic Kits	Case confirmation	Direct Fluorescent Antibody Test reagents; qRT-PCR assays [14]	Gold-standard rabies detection in field samples
RNA Extraction Kits	Genomic surveillance	TRIzol-based RNA extraction [14] [18]	Preserves viral RNA for sequencing
Multiplex Tiling PCR Primers	Whole-genome amplification	RRV-specific primers covering ~11kb genome [14]	Enables deep sequencing of rabies virus
Illumina Sequencing Kits	Viral population analysis	iSeq 100 or MiSeq platforms; coverage >17,000x [18]	Detects intra-host viral diversity
Bioinformatic Tools	Sequence data analysis	FastQC, Trimmomatic, Bowtie2, iVar consensus [14]	Processes sequencing data for phylodynamics

Discussion and Implementation Guidelines

The documented North-South gradients in RRV dynamics necessitate tailored surveillance approaches across geographic regions. Latitudinal patterns significantly influence seasonal sampling strategies, with northeastern programs requiring intensified summer surveillance, while southern programs benefit from consistent year-round effort [8]. The urban-rural gradient exhibits contrasting patterns, with southern regions showing higher rural prevalence, while northern regions demonstrate consistent risk across development gradients.

Natural barriers, particularly major rivers like the Connecticut River, provide opportunities for strategic intervention. Research demonstrates significant spatial structuring in RRV migration across these barriers, with higher transition rates from east to west compared to west to east movements [14]. This asymmetry can be leveraged to fortify natural barriers through targeted vaccination, potentially enhancing containment efficacy.

For contingency actions responding to RRV breaches, our analysis supports integrated strategies combining hand vaccination of raccoons with ORV tactics [16]. The probability of detecting additional cases remains exceptionally high (>0.95) during the index case season, emphasizing the critical importance of rapid response. Successful local containment typically occurs within one year, with elimination achieved within 2-3 years of coordinated contingency implementation [16].

This case study demonstrates that effective raccoon rabies management requires surveillance and intervention strategies adapted to latitudinal gradients and local ecological contexts. The protocols and analytical frameworks presented provide researchers and wildlife managers with evidence-based tools for designing landscape-scale targeted surveillance. By integrating spatiotemporal modeling, genomic analysis, and habitat-tailored intervention strategies, public health agencies can optimize resource allocation for rabies control. Future surveillance design should incorporate these documented gradients to enhance early detection, rapid response, and ultimately work toward the elimination of raccoon rabies in North America.

The Impact of Urbanization and Human Population Density on Disease Risk

The rapid global transition of human populations from rural to urban areas represents one of the most significant demographic shifts in modern times, with profound implications for disease ecology and public health. Current estimates indicate that over half (56.2%) of the world's population now resides in urban areas, a figure projected to reach 68% by 2050 [19]. This transformation of landscapes creates complex and often contradictory influences on disease risk patterns. While urbanization can bring improved access to healthcare and sanitation infrastructure, mitigating many traditional infectious diseases, unplanned or rapid urban expansion can simultaneously foster new transmission pathways and amplify existing threats [20] [19].

Understanding these dynamics is particularly crucial for designing effective wildlife disease surveillance systems, as human-dominated landscapes increasingly become interfaces for human-wildlife-pathogen interactions. The One Health approach – which recognizes the interconnectedness of human, animal, and ecosystem health – provides an essential framework for investigating these relationships [21]. This application note synthesizes current scientific evidence and provides standardized protocols for assessing and monitoring disease risks in urbanizing landscapes, with particular emphasis on landscape-scale targeted surveillance design for wildlife disease research.

Theoretical Framework: Mechanisms Linking Urbanization to Disease

Urbanization influences disease risk through multiple, often interconnected pathways. Research investigating 60 intermediate-sized countries has demonstrated that urbanization and wealth were consistently associated with lower burdens for many human infectious diseases, likely due to improved access to sanitation and healthcare [20]. However, this relationship reverses when urbanization occurs rapidly and without planning, creating conditions that can enhance disease transmission.

Key Pathogenic Pathways of Urbanization

The following diagram illustrates the primary mechanisms through which urbanization and population density influence disease risk:

Population Density Thresholds and Disease Transmission

Fine-scale heterogeneity in population density creates predictable patterns of disease spread, particularly for vector-borne illnesses. Research on dengue epidemics in Rio de Janeiro has demonstrated that the ratio of successive epidemic peaks varies systematically with local population density, revealing a scale-invariant pattern that can inform predictive models [22]. This relationship emerges from the interplay between herd immunity and seasonal transmission, where:

• Sparsely populated areas experience short-lived outbreaks that rapidly deplete the susceptible pool
• Densely populated areas sustain longer transmission chains, resulting in larger successive epidemics
• The timing of pathogen introduction into local areas correlates strongly with population density, with dense urban centers typically experiencing earlier introductions

Table 1: Urbanization-Associated Disease Risk Factors and Outcomes

Urbanization Factor	Effect on Disease Risk	Disease Examples	Supporting Evidence
High Population Density (>1,000 people/km²)	Increases transmission potential for directly transmitted and vector-borne diseases	Dengue, Zika, Chikungunya	Human population density >1,000 inhabitants/km² associated with increased arboviral disease levels in 15/29 studies [23]
Unplanned Urban Expansion	Creates suitable habitats for disease vectors and reservoir hosts	Dengue, Leptospirosis	Aedes aegypti abundance linked to unplanned urbanization and container habitats in informal settlements [23]
Biodiversity Loss	Increases centrality of humans in wildlife pathogen networks	E. coli transmission, zoonotic diseases	Study in Nairobi showed people become more central in pathogen networks in low biodiversity areas [24]
Sanitation Infrastructure Gaps	Enhances transmission of enteric pathogens	Cholera, parasitic worms	>700 million urban residents lack improved sanitation [19]
Healthcare Access	Reduces disease burden through diagnosis and treatment	Multiple infectious diseases	Urbanization and wealth associated with lower DALYs for many diseases [20]

Application Note: Surveillance Protocol for Urban Landscape-Scale Disease Monitoring

Protocol 1: Zoonotic Hotspot Surveillance in Urbanizing Landscapes

Objective: To establish standardized surveillance for zoonotic pathogen transmission at the human-wildlife-livestock interface in urbanizing landscapes.

Background: Rapid urbanization in biodiverse regions creates novel interfaces where humans, domestic animals, and wildlife interact, facilitating pathogen spillover. A study in Nairobi demonstrated that reduced wildlife biodiversity increases human centrality in pathogen sharing networks, elevating spillover risk [24].

Materials and Reagent Solutions:

Table 2: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Urban Zoonotic Surveillance

Item Category	Specific Examples	Function/Application	Storage Requirements
Sample Collection	Sterile swabs (oral, rectal), EDTA blood collection tubes, cryovials, portable cooler with dry ice	Biological sample preservation and transport	-80°C for long-term storage; -20°C for short-term
Molecular Diagnostics	PCR/Viral transport media, RNA/DNA extraction kits, primers for pan-pathogen detection (e.g., coronavirus, flavivirus), real-time PCR reagents	Pathogen detection and identification	-20°C for enzymes; +4°C for buffers
Serological Assays	ELISA plates, antigen preparations, conjugate antibodies, substrate solutions	Antibody detection for exposure assessment	+4°C for most components; avoid freeze-thaw
Field Equipment	GPS units, digital cameras, personal protective equipment (gloves, masks), data collection tablets	Field data collection and biosafety	Ambient with protection from moisture
Taxonomic Identification	Field guides, morphological keys, tissue storage for DNA barcoding	Host species identification	Varies by specific application

Methodology:

• Site Selection: Stratify sampling across an urban-rural gradient, prioritizing:
  • Wildlife interface zones: Areas where natural habitat fragments border urban development
  • High-density settlements: Informal settlements with limited infrastructure
  • Agricultural interfaces: Locations with livestock-wildlife overlap
  • Protected urban greenspaces: Parks and natural reserves within urban boundaries

• Sampling Strategy:

  • Employ a cross-sectional design with longitudinal follow-up at sentinel sites
  • Target both synanthropic species (rodents, bats, peridomestic birds) and livestock at interface zones
  • Include human community sampling where ethically approved

• Data Collection Standardization:

  • Record all data according to the minimum wildlife disease data standard (40 core fields, 9 required) [25]
  • Collect precise GPS coordinates, habitat characterization, and host metadata
  • Document both positive and negative results to enable prevalence calculations

• Laboratory Analysis:

  • Implement tiered diagnostic approach:
    • Primary screening: Molecular detection (PCR) for pathogen families of interest
    • Confirmation: Sequencing and phylogenetic analysis
    • Serological testing: ELISA or neutralization assays for exposure assessment

• Data Integration and Analysis:

  • Spatial analysis of pathogen detection relative to urbanization metrics
  • Network modeling of potential transmission pathways
  • Risk factor analysis using multivariate models

Implementation Considerations:

• Engage community participants and local professionals in surveillance design
• Ensure ethical compliance for human and animal sampling
• Develop data sharing agreements that balance transparency with sensitivity concerns

Protocol 2: Vector-Borne Disease Surveillance in Urban Centers

Objective: To monitor vector population dynamics and pathogen prevalence in response to urbanization gradients.

Background: Urbanization creates heterogeneous landscapes that differentially affect vector ecology. Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus mosquitoes demonstrate variable responses to urbanization, with breeding site availability, human density, and mobility patterns driving transmission dynamics [23].

Methodology:

• Landscape Stratification:
  • Classify study area by population density (using 250m × 250m grid units) [22]
  • Categorize neighborhoods by urban structure type (formal, informal, commercial)
  • Map key infrastructure (water storage, waste management, drainage)

• Entomological Surveillance:

  • Deploy ovitraps and adult mosquito traps across the urbanization gradient
  • Conduct larval surveys in natural and artificial containers
  • Process specimens for species identification and pathogen testing

• Epidemiological Component:

  • Collaborate with health facilities for case-based reporting (where available)
  • Implement prospective cohort studies in high-risk areas
  • Incorporate syndromic surveillance for undifferentiated fever

• Data Synthesis:

  • Analyze relationships between urban metrics and vector indices
  • Model transmission dynamics using agent-based approaches
  • Generate risk maps to guide targeted interventions

Data Standardization and Reporting Framework

The implementation of standardized data collection and reporting is fundamental to generating comparable, reusable wildlife disease data across urban landscapes. Recent initiatives have established minimum data standards specifically designed for wildlife disease research [25] [12].

Minimum Data Standard Implementation

Core Data Fields (Required):

• Animal ID (unique identifier)
• Sampling date
• Geographic coordinates (latitude, longitude)
• Host species
• Sample type
• Diagnostic method
• Diagnostic target
• Test result
• Result type (positive, negative, indeterminate)

Extended Metadata for Urban Context:

• Urbanization classification (using standardized metrics)
• Human population density at appropriate spatial scale
• Land cover/land use characterization
• Infrastructure quality indices
• Sampling effort documentation

Data Sharing Protocol:

• Deposit data in accessible repositories using FAIR principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable)
• Utilize platforms such as PHAROS (Pathogen Harmonized Observatory) or general repositories like Zenodo
• Implement appropriate data embargo periods for sensitive information
• Include detailed project metadata to enable contextual interpretation

Technological Integration and Analytical Approaches

Agent-Based Modeling for Surveillance Optimization

Agent-based models (ABMs) provide powerful tools for designing surveillance strategies that account for the heterogeneities of urban landscapes and host behaviors. These models simulate individual hosts (agents) within realistic landscapes, incorporating movement patterns, contact structures, and transmission dynamics [26].

Application Framework:

• Model parameterization using empirical data on host density, movement, and contact rates
• Scenario testing for various surveillance strategies across urban gradients
• Sample size determination accounting for non-random sampling and clustered disease distribution
• Resource optimization to maximize detection probability within budget constraints

Spatial Analytical Methods

Fine-scale spatial analysis is critical for understanding disease dynamics in urban landscapes. The following approaches are particularly relevant:

• Scale-dependent analysis: Examine patterns at multiple spatial resolutions (e.g., 250m × 250m grids, neighborhood levels, municipal divisions)
• Density-stratified aggregation: Group analysis units by population density rather than administrative boundaries [22]
• Connectivity modeling: Incorporate human mobility patterns using mobile phone data, transportation networks, or social mixing models

Urbanization creates complex, dynamic landscapes that profoundly influence disease emergence and transmission. The protocols and frameworks presented here provide a standardized approach for designing targeted surveillance systems that account for the specific challenges and opportunities presented by urban environments. By implementing these methodologies, researchers and public health professionals can generate comparable data across settings, identify high-risk interfaces, and deploy limited resources more effectively.

Critical Implementation Considerations:

• Context Adaptation: These protocols should be adapted to local ecological, epidemiological, and social contexts
• Stakeholder Engagement: Successful surveillance requires collaboration across wildlife, public health, and urban planning sectors
• Ethical Compliance: Ensure all activities adhere to ethical standards for human and animal research
• Data Integration: Develop mechanisms for integrating wildlife disease data with public health surveillance systems
• Capacity Building: Strengthen local expertise in wildlife disease ecology and urban epidemiology

As urbanization continues globally, the integration of ecological understanding with public health practice becomes increasingly essential for mitigating disease risks and protecting both human and wildlife health.

Implementing Surveillance Systems: Frameworks, Technologies, and Partnerships

Application Notes: Core Principles and Strategic Planning

Effective wildlife disease surveillance requires a structured, multi-scale approach to safeguard biodiversity, ecosystem health, and public health. Over 60% of human pathogens are zoonotic, and disease is a recognized significant threat to species survival on the IUCN Red List [21]. A proactive, One Health approach, which integrates surveillance into a broader strategy involving human, animal, and ecosystem health, is critical for understanding epidemiological patterns and taking proactive measures [21] [2].

Guiding Principles for Surveillance Design

The following principles are essential for an effective surveillance framework:

• Strategic Resource Allocation: Optimal outcomes are achieved by strategically balancing efforts between prevention activities (to lower introduction risks) and surveillance (to ensure early detection). A stable, equilibrium-based allocation is often the most cost-effective long-term strategy [2].
• Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration: Rangers, hunters, local communities, and Indigenous Peoples play crucial roles due to their unique ability to detect changes in wildlife health. Coordination among these stakeholders ensures actions are evidence-based and avoid long-term ecological harm [21].
• Ethical and Safe Conduct: Only authorized, trained, and qualified personnel should collect biological samples to uphold ethical standards and manage pathogen transmission risks. Effective communication with local communities is crucial to prevent harmful actions based on unfounded fears [21].

Defining Surveillance Objectives and Types

A clear objective is the foundation of any surveillance program. The updated IUCN and WOAH guidelines outline four primary surveillance types suitable for different needs [21].

The table below summarizes the key surveillance types and their applications:

Table 1: Wildlife Disease Surveillance Types and Applications

Surveillance Type	Key Methodology	Primary Application and Objective
Active Surveillance	Systematic, planned collection of samples and data [21]	Used to estimate disease prevalence or prove freedom from disease in a population.
Passive Surveillance	Reporting and investigation of disease cases or sick animals as they are encountered [21]	Useful for detecting emerging or endemic diseases; relies on reports from the public, hunters, etc.
Event-Based Surveillance	Rapid detection and reporting of unusual health-related events or mortality clusters [21]	Aims for early warning of a new outbreak or spillover event.
Sentinel Surveillance	Monitoring specific indicator species or populations for the presence of disease [21]	Provides an efficient early warning system for pathogen circulation in an ecosystem.

Experimental Protocols and Methodologies

This section provides detailed, actionable protocols for implementing surveillance activities across the individual, population, and landscape scales.

Protocol 1: Roadkill and Hunter-Harvested Animal Necropsy and Sampling

This protocol is fundamental for passive surveillance, utilizing animals that are found dead or legally harvested.

1. Objective: To systematically collect pathological data and biological samples from individual animals to determine cause of death, assess health status, and detect pathogens.

2. Materials and Reagents:

• Personal Protective Equipment (PPE): Gloves, goggles, N95 mask or respirator, disposable gown or coveralls.
• Basic Necropsy Kit: Scalpel handles and blades, forceps (toothed and smooth), scissors (sharp and blunt), bone cutters, ruler, and digital calipers.
• Sample Collection Supplies: Sterile swabs (for bacteriology/virology), cryovials for flash-freezing, 10% neutral buffered formalin in leak-proof containers, blood collection tubes (EDTA for molecular, serum separator tubes for serology), Whirl-Pak bags for large tissue samples.
• Data Recording: Tough-rated tablet or waterproof paper forms, GPS unit, camera, and pre-printed labels.

3. Step-by-Step Workflow: 1. Field Safety and Triage: Don full PPE. Record date, location (GPS coordinates), species, sex, age (if estimable), and overall condition of the carcass. 2. External Examination: Photograph the animal in situ. Check for external lesions, ectoparasites, discharge, or injuries. 3. Systematic Internal Examination: Make a midline incision and reflect the skin. Examine all organ systems in situ before dissection. Note any abnormalities (size, color, texture, lesions, exudate). 4. Targeted Sample Collection: Collect and preserve tissues as listed below. Change instruments between sampling different tissues/organisms to prevent cross-contamination. 5. Data Consolidation and Storage: Ensure all samples are clearly linked to the animal's metadata. Place fresh/frozen samples on dry ice or in a liquid nitrogen dry shipper for transport to the lab. Formalin-fixed samples can be transported at ambient temperature.

Table 2: Essential Sample Collection Protocol for Necropsy

Target Analysis	Tissue/Sample Type	Preservation Method	Storage Temperature
Histopathology	Brain, lung, liver, spleen, kidney, lymph node, any lesion	10% Neutral Buffered Formalin (10:1 ratio formalin:tissue)	Room Temperature
Molecular (PCR, qPCR, Metagenomics)	Same tissues as above, swabs (e.g., nasal, oral, rectal)	Flash-freeze in liquid nitrogen or on dry ice; place in RNAlater	-80°C
Bacteriology / Virology	Lung, liver, spleen, lymph node, swabs	Fresh (in viral/bacterial transport media)	4°C (short-term)
Serology	Blood, heart clot, fluid from eye	Centrifuge to separate serum; store serum	-20°C or -80°C
Toxicology	Liver, kidney, fat, gastric contents	Flash-freeze	-80°C

Protocol 2: Population-Level Serological Survey

This protocol describes an active surveillance method to estimate pathogen exposure within a specific population.

1. Objective: To determine the seroprevalence of a specific pathogen in a target wildlife population by detecting pathogen-specific antibodies in blood samples.

2. Materials and Reagents:

• Sample Collection: Syringes (3-10 mL), needles (appropriate gauge for species), serum separator tubes (e.g., SST tubes), blood transfer pipettes.
• Serological Assay Kits: Commercially available or in-house developed ELISA (Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay) kits, including microplates, blocking buffers, conjugates, and substrates.
• Laboratory Equipment: Microplate washer, microplate reader (spectrophotometer/fluorometer), multichannel pipettes, centrifuge, incubator.
• Data Analysis Software: R, SPSS, or GraphPad Prism for statistical analysis of seroprevalence.

3. Step-by-Step Workflow: 1. Study Design and Sampling: Define the target population and calculate sample size required for desired statistical power. Collect blood samples via live-capture or from hunter-harvested animals. 2. Sample Processing: Allow blood to clot at room temperature for 30 minutes. Centrifuge at 2000 x g for 10 minutes. Aliquot the supernatant (serum) into cryovials without disturbing the clot. 3. Serological Testing (ELISA): - Coating: Coat ELISA plate wells with the target pathogen antigen. Incubate, then wash. - Blocking: Add a blocking buffer (e.g., BSA or non-fat dry milk in PBS) to prevent non-specific binding. Incubate, then wash. - Sample Incubation: Add diluted test serum samples and controls (positive, negative) to the wells. Incubate to allow antibody-antigen binding, then wash. - Detection: Add a species-specific enzyme-conjugated secondary antibody. Incubate, then wash. - Signal Development: Add the enzyme's substrate solution. Incubate in the dark for a specified time. - Stop and Read: Add a stop solution and immediately measure the absorbance (Optical Density - OD) with a microplate reader. 4. Data Analysis: Calculate the mean OD for the negative controls. Establish a cut-off value (e.g., mean negative OD + 3 standard deviations). Samples with an OD above the cut-off are considered positive for antibodies. Calculate seroprevalence as (Number of Positive Samples / Total Samples Tested) * 100.

Protocol 3: Landscape-Scale Resource Allocation and Spatial Prioritization

This protocol uses a computational framework to optimize the allocation of a limited budget between prevention and surveillance across many geographical sites, a critical step for landscape-scale targeted surveillance [2].

1. Objective: To minimize the expected cumulative number of disease cases before initial detection by optimally allocating a fixed budget between prevention and surveillance efforts across multiple landscape units (e.g., counties).

2. Materials and Reagents:

• Software and Computational Tools: R, Python, or specialized optimization software (e.g., CPLEX, Gurobi) for implementing the POMDP model.
• Input Data Layers:
  • Introduction Risk Map: GIS layers of risk factors (e.g., wildlife density, human footprint, proximity to known outbreak areas, transportation networks).
  • Sampling Cost Map: GIS layer of costs per sample per unit area (e.g., incorporating travel distance, personnel time, lab fees) [2].
  • Host Population Data: Estimated density of the target host species across the landscape.
  • Disease Spread Parameters: Data on transmission rates, dispersal kernels, and incubation periods for the pathogen of concern.

3. Step-by-Step Workflow: 1. Model Formulation: Structure the problem as a Partially Observable Markov Decision Process (POMDP). The "state" is the true, but unobserved, disease status (e.g., prevalence level) of each site. The "belief" is the probabilistic estimate of the state, which is updated based on surveillance results [2]. 2. Parameterization: Populate the model with the collected input data. Define the transition dynamics between disease states, which depend on prevention efforts and connectivity between sites. Define the detection probability, which is a function of surveillance effort and local prevalence [2]. 3. Optimization: The objective is to minimize the expected cumulative prevalence across all sites up to the time of first detection. The model solves for the optimal allocation of the budget to prevention and surveillance at each site for each time period. A key finding is that the optimal strategy often converges to a stable "turnpike equilibrium" where efforts are maintained at constant levels for long durations [2]. 4. Implementation and Adaptive Management: Apply the optimized allocation strategy in the field. As new data is collected (e.g., all negative tests), update the belief state and re-run the model periodically to adapt the strategy, ensuring it remains optimal over time.

Visualization of the Surveillance Framework

The following diagram, generated using Graphviz, illustrates the logical workflow and integration of the three scales of surveillance.

Figure 1: Surveillance Framework: Multi-Scale Integration

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

The following table details key reagents, software, and materials essential for implementing the protocols described in this framework.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Solutions for Wildlife Disease Surveillance

Item Name	Category	Primary Function and Application
10% Neutral Buffered Formalin	Fixative	Preserves tissue architecture for histological examination; prevents autolysis and degradation.
RNAlater Stabilization Solution	Nucleic Acid Stabilizer	Stabilizes and protects RNA and DNA in fresh tissues and swabs at non-frozen temperatures, preventing degradation during transport.
Viral/Bacterial Transport Media	Culture Media	Maintains viability of pathogens swabbed from mucous membranes or lesions during transport to the lab for culture.
Species-Specific ELISA Kits	Immunoassay	Detect and quantify pathogen-specific antibodies (IgG, IgM) in serum or plasma to determine seroprevalence and exposure history.
PCR/QPCR Master Mixes	Molecular Biology	Enzymes, buffers, and nucleotides for the amplification and detection of specific pathogen DNA/RNA sequences.
GIS Software (e.g., QGIS, ArcGIS)	Software	Creates, analyzes, and visualizes spatial data layers (risk maps, cost surfaces, host density) for landscape-scale planning.
R or Python with Optimization Libraries	Software/Computational	Implements statistical analysis, disease modeling, and POMDP optimization for resource allocation and data interpretation.

Leveraging Research Networks and Multi-Sector Partnerships for National Scale

Landscape-scale targeted surveillance is a strategic approach designed to collect standardized data across diverse ecological contexts to understand disease dynamics in free-ranging wildlife. This methodology is critical for developing a mechanistic understanding of disease emergence, which forms the foundation for improving risk assessment of zoonotic or wildlife-livestock disease outbreaks and predicting hotspots of disease emergence [27]. Unlike passive or opportunistic surveillance, this approach actively targets specific individuals and populations with standardized sampling protocols, enabling direct comparison across different landscapes and time periods.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) surveillance in two free-ranging deer species across their ranges in the United States serves as a seminal example of this approach. This system was specifically designed to collect data across individual, population, and landscape scales for future analyses aimed at understanding mechanisms and risk factors of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, evolution, and persistence [27]. The successful implementation of this surveillance demonstrates the power of leveraging partnerships between state and federal public service sectors and academic researchers in a landscape-scale targeted surveillance research network.

Conceptual Framework and Multi-Sector Collaboration

The One Health Foundation

The One Health approach provides the foundational framework for effective wildlife disease surveillance, recognizing the interconnection between people, animals, plants, and their shared environment [28]. This collaborative, multisectoral, and transdisciplinary approach emphasizes the need for coordinated efforts across multiple disciplines and sectors—including human health, veterinary science, and environmental health—to address complex health challenges at the human-animal-plant-environment interface.

As the world faces growing threats from emerging infectious and zoonotic diseases, environmental degradation, and biodiversity loss, the One Health approach has gained increasing importance for addressing complex health challenges [28]. However, despite its promise, One Health policies often focus predominantly on human and livestock health, with less attention given to wildlife and ecosystem health. Effective landscape-scale surveillance requires addressing these gaps through deliberate integration of wildlife health and ecosystem health perspectives.

Strategic Partnership Models

Table: Multi-Sector Collaboration Models for Wildlife Disease Surveillance

Collaboration Model	Key Characteristics	Implementation Examples
Research Network Partnerships	Leverages academic expertise with governmental resources; enables standardized sampling across ecological contexts [27]	SARS-CoV-2 surveillance in white-tailed and mule deer across their U.S. ranges
Federal Interagency Coordination	Formalized structures with shared leadership across multiple agencies; coordinated policy implementation	U.S. One Health Coordination Unit (OHCU) with 24 agencies from eight departments [28]
Integrated Surveillance Systems	Shared platforms for data collection and analysis across human, animal, and environmental health sectors	Coordinated, multi-sectoral surveillance systems enabling real-time threat identification [28]
Community-Engaged Surveillance	Involves local populations in design and implementation; ensures cultural appropriateness and context specificity	Community-based monitoring programs that incorporate traditional ecological knowledge [28]

Operational Protocols and Implementation Framework

Surveillance Network Establishment Protocol

Phase 1: Preliminary Assessment and Partner Identification

• Conduct stakeholder mapping to identify relevant agencies, academic institutions, and community organizations
• Assess existing surveillance infrastructure and data sharing capabilities across sectors
• Identify regulatory requirements and data sharing agreements needed for collaboration
• Establish common goals and define shared objectives for the surveillance network

Phase 2: Governance Structure and Leadership Model

• Implement shared interagency leadership model based on the U.S. OHCU approach [28]
• Establish clear decision-making frameworks with defined roles and responsibilities
• Create multi-sectoral committees with representatives from human health, veterinary medicine, environmental agencies, and other relevant sectors
• Develop rotational leadership opportunities to maintain engagement and distribute responsibility

Phase 3: Operational Implementation and Coordination

• Conduct regular meetings, conferences, and workshops for knowledge sharing and relationship building [28]
• Implement joint simulation exercises to practice harmonized approaches to multi-sector health threats
• Establish informal communication channels (e.g., WhatsApp groups) to complement formal coordination [28]
• Create accessible databases and knowledge-sharing platforms for real-time collaboration

Standardized Field Sampling Protocol

Site Selection and Stratification Methodology

• Implement stratified random sampling across the target species' range to ensure ecological representation
• Identify key landscape variables for stratification: habitat type, human-wildlife interface areas, population density gradients
• Establish sentinel sites for continuous monitoring and hotspot identification
• Incorporate anthropogenic factors: agricultural interfaces, urban-wildland boundaries, wildlife corridors

Biological Sample Collection and Handling

• Collect standardized sample types across all sites: nasal swabs, blood samples, fecal samples, tissue specimens (when available)
• Implement consistent sample preservation methods: flash freezing in liquid nitrogen, placement in viral transport media, or appropriate fixatives
• Maintain cold chain integrity during transport with temperature monitoring and redundant cooling systems
• Document comprehensive metadata: GPS coordinates, date/time, animal demographics, environmental conditions

Data Collection and Management

• Implement digital data capture using standardized forms on ruggedized tablets or mobile devices
• Collect associated ecological data: vegetation composition, weather conditions, land use characteristics
• Record animal health parameters: body condition, clinical signs, age, sex, reproductive status
• Utilize unique identifiers that link samples to field data and laboratory results

Diagram 1: Integrated surveillance workflow showing the pathway from planning to policy action, highlighting multi-sector coordination points.

Data Management and Analytical Framework

Quantitative Data Standards and Requirements

Table: Minimum Data Standards for Landscape-Scale Wildlife Disease Surveillance

Data Category	Required Elements	Standardization Protocol
Sample Metadata	GPS coordinates (decimal degrees), date/time (ISO 8601), collector ID, unique sample identifier	Darwin Core standards for biodiversity data; OGC standards for spatial data
Host Information	Species (binomial nomenclature), sex, age class, body condition score, reproductive status	Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS) for species nomenclature
Pathogen Data	Detection method (PCR, ELISA, culture), genetic sequence (if applicable), quantification (Ct value, titer)	MIAME standards for microarray data; MINSEQE for sequencing data
Environmental Context	Habitat classification, land use type, weather conditions, proximity to interfaces	IUCN habitat classification scheme; FAO land use classification
Laboratory Methods	RNA/DNA extraction method, primer sequences, assay conditions, quality controls	MIQE guidelines for qPCR experiments; BRISQ standards for biospecimens

Integrated Data Analysis Framework

The analytical framework for landscape-scale surveillance data should incorporate spatial, temporal, and multi-host dynamics to understand disease transmission mechanisms. Key analytical approaches include:

• Spatial Analysis: Utilization of geographic information systems (GIS) to map disease distribution and identify spatial clusters using kernel density estimation and spatial scan statistics
• Network Analysis: Application of social network analysis to understand contact patterns and transmission pathways between individuals and populations [27]
• Multi-scale Modeling: Development of hierarchical models that incorporate individual, population, and landscape-level variables to identify risk factors
• Genomic Epidemiology: Integration of pathogen genomic data with ecological metadata to understand transmission dynamics and evolutionary pathways

Diagram 2: Data integration and analysis framework showing the flow from raw data collection through analytical processes to decision support tools.

Research Reagent Solutions and Essential Materials

Table: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Wildlife Disease Surveillance

Reagent/Material	Specifications	Application in Surveillance
Viral Transport Media	Contains protein stabilizer, antimicrobial agents, buffer; validated for SARS-CoV-2, influenza	Preservation of viral pathogens in field-collected nasal, oral, or rectal swabs
RNA/DNA Stabilization Buffer	Guanidinium thiocyanate-based, room temperature stabilization for 30 days	Preservation of nucleic acids in remote field settings without immediate freezing
Field Nucleic Acid Extraction Kits	Magnetic bead or column-based methods; portable equipment compatibility	Rapid extraction of pathogen nucleic acids in field laboratories for preliminary screening
Multiplex PCR Assays	Targeted detection of multiple pathogens in single reaction; internal controls included	Simultaneous surveillance for priority zoonotic diseases from limited sample volumes
Portable Sequencing Platforms	Oxford Nanopore MinION, Illumina iSeq; battery-powered operation	Genomic characterization of pathogens in near-real-time at field stations
Environmental Sample Collection Kits	Water filters, soil corers, air samplers with appropriate media	Detection of pathogen environmental shedding and contamination
Linked Color Imaging Systems	Standardized digital photography with color calibration cards	Documentation of clinical signs and morphological changes with color fidelity [29]

Implementation Challenges and Mitigation Strategies

Barriers to Effective Collaboration

Effective multi-sector collaboration faces several significant barriers that must be addressed for successful surveillance network implementation [28]:

• Siloed Disciplines and Sectors: Different health sectors often operate independently with limited interaction, leading to missed collaboration opportunities
• Differing Priorities and Funding Mechanisms: Each sector has distinct priorities and funding mechanisms that may conflict with collaborative initiatives
• Communication Barriers: Technical language and terminology differences prevent effective dialogue and collaborative problem-solving
• Resource Limitations: Limited personnel and financial resources for multi-sector initiatives, particularly in low- and middle-income countries
• Institutional and Policy Fragmentation: Separate governmental bodies and agencies develop and implement policies, making coordinated responses difficult

Strategic Mitigation Approaches

• Joint Training and Education Programs: Develop interdisciplinary One Health programs that bring together students from human medicine, veterinary science, and environmental science [28]
• Common Communication Platforms: Establish shared platforms for data collection and analysis, creating accessible databases and knowledge-sharing portals
• Alignment of Institutional Frameworks: Create multi-sectoral health councils or committees that bring together representatives from relevant sectors
• Clear Decision-Making Frameworks: Implement governance structures based on trust, equity in participation, transparency, and mutually beneficial outcomes [28]

Diagram 3: Collaboration framework showing the relationship between barriers, mitigation strategies, stakeholders, and outcomes in multi-sector surveillance.

Case Application: SARS-CoV-2 in White-Tailed Deer

The landscape-scale targeted surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 in white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) and mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) demonstrates the practical application of these protocols [27]. This surveillance system was rapidly deployed across the deer species' ranges in the United States, leveraging partnerships between state and federal agencies and academic researchers.

Key Implementation Features:

• Standardized sampling protocol implementation across multiple states and ecological regions
• Coordination through existing wildlife management frameworks and hunting seasons
• Laboratory capacity sharing across academic and government laboratories
• Data integration through centralized database with standardized metadata
• Genomic sequencing to understand viral evolution and transmission patterns

Adaptive Management Lessons:

• Sampling designs required adaptation as implementation challenges emerged across different jurisdictions
• Flexibility in protocol implementation while maintaining core data standards was essential
• Real-time data sharing enabled rapid assessment of transmission patterns and risk factors
• Integrated analysis of host, pathogen, and environmental data provided insights into transmission mechanisms

This case example illustrates how the principles and protocols outlined in this document can be successfully implemented for national-scale wildlife disease surveillance, providing a model for future surveillance initiatives targeting other wildlife diseases with zoonotic potential.

Integrating Digital Platforms and Participatory Surveillance for Data Collection

Landscape-scale targeted surveillance is critical for understanding disease emergence, dynamics, and risk factors in wildlife populations. This approach collects standardized data across specific individuals, populations, and ecological contexts to develop mechanistic models of disease transmission [30]. The integration of digital platforms with participatory surveillance methodologies enhances the scope, efficiency, and real-time capabilities of wildlife disease research, enabling rapid response to emerging threats such as SARS-CoV-2 in white-tailed deer and chronic wasting disease [30]. This protocol outlines the application of these integrated systems within a comprehensive One Health framework that recognizes the interconnectedness of human, animal, and ecosystem health [31].

Digital Platform Architecture for Wildlife Surveillance

Platform Selection Criteria

The selection of digital platforms should prioritize interoperability, scalability, and adaptability to diverse ecological contexts. Interoperability ensures data exchange between existing health surveillance systems, while scalability allows for expansion across geographical regions and species. Platforms must support standardized data collection to enable cross-system analysis and meta-analyses of disease patterns [31] [30].

Table 1: Digital Platform Types for Participatory Surveillance

Platform Type	Primary Applications	Data Outputs	Implementation Challenges
Web-Based Reporting Portals	Large-scale data collection from researchers, wildlife professionals, and public contributors	Structured data on wildlife observations, morbidity, mortality	Requires internet connectivity; potential for reporting bias
Mobile Applications	Real-time field data collection; geotagged observations	Animal location, health status, photographic evidence, environmental parameters	Variable device capabilities; data synchronization issues
SMS/Text-Based Systems	Areas with limited internet connectivity; citizen science reporting	Basic health reports; mortality events; species identification	Limited data complexity; requires message processing algorithms
Integrated Data Repositories	Aggregation from multiple surveillance streams; analysis and visualization	Combined human, animal, and environmental health indicators; model-ready datasets	Data standardization across sources; privacy and security concerns

Data Parameter Standardization

The compendium of data parameters from existing One Health participatory surveillance systems reveals substantial variation in how parameters are collected, underscoring the need for data standards to enable system interoperability and timely data sharing during outbreaks [31]. Systems operating across multiple continents collect parameters spanning livestock, wildlife, environmental, and human health sectors, with almost one-third (29%) implementing multisector data collection [31].

Table 2: Essential Data Parameters for Wildlife Disease Surveillance

Parameter Category	Specific Parameters	Collection Method	One Health Integration
Animal Demographic	Species, age, sex, reproductive status	Field observation; morphological assessment	Links individual health to population dynamics
Health Status	Clinical signs, body condition, mortality events	Visual assessment; photographic evidence; laboratory confirmation	Connects animal health to human and ecosystem health
Environmental Context	Habitat type, land use, climate variables, human-wildlife interface	Remote sensing; field measurements; participatory mapping	Identifies environmental drivers of disease emergence
Temporal-Spatial	GPS coordinates, date/time, movement patterns	Mobile apps; satellite tracking; researcher and citizen reports	Enables landscape-scale analysis of disease spread
Human Dimensions	Wildlife-livestock contact, human perception, reporting source	Surveys; interviews; participatory mapping	Addresses anthropogenic factors in disease transmission

Participatory Surveillance Methodologies

Stakeholder Engagement Framework

Successful participatory surveillance requires engaging diverse stakeholders through structured frameworks. Research networks that combine state and federal agencies with academic institutions provide the infrastructure for landscape-scale targeted surveillance [30]. Community-level participants including landowners, hunters, wildlife enthusiasts, and indigenous knowledge holders contribute essential observational data and contextual understanding of local ecosystems.

Implementation of the engagement framework involves:

• Stakeholder Identification: Mapping all potential contributors across the wildlife-livestock-human interface
• Capacity Building: Developing training materials for standardized data collection
• Feedback Mechanisms: Ensuring bidirectional information flow to maintain participant engagement
• Ethical Considerations: Addressing data privacy, intellectual property, and cultural sensitivities

Integrated Surveillance Protocols

The integration of participatory surveillance with traditional approaches enhances early detection of emerging health threats at the interfaces where animals, humans, and environmental factors converge [31]. This protocol adapts established methodologies for landscape-scale targeted surveillance of wildlife diseases [30].

Sampling Design Protocol

Objective: Establish statistically valid sampling strategies for detecting disease presence and estimating prevalence across landscape scales.

Materials:

• GPS units or smartphones with geolocation capabilities
• Digital data collection forms configured for specific disease systems
• Sample collection kits (swabs, blood collection supplies, appropriate personal protective equipment)
• Standardized photographic reference guides for clinical signs

Procedure:

• Stratified Sampling: Divide the study area into strata based on ecological factors (habitat type, human footprint, known wildlife corridors) and disease risk factors
• Site Selection: Within strata, randomly select sampling locations while considering accessibility and logistical constraints
• Temporal Frequency: Establish sampling intervals based on disease dynamics and seasonal patterns
• Multi-Scale Data Collection: Implement nested sampling designs that collect data at individual, population, and landscape levels
• Integration of Opportunistic Reports: Develop protocols for incorporating incidental wildlife observations from participatory sources while accounting for reporting bias

Validation: Compare participatory surveillance data with parallel traditional surveillance data to assess sensitivity and specificity. Implement statistical corrections for detection probability and reporting bias.

Quantitative Analysis and Modeling Framework

Data Integration and Modeling Approaches

Quantitative models are powerful tools for informing conservation management and decision-making, with three key roles in conservation: (a) assessing the extent of a conservation problem; (b) providing insights into the dynamics of complex social and ecological systems; and (c) evaluating the efficacy of proposed conservation interventions [32]. The integration of participatory surveillance data with quantitative models enables the development of mechanistic understanding of disease emergence.

Model Implementation Protocol

Objective: Develop quantitative models that leverage integrated surveillance data to understand disease dynamics and predict emergence hotspots.

Analytical Framework:

• Occupancy Modeling: Estimate probability of disease detection while accounting for imperfect detection using participatory surveillance data [33]
• Resource Selection Analysis: Identify environmental and anthropogenic factors influencing wildlife habitat use and disease transmission risk [33]
• Dynamic Population Modeling: Project disease spread under different intervention scenarios using individual-based models [33]
• Machine Learning Applications: Implement random forests and boosted regression trees to identify complex, nonlinear relationships in surveillance data [33]

Implementation Considerations:

• Clearly state model assumptions and parameter interpretations [32]
• Include measures of model and parameter uncertainty [32]
• Communicate uncertainty in model results to stakeholders [32]
• Balance the use of all available data with model complexity [32]
• Publish model code to ensure transparency and reproducibility [32]

Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 3: Research Reagent Solutions for Wildlife Disease Surveillance

Reagent/Material	Specifications	Application in Surveillance	Implementation Notes
Mobile Data Collection Platform	Smartphone apps with offline capability; GPS accuracy ≤5m; customizable forms	Field data collection; real-time reporting; geotagged observations	Select platforms with export functionality to common formats (CSV, JSON)
Remote Camera Systems	Weather-resistant housing; motion sensors; night vision capability	Non-invasive monitoring of wildlife behavior; population counts; mortality detection	Deploy at wildlife corridors, water sources, and bait stations
Sample Collection Kits	Sterile swabs; blood collection cards; appropriate preservatives; cold chain maintenance	Pathogen detection; serological studies; genetic analysis	Tailor to target pathogens; ensure biosafety compliance
GPS Tracking Equipment	Collars or tags with programmable duty cycles; satellite or UHF capabilities	Movement ecology; contact rates; habitat use analysis	Consider battery life, weight restrictions, and retrieval methods
Molecular Diagnostic Assays	PCR primers/probes for target pathogens; portable field sequencing technologies	Pathogen detection and characterization; variant monitoring	Validate assays for wildlife species; include positive controls
Data Management System	Secure databases; API interfaces; spatial data support	Data integration from multiple sources; quality control; visualization	Implement version control; ensure GDPR/HIPAA compliance where applicable

Implementation Challenges and Adaptive Strategies

The deployment of integrated digital surveillance systems faces several implementation challenges that require adaptive management approaches. Technical barriers include variable connectivity in remote areas and interoperability between data systems. Social considerations encompass participant engagement, data privacy concerns, and cultural differences in wildlife relationships. Analytical challenges involve accounting for reporting bias in participatory data and integrating diverse data streams with different spatial and temporal resolutions [31] [30].

Adaptive strategies for addressing these challenges include:

• Multi-Modal Data Collection: Implementing complementary technologies (SMS, mobile apps, web portals) to accommodate varying connectivity and user preferences
• Structured Feedback Loops: Providing regular updates to participants on how their data is being used and contributing to conservation outcomes
• Iterative Protocol Refinement: Regularly reviewing and adjusting sampling designs based on operational experience and analytical findings
• Capacity Building Investments: Developing training resources for both technical implementers and field participants to ensure data quality and sustained engagement

The successful implementation of these integrated systems requires ongoing collaboration between wildlife managers, quantitative ecologists, software developers, and local stakeholders to balance technological capabilities with practical field constraints and scientific objectives.

This case study details the rapid deployment of a surveillance framework for detecting SARS-CoV-2 in free-ranging white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), demonstrating a critical application of landscape-scale targeted surveillance for wildlife disease research. Findings confirm that white-tailed deer are susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection and can sustain transmission cycles of multiple variants, including those no longer circulating in human populations [34] [35]. The persistence of the Alpha (B.1.1.7) variant in deer more than a year after its displacement in humans underscores the potential for wildlife reservoirs to complicate public health efforts [34] [36]. This report provides validated protocols and data frameworks to guide future surveillance strategies for zoonotic pathogens at the human-wildlife interface.

Quantitative Data Synthesis from Surveillance Studies

The following tables consolidate key quantitative findings from recent large-scale surveillance efforts, highlighting the prevalence, viral diversity, and transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 in white-tailed deer.

Table 1: Summary of SARS-CoV-2 Detection in White-Tailed Deer from Major Surveillance Studies

Study Description	Sampling Period	Total Samples Collected	RT-PCR Positives	Positivity Rate	Sequenced Genomes	Key Variants Identified (Pango Lineages)
Multi-State (23 states) Surveillance [35]	Nov 2021 - Apr 2022	8,830	944	10.7%	391	Alpha (B.1.1.7), Gamma, Delta (multiple), Omicron (multiple)
Northeast Ohio Surveillance [34]	Jan 2022 - Mar 2023	519	36 (Sequenced)	~6.9%*	36	Alpha (B.1.1.7), BQ.1.1, BQ.1.1.63, BQ.1.1.67, BQ.1.23, XBB.1.5.35

*Percentage calculated from the number of sequenced samples out of total collected, as the total number of PCR positives was not explicitly stated in [34].

Table 2: Analysis of Spillover Events and Transmission Dynamics [35]

Transmission Category	Number of Events Identified	Description	Variants Involved
Human-Deer	64	Single spillover from humans to a deer, with no evidence of further deer-to-deer spread.	60 Delta, 3 Alpha, 1 Omicron
Human-Deer-Deer	39	Spillover from humans followed by subsequent deer-to-deer transmission.	29 Delta, 8 Alpha, 2 Gamma
Human-Deer-Human	3	Spillover from humans to deer, deer-to-deer transmission, and suspected spillback from deer to humans.	3 Delta

Experimental Protocols for Surveillance and Diagnosis

This section outlines detailed, standardized protocols for field sampling and laboratory confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 in white-tailed deer, essential for generating comparable data across landscape-scale studies.

• Sample Collection:

  • Target Sample: Nasal swabs and/or oropharyngeal swabs are the sample of choice for active infection detection, as they yield higher viral loads compared to fecal or tissue samples [37].
  • Procedure: Using a sterile polyester-tipped swab, thoroughly sample the nasal passage and/or oropharynx of the animal.
  • Post-Collection: Immediately place the swab into a 3-mL vial containing viral transport medium (VTM) or saline.

• Sample Storage & Transport:

  • Chill samples in the field immediately after collection.
  • Store samples at 2-8°C if processing within 72 hours.
  • For longer storage, keep samples or extracted RNA at -70°C to -80°C [34] [37].

Laboratory Diagnostic Protocols

A. Molecular Detection via RT-qPCR [34] [37]

• Principle: considered the 'gold-standard' for detecting active SARS-CoV-2 infection by amplifying viral RNA.
• Procedure:
  • RNA Extraction: Extract viral RNA from 200 μL of VTM using a commercial nucleic acid isolation kit (e.g., MagMAX Viral/Pathogen II Nucleic Acid Isolation Kit).
  • RT-qPCR Assay: Perform quantitative real-time RT-PCR using a multi-target kit (e.g., TaqPath COVID-19 Combo Kit).
  • Interpretation: A sample is considered positive with a cycle threshold (Ct) value of <37 on two or more viral targets (e.g., nucleocapsid (N) gene, spike (S) gene, open reading frame 1ab (ORF1ab)) [34]. Samples with a Ct <33 are typically selected for subsequent genome sequencing.

B. Rapid Field-Based Testing via Multiplex LAMP [38]

• Principle: Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) allows for rapid, specific amplification of viral RNA at a constant temperature, eliminating the need for complex thermocyclers.
• Procedure (COVISelect Test):
  • Sample Preparation: Use unpurified sample material, eliminating the nucleic acid extraction step.
  • Amplification: Add the sample to a ready-to-use, lyophilized master mix containing a strand-displacing DNA polymerase with high reverse transcriptase activity (e.g., neoBolt Bst DNA Polymerase).
  • Detection: Incubate in a portable, battery-operated device that provides real-time fluorescence readout. The test simultaneously detects an internal control and SARS-CoV-2 targets.
  • Duration: Results are obtained in under 30 minutes, including sample preparation [38].

C. Serological Assays for Antibody Detection [39] [40]

• Principle: Detects past infection and exposure by measuring virus-specific neutralizing antibodies in serum.
• Sample Collection: Paired blood samples can be collected via:
  • Serum Separator Tubes: Provides higher sampling sensitivity for subsequent tests [39].
  • Nobuto Filter Paper Strips: Offers field convenience but with potentially lower sensitivity (as low as 21% for mule deer and 40% for white-tailed deer) [39].
• Assay Types:
  • Surrogate Virus Neutralization Test (sVNT): A high-throughput assay that detects antibodies inhibiting the interaction between the viral spike protein and the host cell receptor (ACE2). A 40% inhibition threshold is recommended for the Omicron variant in deer sera [39].
  • Plaque Reduction Neutralization Test (PRNT): The gold-standard serological assay that measures the titer of antibodies capable of neutralizing live virus in cell culture. A 90% neutralization (PRNT90) criterion is highly specific [40].

D. Whole-Genome Sequencing for Variant Tracking [34]

• Principle: Enables genomic surveillance to identify circulating variants and track transmission pathways.
• Procedure:
  • cDNA Synthesis: Reverse transcribe extracted RNA into cDNA.
  • Enrichment: Enrich for SARS-CoV-2 using two separate PCR reactions with the ARTIC 4.1 primer set.
  • Library Preparation: Recombine enriched products, perform cleanup, and prepare sequencing libraries using a protocol like Illumina DNA Prep.
  • Sequencing & Analysis: Sequence on a platform such as Illumina NextSeq2000. Analyze fastq files using pipelines like DRAGEN Covid Lineage. Map reads to a reference genome (e.g., MN908947.3) and call variants to generate consensus sequences for phylogenetic analysis.

Diagnostic Workflow Visualization

The following diagram illustrates the integrated workflow from field sampling to final diagnostic and surveillance outcomes.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents & Materials

Table 3: Key Research Reagent Solutions for SARS-CoV-2 Deer Surveillance

Item	Function/Application	Example Product / Note
Viral Transport Medium (VTM)	Preserves viral RNA integrity in swab samples during transport and storage.	Essential for maintaining sample quality for PCR and sequencing [34].
MagMAX Viral/Pathogen NA Kit	Automated nucleic acid extraction from challenging sample matrices like nasal swabs.	MagMAX Viral/Pathogen II Nucleic Acid Isolation Kit [34].
TaqPath COVID-19 Combo Kit	Multi-target RT-qPCR assay for sensitive detection of active SARS-CoV-2 infection.	Targets N, S, and ORF1ab genes; includes MS2 phage internal control [34].
ARTIC 4.1 Primers	A set of primers for multiplex PCR to efficiently amplify the entire SARS-CoV-2 genome for sequencing.	Critical for preparing sequencing libraries from low viral load samples [34].
neoBolt Bst DNA Polymerase	Engineered polymerase with high reverse transcriptase activity for rapid, isothermal amplification.	Key component of the COVISelect LAMP test for field deployment [38].
SARS-CoV-2 sVNT Kit	High-throughput serological assay to detect neutralizing antibodies against specific variants.	Optimal 40% inhibition threshold for Omicron in deer sera [39].

Integration with Landscape-Scale Targeted Surveillance Design

The protocols and findings herein directly inform the principles of landscape-scale targeted surveillance design for wildlife diseases, as exemplified in historical models like raccoon rabies management [3] [8]. This approach prioritizes resources in high-risk populations and geographical areas where specific risk factors are known.

• Spatiotemporal Targeting: Surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 in deer can be optimized by focusing on areas with high deer density and frequent human-deer interactions. Historical data shows that for raccoon rabies, recent case detection in a county or its neighbors was a more informative predictor of future cases than broad metrics alone [8].
• Risk-Based Sampling: The confirmed deer-to-deer and potential deer-to-human transmission of SARS-CoV-2 [34] [35] defines white-tailed deer as a high-risk population, justifying ongoing and enhanced surveillance as part of a One Health framework.
• Adaptive Management: The rapid mutation rate of SARS-CoV-2 in deer (approximately three times faster than in humans) [34] [36] necessitates continuous genomic surveillance to monitor for the emergence of novel, potentially adapted variants that could pose a spillback risk to humans, livestock, or other wildlife.

Advanced Sampling Designs that Account for Host Social Structure and Clustering

Landscape-scale targeted surveillance represents a powerful paradigm in wildlife disease ecology, deliberately designed to collect standardized data across individual, population, and landscape scales [1]. A critical advancement within this framework is the explicit incorporation of host social structure and population clustering, which are fundamental drivers of pathogen transmission dynamics [41] [42]. Deviations from homogeneous mixing within wildlife populations create contact heterogeneities that profoundly influence outbreak probability, size, and progression [42]. Sampling designs that fail to account for this structure risk generating biased prevalence estimates and misleading models, ultimately compromising disease management and control strategies [43] [42].

The core principle of these advanced designs is to align data collection with the underlying contact ecology of the host species. For social species, transmission events are not random but are constrained by group membership, social affinities, and shared space use [41]. Furthermore, populations often exhibit clustering at broader spatial scales, forming metapopulations where connected subpopulations experience independent or correlated disease dynamics [1] [42]. By leveraging these structural properties, researchers can design more efficient, informative, and cost-effective surveillance programs, sometimes reducing required sample sizes by over 75% compared to designs assuming host independence [43].

Theoretical Foundation: Linking Social Structure to Disease Dynamics

The Role of Contact Heterogeneity

Pathogen transmission in socially structured populations depends on the interaction between contact patterns and pathogen life-history [42]. Different contact structures—from homogeneous mixing to complex networks—can lead to vastly different epidemiological outcomes, even for the same pathogen. Research on disease-emergence dynamics in feral swine, a socially structured species, has demonstrated that pathogens with short infectious periods (e.g., Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus) exhibit low persistence probabilities in spatially structured or network-based contact systems. In contrast, pathogens with longer infectious periods (e.g., Classical Swine Fever Virus) can persist across a wider range of social structures [42]. This interplay underscores the necessity of tailoring surveillance design to both the host's social system and the specific pathogen of concern.

Key Metrics for Quantifying Social Structure

Social Network Analysis (SNA) provides a quantitative toolbox for characterizing the contact patterns relevant to disease spread. These metrics can be calculated from data collected via direct observation, biologging technology (e.g., GPS collars, proximity logers), or camera traps [41]. The resulting network can be analyzed at both the individual and population levels, with the choice of metric depending on the specific research question. The table below summarizes key SNA metrics and their epidemiological relevance.

Table 1: Social Network Metrics and Their Application in Wildlife Disease Ecology

Metric	Level	Epidemiological Interpretation	Application in Sampling Design
Degree	Individual	Number of direct contacts; identifies potential "superspreaders" with high contact rates [41].	Target individuals with high degree for sentinel surveillance or diagnostic testing.
Strength	Individual	Summed frequency or duration of an individual's contacts [41].	Prioritize sampling of individuals with high strength, as they may have higher exposure risk.
Betweenness	Individual	Measures how often an individual lies on the shortest path between others; identifies "bridges" between social groups [41].	Target individuals with high betweenness to monitor pathogen movement between clusters.
Clustering Coefficient	Population	Quantifies the degree to which nodes tend to cluster together; indicates localized transmission potential [41].	Informs the level of clustering to account for in sample size calculations [43].
Modularity	Population	Degree to which a network is subdivided into distinct, dense modules or communities [41].	Supports stratified sampling by module, with potential for adaptive sampling between modules.

Quantitative Frameworks for Sampling Clustered Populations

Sample Size Calculations Accounting for Clustering

A primary practical application of this theory is the adjustment of sample size calculations to reflect the non-independence of hosts due to social or spatial clustering. When individuals cluster, their disease status becomes correlated, reducing the effective sample size and the amount of unique information gained per individual sampled [43]. Novel statistical equations have been developed that incorporate this clustering effect, allowing researchers and managers to compute the number of animals needed to test to declare a population free from disease or to estimate prevalence with a desired precision.

The underlying model often uses a Bayesian framework to estimate prevalence, formally incorporating the intra-cluster correlation coefficient [43]. The efficiency gains can be substantial. In some documented cases, leveraging knowledge of animal social structure can reduce the required sample size by more than 75% over traditional methods that assume hosts are independent [43]. This represents a significant reduction in cost, labor, and animal handling, enabling more robust scientific investigation with fewer resources.

Spatiotemporal Sampling Designs

At the landscape scale, sampling designs must also account for spatial and temporal heterogeneity. A tiered sampling strategy that combines different approaches offers a scalable and cost-effective solution [44].

Table 2: Spatiotemporal Sampling Designs for Landscape-Scale Surveillance

Design	Description	Advantages	Ideal Use Case
Stratified Random	Sampling units are placed randomly within pre-defined strata (e.g., habitat types, social groups) [44].	Ensures representative coverage of key sub-populations or environmental gradients.	Landscapes with high heterogeneity; when specific host clusters are known.
Systematic/Grid	Sampling units are placed at regular intervals across the landscape [44].	Simple to implement, reduces bias, provides good spatial coverage for model-based inference.	When little prior information is available; for estimating a site-level average [44].
Temporally Adaptive	Survey effort is concentrated in time periods when detection probability is highest, based on initial results [45].	Improves detection rates for elusive species with temporally variable abundance or visibility.	Species with high inter-annual reproductive variance or seasonal detectability [45].
Adaptive (Spatial)	Initial random samples are taken; if a positive is found, additional samples are taken in the vicinity [45].	Highly efficient for detecting rare species or pathogens with clumped (aggregated) distributions.	Initial detection of a novel pathogen in a new region or host population.

Practical Application: Protocols for Socially-Structured Surveillance

Protocol 1: Implementing a Social Network-Based Surveillance Program

This protocol outlines the steps for designing a surveillance program that leverages quantitative social network metrics.

• Define the Network and Edges: Pre-define the biological rationale for a "contact" based on the pathogen's transmission route (e.g., physical interaction, proximity within a certain distance) [41].
• Data Collection: Use biologging devices (e.g., GPS collars, proximity loggers) or direct observation to record associations or interactions between individuals. Data should be stored as an edgelist detailing the two individuals connected and the weight (e.g., duration, frequency) of each edge [41].
• Network Construction and Analysis: Construct the social network using software like R. Calculate relevant individual-level (e.g., degree, betweenness) and population-level (e.g., modularity) metrics (see Table 1) [41].
• Stratified Sampling: Use network metrics to stratify the population. For example:
  • Sample individuals proportional to their degree centrality to capture the core of the network.
  • Ensure to include individuals with high betweenness centrality to monitor bridges between modules.
  • Randomly sample within each distinct module identified by high modularity.
• Diagnostic Testing and Data Analysis: Conduct disease diagnostics on collected samples. Analyze results in relation to network position to identify risk factors and validate the transmission relevance of the constructed network.

The workflow below visualizes this multi-stage protocol.

Protocol 2: Leveraging Social Clustering for Population-Level Freedom-from-Disease Surveys

This protocol uses the natural clustering of wildlife to efficiently demonstrate the absence of a disease.

• Parameter Definition: Define the population parameters:
  • Population Size (N): The total number of individuals in the population of interest.
  • Design Prevalence (P*): The threshold prevalence you aim to detect (e.g., 1%).
  • Intra-Cluster Correlation (ρ): A statistical measure of the relatedness within clusters. This can be estimated from pilot data, previous studies, or social network metrics like the clustering coefficient [43].
• Sample Size Calculation: Use specialized software or statistical packages (e.g., the interactive app referenced in [43]) that implement Bayesian modeling to compute the required sample size. Input the parameters from Step 1. The model will output a smaller sample size than traditional methods by accounting for the clustering effect.
• Cluster Identification and Selection: Identify natural social or spatial clusters within the population (e.g., family groups, prides, colonies). Randomly select a number of these clusters based on the sampling design.
• Within-Cluster Sampling: Within each selected cluster, randomly select individuals for testing. The number per cluster will be determined by the statistical model from Step 2.
• Diagnostic Testing and Inference: Test selected individuals. If all tests are negative, one can conclude with a known statistical confidence that the disease is absent from the population at a level above the design prevalence.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Successful implementation of these advanced sampling designs requires a suite of methodological tools and reagents.

Table 3: Essential Reagents and Tools for Socially-Structured Disease Surveillance

Category	Item	Function/Application
Data Collection	GPS/Proximity Loggers [41]	Automatically records individual location and contact data for constructing movement and social networks.
	Non-invasive Sampling Kits (e.g., for fecal, urine, hair collection) [46]	Allows sample collection with minimal disturbance to animals, crucial for not altering natural social behavior.
	Acoustic Sensors & Camera Traps [44]	Remote tools for monitoring presence, behavior, and group composition.
Laboratory Analysis	eDNA/eRNA Kits [44]	Detects pathogen DNA/RNA from environmental samples (water, soil), useful for assessing pathogen presence in shared spaces.
	Pathogen-Specific PCR Assays	Provides definitive diagnosis from non-invasively collected samples (e.g., from feces) [46].
	Multiplex Serological Assays	Screens for exposure to multiple pathogens from a single sample, such as blood collected via vector-borne blood meals [46].
Data Analysis	R packages (igraph, sna, tnet) [41]	Calculates social network metrics (degree, betweenness, modularity) and models disease spread.
	Bayesian Sample Size Calculators [43]	Computes required sample sizes for prevalence estimation or freedom-from-disease surveys, accounting for social clustering.
	Spatial Modeling Software (e.g., for kriging) [44]	Extrapolates findings from sampled to unsampled locations using model-based inference.

Integrating host social structure and clustering into wildlife disease surveillance is no longer a theoretical concept but a practical necessity for robust science and effective management. The frameworks and protocols outlined here provide a roadmap for moving beyond assumptions of population homogeneity. By strategically targeting individuals and clusters based on their network position and using statistically sound methods to account for non-independence, researchers can achieve greater efficiency, accuracy, and predictive power in their landscape-scale targeted surveillance efforts. This advanced approach ultimately leads to a more mechanistic understanding of disease drivers and more successful interventions to protect wildlife, livestock, and human health.

Overcoming Real-World Challenges: Bias, Sampling, and System Optimization

Addressing Sampling Biases in Hunter-Harvest and Passive Surveillance Data

Effective wildlife disease surveillance at a landscape scale is fundamentally dependent on the quality of data collected. Hunter-harvest and passive surveillance are two common data sources, but each introduces specific sampling biases that can distort research findings and compromise management decisions. Hunter-harvest data often exhibits selection bias toward certain age classes, sexes, or health statuses, as hunters may selectively target specific animals. Passive surveillance, which relies on reports of sick or dead animals, suffers from accessibility and detectability biases, where data collection is concentrated near human infrastructure and is more likely to include clinically ill individuals. This Application Note provides structured protocols and analytical tools to identify, quantify, and correct for these biases, enabling the design of a more targeted and effective surveillance system.

Quantifying Bias in Common Wildlife Data Collection Methods

A recent study on wild boar population management provides a quantitative framework for evaluating the age and sex selectivity of various hunting and capture methods, which is directly analogous to the biases present in disease surveillance data [47]. The performance and demographic bias of these methods are summarized in the table below.

Table 1: Performance and Demographic Bias of Wild Boar Hunting and Capture Methods [47]

Method	Overall Performance (Individuals/Event)	Primary Age Class Bias	Sex Bias in Adults	Seasonal Performance (Best to Worst)
Drop Net	Moderate	Adult females, Yearlings, Juveniles	Female	Summer, Autumn, Spring, Winter
Teleanaesthesia	Data Available in Source	Data Available in Source	Data Available in Source	Data Available in Source
Cage Traps	Moderate	Juveniles	Minimal	Summer, Autumn, Spring, Winter
Night Stalks	Data Available in Source	Data Available in Source	Data Available in Source	Data Available in Source
Drive Hunting	High	Adult males, Adult females, Yearlings	Male (for adults)	Summer, Autumn, Spring, Winter

This data highlights that no single method provides a demographically neutral sample. Drive hunting, while high-yield, underrepresents juveniles. Conversely, cage traps are effective for juveniles but underrepresent adults. Seasonality also significantly impacts all methods, with summer consistently being the highest-yielding season [47]. For a comprehensive view, integrating multiple methods is crucial to mitigate the inherent biases of any single approach.

Experimental Protocols for Bias Assessment and Correction

Protocol 1: Field Data Collection for Bias Quantification

Objective: To collect standardized field data that enables the quantification of age and sex bias in hunter-harvest and passive surveillance samples.

Materials:

• Animal carcasses or samples from hunter-harvest or mortality events.
• Standardized data collection forms (digital or physical).
• Basic dissection kit for tissue sampling.
• Tags and labels for sample identification.
• GPS unit for location data.

Methodology:

• Demographic Data Recording: For each animal encountered, record the following:
  • Sex: Determine through morphological examination.
  • Age Class: Classify as juvenile (<1 year), yearling (1-2 years), or adult (>2 years) using a combination of body size, tooth eruption, and wear patterns [47].
  • Body Condition: Note any obvious signs of disease, emaciation, or injury.
• Spatial and Temporal Data: Record the precise geographic location (GPS coordinates) and date of collection.
• Sample Collection: Collect relevant tissues (e.g., blood, lymph nodes, serum) for disease screening, ensuring all samples are linked to the individual animal's demographic data.
• Method Documentation: Document the specific capture or reporting method (e.g., drop net, cage trap, found dead) for each sample.

Protocol 2: Data Analysis for Bias Adjustment

Objective: To analyze collected data to identify significant biases and calculate adjustment factors for population-level disease prevalence estimates.

Materials:

• Dataset with demographic, spatial, temporal, and disease-testing results.
• Statistical software (e.g., R, Python with pandas, SPSS).
• Independent population data (e.g., from camera traps, aerial surveys) if available.

Methodology:

• Stratified Analysis: Analyze disease prevalence separately for each age class and sex (e.g., prevalence in adult males vs. juvenile females).
• Comparison to Baseline: Compare the demographic distribution of your sample (e.g., 70% adult males) to a known or estimated population demographic structure (e.g., 30% adult males in the population). A significant difference indicates a sampling bias.
• Statistical Modeling: Use generalized linear models (GLMs) to test the influence of capture method, season, and demographic factors on the likelihood of an animal being sampled and its disease status [47].
• Calculation of Adjustment Weights: For prevalence estimation, calculate weights for each demographic stratum inversely proportional to their probability of being sampled. For example, if adult males are three times more likely to be sampled than juveniles, juvenile data should be weighted more heavily in the overall prevalence calculation.

The following workflow outlines the logical process for moving from biased raw data to a bias-corrected surveillance design.

Diagram 1: Workflow for Addressing Sampling Biases in Surveillance Data

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Successful field surveillance and subsequent bias analysis require a suite of specialized materials. The following table details key items and their functions.

Table 2: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Wildlife Disease Surveillance

Item Category	Specific Examples	Function in Protocol
Sample Collection & Preservation	Sterile swabs, Serum separator tubes, RNAlater, Dry ice or liquid nitrogen	Preservation of nucleic acids and viability of pathogens for subsequent laboratory analysis.
Field Data Recording	Ruggedized tablets or PDAs, GPS units, Digital cameras, Standardized data forms	Ensures accurate, georeferenced, and standardized metadata collection for spatial and temporal bias analysis.
Demographic Assessment	Dental probe for age estimation, Calipers for body measurements, Field scales	Critical for determining the age and body condition of sampled animals to quantify demographic bias.
Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)	Nitrile gloves, N95 respirators, Disposable coveralls	Protects personnel from zoonotic pathogens during animal handling and necropsy.
Statistical Analysis Tools	R statistical environment, GIS software (e.g., QGIS, ArcGIS)	Enables the spatial analysis of data gaps and calculation of statistical weights for bias adjustment.

Ignoring the inherent biases in hunter-harvest and passive surveillance data can lead to a profound misunderstanding of wildlife disease dynamics at a landscape scale. By systematically quantifying these biases using the provided experimental protocols and analytical workflows, researchers can move from relying on convenience samples to designing a targeted, evidence-based surveillance system. The integration of multiple data sources, coupled with statistical correction for known biases, allows for more accurate estimates of disease prevalence and a more robust foundation for management and intervention strategies.

Statistical and Modeling Solutions for Non-Random Disease Distribution

Application Note: Integrating Data Standards and Geospatial Tools for Targeted Surveillance

Non-random disease distribution in wildlife populations presents significant challenges for surveillance and control. This non-uniformity, driven by heterogeneous host distributions, environmental gradients, and varying transmission dynamics, necessitates sophisticated statistical and modeling approaches for effective landscape-scale surveillance design. Framed within a broader thesis on targeted surveillance design, this application note details protocols for implementing a novel minimum data standard alongside geospatial tools and network models to optimize resource allocation, enhance outbreak detection, and inform control strategies for wildlife diseases.

A critical barrier in wildlife disease ecology has been fragmented and inconsistent data, which limits the utility of collected information for secondary analysis and modeling. A newly proposed minimum data and metadata standard addresses this by providing a flexible framework for recording, formatting, and sharing wildlife disease data to enhance transparency, reusability, and global utility [12]. This standard is pivotal for aligning wildlife surveillance with global health security goals, enabling broader data aggregation across studies to improve capacity for detecting and responding to emerging infectious threats.

Core Data Standardization Protocol

The following protocol, based on the proposed minimum data standard, ensures collected data are Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR).

• Objective: To standardize the collection and reporting of wildlife disease data at the finest possible spatial, temporal, and taxonomic resolution to support robust spatial and statistical modeling.
• Materials: Data collection forms (digital or physical), GPS device, unique sample identifiers.
• Procedure:
  • Record All Data Points: Document every sampling event, including both positive and negative test results. Omitting negative results severely constrains the ability to calculate accurate disease prevalence [12].
  • Collect Core Data Fields: For each sample, record a minimum of the 9 required data fields from the standard. The full standard encompasses 40 data fields and 24 metadata fields for comprehensive documentation [48].
  • Document Methodological Metadata: Record all relevant metadata, including the diagnostic assay used (e.g., PCR, ELISA), sampling methodology, and any pooling strategies. This is critical for interpreting results and comparing across studies [12].
  • Georeference Samples: Record geographic coordinates at the finest resolution possible using a GNSS device. For sensitive species or high-risk pathogens, implement data obfuscation protocols as a security safeguard to prevent misuse [12] [49].
  • Format for Re-use: Structure data into a flat format (e.g., .csv) using open, non-proprietary standards. Include a data dictionary explaining all fields, codes, and abbreviations [12].
  • Deposit in Repositories: Share complete datasets via open-access repositories such as Zenodo, GBIF, or specialized databases like PHAROS to ensure long-term accessibility and citability [12].

Quantitative Data Tables for Surveillance Design

Table 1: Minimum Data Standard - Core Required Fields for Wildlife Disease Surveillance [12] [48]

Field Name	Description	Data Type	Importance for Modeling
Investigation ID	Unique identifier for the study or surveillance project.	Text	Links data to project metadata and publications.
Sample ID	Unique identifier for the individual sample or observation.	Text	Ensures traceability and prevents duplication.
Host Species	Lowest possible taxonomic classification of the host.	Text	Captures host specificity, a key driver of non-random distribution.
Date of Collection	Calendar date of sample collection.	Date	Enables temporal trend analysis and seasonality studies.
Geographic Coordinates	Latitude and longitude of sample origin.	Numeric	Fundamental for spatial analysis and mapping disease risk.
Diagnostic Assay	Specific test used for pathogen detection.	Text	Allows for assessment of test sensitivity/specificity in models.
Diagnostic Result	Pathogen detection result (e.g., positive/negative).	Text	The primary outcome variable for prevalence and distribution models.
Data Collector	Individual or organization responsible for data collection.	Text	Ensures accountability and allows for follow-up.
Data License	Terms of use for the shared dataset.	Text	Promotes ethical and legal re-use of data.

Table 2: Overview of Modeling Approaches for Non-Random Disease Distribution

Modeling Approach	Key Characteristics	Application in Wildlife Disease	Cited Example
Network Models	Represents populations as nodes (individuals/groups) connected by edges (transmission pathways). Captures heterogeneous contact structures.	Simulating disease spread through social or spatial connections; evaluating targeted vaccination.	Modeling measles spread using Erdős-Rényi, Stochastic Block Models, and Random Geometric Graphs [50].
Geospatial Models	Integrates geographic, environmental, and climatic data with disease occurrence points.	Identifying environmental drivers of disease; creating habitat suitability and risk maps for pathogens.	CerMapp prototype for creating analysis-ready geospatial wildlife disease databases [49].
Statistical Models (e.g., GLMs, GLMMs)	Fits mathematical relationships between dependent (e.g., infection status) and independent variables (e.g., environmental covariates).	Quantifying associations between disease presence and landscape-scale risk factors.	Foundation for spatial epidemiology and risk analysis using GIS data [49].

Experimental Protocols for Key Methodologies

Protocol 1: Implementing a Cloud-Based Geospatial Surveillance System

This protocol is adapted from the CerMapp (Certificazione Materiali Patologico) prototype, a cloud-based system designed to fill the critical gap of standardized, national-scale geodatabases for wildlife diseases [49].

• Objective: To establish a centralized, geospatial database for wildlife disease data that supports spatial epidemiology and One Health initiatives.
• Materials:
  • Mobile data collection application (e.g., based on ESRI ArcGIS Survey123).
  • Cloud-based geodatabase (e.g., ArcGIS Online).
  • Cloud computing platform for remote sensing analysis (e.g., Google Earth Engine).
• Procedure:
  • Platform Configuration: Develop a digital form within a mobile application that incorporates the fields from the minimum data standard (Table 1). Configure the form for offline use to enable data collection in remote areas.
  • Field Data Collection: Veterinarians, foresters, or wildlife biologists use the mobile app to record data on wildlife morbidity/mortality. The app should automatically capture GNSS coordinates or allow for manual map-pointing.
  • Data Centralization: Collected data is synced to a centralized cloud-based geodatabase when an internet connection is available. This creates a structured, analysis-ready data repository.
  • Data Integration: Link the wildlife health data with remote sensing layers (e.g., land surface temperature, vegetation index, water bodies) from platforms like Google Earth Engine.
  • Spatial Analysis: Use the integrated data to perform spatial analyses, such as cluster detection, risk mapping, and habitat suitability modeling for pathogens.
  • Reporting and Visualization: Develop automated reports and interactive dashboards (e.g., "MeaslesTracker" for human diseases) to visualize trends and inform public health and conservation authorities [50].

The workflow for this geospatial surveillance system is detailed in the diagram below.

Protocol 2: Network Modeling for Vaccination Strategy Assessment

This protocol utilizes network-based simulations to assess the impact of vaccination coverage on disease spread in a heterogeneous population, as demonstrated in studies of measles [50].

• Objective: To simulate the impact of varying vaccination coverage on the potential and extent of disease outbreaks using different population network structures.
• Materials:
  • Computational software for network analysis and simulation (e.g., R, Python with NetworkX library).
  • Data on population contact structures or parameters to generate synthetic networks.
• Procedure:
  • Network Generation: Construct a network representing population contacts. Common models include:
    • Erdős-Rényi (ER): Nodes are connected randomly with a fixed probability. Represents a baseline with minimal structure [50].
    • Stochastic Block Model (SBM): Nodes are divided into blocks (communities), with higher connection probabilities within blocks than between them. Simulates population subgroups [50].
    • Random Geometric Graph (RGG): Nodes are placed in a metric space and connected if within a specified distance. Incorporates spatial proximity [50].
  • Model Parameterization: Define disease parameters (e.g., transmission probability, recovery rate) based on the pathogen of interest (e.g., Measles R0=12-18 [50]).
  • Intervention Scenario Setup: Define vaccination scenarios by randomly assigning a "vaccinated" status to a specified fraction of nodes. Vaccinated nodes are typically considered immune and cannot be infected or transmit the pathogen.
  • Simulation Execution: Introduce the pathogen at a random node and simulate its spread through the network via connected edges. Run multiple iterations for each vaccination coverage scenario to account for stochasticity.
  • Output Analysis: Calculate key outcome metrics for each scenario, including:
    • Final outbreak size (number of infected nodes).
    • Epidemic duration.
    • Probability of a major outbreak.
  • Interpretation: Analyze how the outcome metrics change with increasing vaccination coverage. Results typically show a marked reduction in disease spread as vaccination coverage increases, highlighting the threshold needed for herd immunity [50].

The logical structure of the network modeling process is as follows.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Materials and Tools for Wildlife Disease Surveillance and Modeling

Item	Function/Description	Application Context
Mobile Data Collection App	A configurable application for standardized, georeferenced field data collection.	Replaces paper forms; ensures data integrity and immediate georeferencing in tools like CerMapp [49].
Cloud Geodatabase	A centralized, online repository for storing and managing spatial data.	Enables data sharing, version control, and serves as the foundation for spatial analysis [49].
GNSS Receiver	Global Navigation Satellite System receiver for accurate location positioning.	Critical for recording precise geographic coordinates of observations, essential for all spatial modeling [49].
Remote Sensing Data	Satellite-derived environmental data (e.g., vegetation, temperature, precipitation).	Used as covariates in spatial models to identify environmental drivers of disease distribution [49].
Network Modeling Software	Computational tools (e.g., R, Python) with libraries for creating and analyzing networks.	Used to simulate disease spread through structured populations and test intervention strategies [50].
FAIR Data Repository	A public data repository that adheres to Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable principles.	For archiving and sharing structured datasets, promoting transparency and re-use in line with the new data standard [12].

The integration of a minimum data standard, cloud-based geospatial tools, and computational network models provides a powerful, synergistic framework for addressing the challenges of non-random disease distribution in wildlife. The protocols outlined here offer researchers and public health professionals a roadmap for designing targeted, cost-effective surveillance systems. By standardizing data at the point of collection and leveraging it for sophisticated spatial and network analyses, this approach significantly enhances the capacity for early detection, accurate risk assessment, and proactive management of wildlife disease outbreaks, thereby strengthening global health security.

Optimizing Sample Sizes by Leveraging Animal Social Structure and Grouping

The foundational principle for optimizing sample sizes in wildlife disease surveillance rests on understanding and leveraging non-independent disease states among individuals within a social group. For contagious diseases, the health status of individuals within a stable social unit is often highly correlated; if one member is infected, others in the same group have a higher probability of infection due to frequent and close contact [51] [52]. This correlation contradicts the core assumption of independence in traditional sample size calculations (e.g., binomial and hypergeometric models), which treat each animal as an independent unit [51]. By explicitly accounting for this positive correlation in disease status, researchers can achieve a statistically robust level of confidence in determining disease freedom or prevalence while testing fewer individual animals [51] [52]. The key to these sampling savings is to distribute samples across as many different social groups as possible rather than intensively sampling within a few groups [52].

This approach is perfectly aligned with the objectives of landscape-scale targeted surveillance, which aims to understand disease dynamics across individual, population, and landscape scales. This surveillance design replicates standardized sampling—such as repeated cross-sectional or cohort sampling—across multiple populations in different ecological contexts [1]. Integrating knowledge of social structure directly into the sampling framework for such studies enhances efficiency and provides powerful data for analyzing ecological risk factors and mechanisms of disease transmission and persistence [1].

Key Theoretical Principles and Data

The efficiency gain is mathematically modeled by acknowledging that disease statuses within a group are not independent. Standard sample-size formulas become overly conservative when animals cluster, as they fail to account for the information gained about the group from testing a single member [51]. A beta-binomial model, which incorporates intra-group correlation, can substantially reduce the required sample size to declare a population disease-free with high confidence compared to traditional models [51].

The applicability of this optimized approach is contingent on several key properties of the disease and the host species, as outlined in the table below.

Table 1: Prerequisites for Applying Social Structure-Based Sampling

Factor	Requirement for Sampling Savings	Rationale
Disease Type	Must be contagious (infectious and transmissible) [52].	The disease must be capable of spreading between individuals to create correlated disease statuses within a group.
Host Sociality	Species must form predictable clusters in time or space (e.g., family groups, dens, herds) [51] [52].	Provides a definable "cluster" unit for sampling where correlation is expected.
Sampling Strategy	Sample fewer animals from more groups [52].	Maximizes the amount of new population-level information per test, avoiding the diminishing returns of testing many individuals from the same group.

The following diagram illustrates the logical decision process for determining when and how to apply this optimized sampling method.

Application Protocols for Landscape-Scale Targeted Surveillance

Integrating social structure into a landscape-scale targeted surveillance design requires careful planning and execution. The following protocols provide a detailed methodology for implementing this approach, using a hypothetical study of SARS-CoV-2 in white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) as a model, based on real-world surveillance efforts [1].

Protocol: Social Group-Based Cross-Sectional Sampling

1. Objective: To determine the presence or absence of a specific pathogen (e.g., SARS-CoV-2) across a landscape with high confidence while minimizing the number of individual animals tested.

2. Pre-Fieldwork Preparation:

• Define the Population and Landscape: Clearly delineate the geographic boundaries of the study area.
• Identify and Map Social Groups: Using pre-existing ecological data, expert consultation, or preliminary surveys, identify the locations of potential social groups (e.g., deer family groups, herds frequenting specific water holes). Overlay these onto a landscape map.
• Determine Sample Size: Using a beta-binomial or similar model that accounts for intra-group correlation, calculate the number of social groups (G) that need to be sampled and the number of individuals (I) to sample per group to achieve the desired confidence level and design prevalence. The total number of tests will be G x I.

3. Field Sampling Workflow:

• Random Group Selection: Randomly select G groups from the mapped population.
• Standardized Individual Sampling: For each selected group, randomly capture and sample I individuals (e.g., 1-2 animals). The same sampling method (e.g., nasal swab, blood collection) should be used consistently across all groups and individuals.
• Data Collection: For each sampled animal, record essential metadata including:
  • GPS location of the group
  • Date and time of sampling
  • Animal ID, sex, and approximate age
  • Group size and composition (if possible)

4. Laboratory and Data Analysis:

• Process all samples using standardized diagnostic tests (e.g., PCR for pathogen detection).
• Analyze data at the group level. A group is considered positive if at least one sampled individual tests positive.
• Use statistical models that account for cluster sampling to estimate landscape-level prevalence or probability of disease freedom.

Protocol: Longitudinal Cohort Sampling within and Across Groups

1. Objective: To understand epidemiological parameters and risk factors for disease transmission, evolution, and persistence across different ecological contexts.

2. Pre-Fieldwork Preparation:

• Select Sentinel Groups: Identify specific social groups across a gradient of ecological contexts (e.g., urban, agricultural, forested) for intensive study.
• Establish Marking/Tracking: Plan for the individual marking of animals within these groups (e.g., ear tags, radio collars) to enable resampling.

3. Field Sampling Workflow:

• Baseline Sampling: Capture, mark, and sample all or most individuals within each sentinel group.
• Resampling: Conduct repeated sampling events (e.g., every 3-6 months) of the marked individuals. This can be combined with cross-sectional sampling of unmarked individuals in the group during each visit to monitor population dynamics.
• Behavioral and Ecological Data: During each visit, collect data on group size, composition, contact rates (if feasible), and relevant landscape variables.

4. Laboratory and Data Analysis:

• Process samples to determine infection status and, if applicable, viral load or strain.
• Analyze data to estimate state-transition rates (e.g., susceptible to infected), identify drivers of transmission, and model spatial dynamics.

Table 2: Comparison of Sampling Designs for Landscape-Scale Surveillance

Aspect	Social Group-Based Cross-Sectional	Longitudinal Cohort
Primary Goal	Efficiently determine disease presence/absence at a landscape scale.	Understand transmission mechanisms and persistence over time.
Sampling Unit	The social group.	The marked individual within a social group, tracked over time.
Key Strength	Cost-effective for broad-scale surveillance; requires fewer tests.	Provides high-quality data on individual infection trajectories and risk factors.
Key Weakness	Provides a snapshot in time; limited for inferring transmission dynamics.	Logistically complex, expensive, and covers less spatial heterogeneity.
Ideal Use Case	Large-scale freedom-from-disease surveys or initial pathogen detection.	In-depth studies of pathogen ecology in a subset of populations [1].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions & Essential Materials

Successful implementation of these protocols relies on a suite of specialized materials and reagents. The following table details key items and their functions.

Table 3: Essential Materials for Field and Laboratory Work in Wildlife Disease Surveillance

Item	Function/Application
Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)	Protects personnel from zoonotic pathogens and prevents cross-contamination between animals/samples. Includes gloves, masks, and disposable gowns.
Biologger / GPS Collars	For cohort studies, these devices track individual animal movements, providing data on contact rates, home range, and habitat use, which are critical for understanding transmission risk [1].
Sterile Swabs (e.g., Nasal, Oral)	For non-invasive collection of mucosal samples for pathogen detection via PCR or viral culture.
Blood Collection Kits	For serological assays to detect past exposure to a pathogen (antibodies). Includes needles, vacutainers, and serum separation tubes.
RNA/DNA Stabilization Buffers	Preserves nucleic acids in samples during transport from remote field sites to the laboratory, which is critical for accurate PCR results.
Virus Transport Media	Maintains pathogen viability if the goal is viral culture or isolation.
Liquid Nitrogen Dewar / Portable Freezer	For preserving samples at ultra-low temperatures in the field during extended sampling sessions.
Species-Specific ELISA or PCR Reagents	Diagnostic test kits configured for the specific pathogen and host species of interest to confirm infection status.

Integrated Workflow for Surveillance Design

The overall process of designing and executing a landscape-scale surveillance study that leverages social structure involves multiple interconnected stages, from network building to data analysis. The following workflow diagram maps this process.

Adaptive sampling designs represent a paradigm shift in wildlife disease surveillance, moving from static, predetermined plans to dynamic, data-driven strategies. For landscape-scale targeted surveillance, these designs are essential for efficiently locating and monitoring rare, clustered, or emerging pathogen events that traditional methods might miss. The foundational principle of adaptive cluster sampling (ACS), as introduced by Thompson, involves modifying the sampling strategy based on findings collected in the field [53]. When a sample unit satisfies a pre-defined condition—such as the detection of an infected animal—sampling intensifies in the neighborhood of that unit. This approach is particularly powerful for wildlife disease research because pathogens in host populations often exhibit spatial aggregation, forming clusters or "hotspots" that ACS is specifically designed to detect with greater efficiency and lower cost than conventional methods [53].

The strategic value of adaptive sampling extends beyond mere detection. It provides a structured framework for addressing the "when," "where," and "how many" questions critical to surveillance objectives, which include initial disease detection, prevalence estimation, and understanding epidemiological dynamics [54]. By aligning the sampling design with these specific objectives, researchers can build statistically robust intuition for making real-time decisions in the field, thereby overcoming the common challenges of complex host-pathogen systems and diagnostic uncertainties [54]. Furthermore, in the context of landscape-scale targeted surveillance, adaptive designs facilitate the collection of standardized data across different ecological contexts. This standardization is crucial for developing a mechanistic understanding of disease emergence and for predicting hotspots of spillover risk to humans, livestock, and other wildlife species [1].

Core Principles and Sampling Strategies

Foundational Concepts

Adaptive sampling designs are built upon several key concepts that distinguish them from traditional methods. Understanding these concepts is a prerequisite for effective implementation.

• Condition and Neighborhood: The entire adaptive process is triggered by a pre-specified condition related to the variable of interest. In wildlife disease, this is typically the detection of a pathogen or antibody. When a selected sampling unit (e.g., an individual animal, a herd, or a geographic area) meets this condition, the sampling effort expands to include its neighborhood. This neighborhood is defined a priori and could be based on geographical proximity, shared resources, or social connections within a host population [53].
• Networks and Clusters: A network is defined as a group of interconnected units that all trigger the condition and are connected through their neighborhood relationships. Units that do not meet the condition but are in the neighborhood of a unit that does are called edge units. The combination of a network and its associated edge units forms a cluster [53].
• Two-Phase Sampling: ACS is inherently a two-phase process. The first phase involves selecting an initial sample using a conventional probability-based design, such as simple random sampling (SRS) or stratified sampling. The second phase is the adaptive phase, where the sample is expanded to include the neighborhoods of all units in the initial sample that satisfied the condition [53].

Comparison of Sampling Strategies for Wildlife Disease

The choice of sampling strategy is dictated by the surveillance objective, logistical constraints, and the ecological context of the host-pathogen system. The table below summarizes the key strategies relevant to landscape-scale wildlife disease research.

Table 1: Key Sampling Strategies for Landscape-Scale Wildlife Disease Surveillance

Strategy	Core Principle	Best Suited For	Key Advantages	Key Challenges
Adaptive Cluster Sampling (ACS) [53]	Sampling intensifies around initial positive detections.	Rare, clustered, or spatially aggregated diseases.	High efficiency for finding and estimating clustered phenomena; cost-effective for rare events.	Complex design and analysis; defining appropriate neighborhoods and conditions is critical.
Landscape-Scale Targeted Surveillance [1]	Replicated, standardized sampling across multiple populations and ecological contexts.	Understanding mechanisms and risk factors of disease emergence and persistence.	Enables cross-population comparisons; identifies ecological drivers of transmission.	Logistically intensive and expensive; requires a strong, collaborative network.
Cohort Sampling [1]	Repeated sampling of the same identified individuals over time.	Understanding individual-level infection trajectories, transmission rates, and immunity.	Provides gold-standard data on state-transition rates (e.g., susceptible to infected).	High cost of recapturing individuals; potential for capture-related stress.
Repeated Cross-Sectional Sampling [1]	Sampling different individuals from the same population at different time points.	Monitoring population-level prevalence and dynamics through time.	Cheaper and easier than cohort sampling; provides population-level snapshots.	Less accurate for estimating state-transition rates than cohort sampling.
Opportunistic Sampling [54] [1]	Leveraging pre-existing activities (e.g., hunter harvest, management culls) for sampling.	Broad-scale, low-cost surveillance to characterize spatial distribution.	Cost-effective; leverages existing infrastructure and samples.	Prone to detection biases (age, sex, health); difficult to infer epidemiological parameters.

Quantitative Frameworks and Data Analysis

Transitioning from strategy to practice requires robust quantitative frameworks to guide design and analyze collected data. Power analysis and statistical modeling are indispensable for drawing meaningful inferences from adaptive designs.

Sample Size and Power Analysis

A critical step in planning surveillance is determining the required sample size to achieve a study's objective, whether it is detecting disease presence or estimating prevalence with a desired precision. The Surveillance Analysis and Sample Size Explorer (SASSE) is a plug-and-play tool developed specifically to help wildlife professionals build intuition about sample size in the context of sampling design and diagnostic test performance [54]. SASSE uses interactive modules to perform power analyses for key objectives, allowing users to explore how sample size requirements change based on expected prevalence, diagnostic test sensitivity and specificity, and the desired confidence level [54].

For ACS designs, traditional estimators can be distorted when data contains outliers, which is common in ecological data. Recent advancements propose using robust regression techniques within the ACS framework for more efficient estimation of population means. These techniques, including Huber M-estimation and Generalized M-estimation, are less sensitive to extreme values and provide more reliable estimates for rare and clustered populations [53].

Analytical Models for Population Inference

Once data is collected, hierarchical models are a powerful tool for analyzing landscape-scale surveillance data while accounting for observational error.

• Occupancy Modeling: This approach uses detection-nondetection data (e.g., from camera traps or non-invasive samples) to estimate the probability of a site being occupied by a species or infected with a pathogen, while explicitly accounting for imperfect detection. This is crucial for producing unbiased trend estimates [55].
• Royle-Nichols Model: This model extends occupancy modeling by linking detection probability to abundance, allowing for the estimation of relative abundance from detection-nondetection data without individually identifying animals [55].
• Spatial Capture-Recapture (SCR): For species that are individually identifiable, SCR is the gold standard for estimating population density, as it models the spatial distribution of individuals and their encounter process [55].

Table 2: Key Metrics for Surveillance Design and Analysis as Defined in SASSE [54]

Module	Key Metric	Definition	Role in Surveillance
Detection	Disease Freedom Probability	The probability that a population is free from disease given no positive detections.	Informs confidence in declaring a population or area disease-free.
Detection	Disease Presence Probability	The probability that disease exists in a population given the observed data.	Quantifies the evidence for pathogen presence.
Prevalence	Prevalence Upper Bound	The upper limit of prevalence, given the sample size and test results.	Provides a worst-case scenario estimate, useful for risk assessment.
All Modules	Sensitivity / Specificity	True positive rate / True negative rate of a diagnostic test.	Critical inputs for correcting biased estimates and planning sample sizes.

Experimental Protocols and Workflows

Protocol: Implementing a Landscape-Scale Targeted Surveillance Network

This protocol outlines the steps for establishing a research network to conduct landscape-scale targeted surveillance, as demonstrated for SARS-CoV-2 in white-tailed and mule deer [1].

Objective: To collect standardized data across individual, population, and landscape scales to understand mechanisms and risk factors of disease transmission, evolution, and persistence. Key Components: A partnership network, a stratified site selection process, and a multi-scale sampling design.

• Phase 1: Network Building and Planning

  • Step 1: Establish a Multi-Sector Partnership. Assemble a network that includes state and federal wildlife agencies, academic researchers, and other relevant stakeholders. This leverages diverse expertise and infrastructure [1].
  • Step 2: Define Surveillance Objectives and Target Populations. Clearly articulate the long-term objectives. For example: (1) understand epidemiological risk factors, (2) predict landscape-level hotspots, and (3) advance methods for predicting spatial dynamics [1].
  • Step 3: Stratify and Select Study Sites. Stratify the landscape based on relevant ecological covariates (e.g., land cover, climate, host density). Within strata, randomly select or target specific populations for inclusion to ensure representation across different ecological contexts [1].

• Phase 2: Field Implementation and Sampling

  • Step 4: Deploy a Multi-Scale Sampling Design. At each selected site, implement a combination of:
    • Cohort Sampling: Capture, tag, and collect samples (e.g., nasal, rectal, blood) from individual animals. Schedule recapture events to monitor individual infection status over time [1].
    • Cross-Sectional Sampling: Collect samples from different individuals in the population at regular intervals to monitor population-level prevalence and dynamics [1].
  • Step 5: Collect Metadata. Record crucial metadata for each sample, including GPS location, date, host species, age, sex, and any relevant behavioral or environmental observations.

• Phase 3: Data Management and Analysis

  • Step 6: Centralize Data Management. Establish a unified database for all diagnostic results and metadata to facilitate collaborative analysis.
  • Step 7: Analyze Data Using Robust Statistical Models. Use hierarchical models (e.g., occupancy, Royle-Nichols, SCR) to estimate occurrence, abundance, and population trends while accounting for imperfect detection [55].

Workflow: Adaptive Cluster Sampling for a Rare Wildlife Pathogen

The following diagram illustrates the logical workflow for executing an ACS study to detect a rare pathogen in a wildlife host population.

Diagram: Adaptive Cluster Sampling Workflow. SRS: Simple Random Sampling.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Successful implementation of adaptive sampling designs relies on a suite of methodological tools and technologies. The table below details key solutions for field-based, laboratory, and analytical stages.

Table 3: Research Reagent Solutions for Adaptive Surveillance

Category	Item / Solution	Function and Application
Field Sampling & Non-Invasive Monitoring	Camera Traps [55]	Non-invasive method for collecting detection-nondetection data and estimating occupancy/abundance for multiple species simultaneously.
	Environmental DNA (eDNA) Sampling [56]	Non-invasive method to detect wildlife-related pathogens from environmental reservoirs (e.g., water, soil).
	GPS Collars and Tags [1]	For tracking individual animal movements in cohort studies, providing data on space use and contact rates.
Molecular & Diagnostic Tools	Oxford Nanopore Sequencing [56] [57]	Portable, third-generation sequencing technology for genomic analysis of pathogens. Enables in-field use.
	Nanopore Adaptive Sampling [56] [57]	A real-time, in silico enrichment technique that selectively sequences DNA fragments matching a target database (e.g., a specific pathogen).
	Diagnostic Test Kits (ELISA, PCR)	To determine infection or exposure status. Critical parameters are sensitivity and specificity [54].
Analytical & Computational Software	R and R Shiny [54]	Open-source programming language and framework for statistical analysis and building interactive applications (e.g., SASSE).
	Hierarchical Model Packages (e.g., unmarked, secr) [55]	Specialized software packages for fitting occupancy, Royle-Nichols, and spatial capture-recapture models.
	Geographic Information Systems (GIS)	For mapping study sites, stratifying landscapes, and analyzing spatial data.

Adaptive sampling designs are powerful, strategic frameworks for navigating the inherent challenges of field research in wildlife disease. By moving beyond rigid, pre-defined plans to incorporate data-driven adjustments, strategies like Adaptive Cluster Sampling and Landscape-Scale Targeted Surveillance dramatically improve the efficiency of detecting and monitoring rare, clustered, or emerging pathogens. The successful application of these designs hinges on a rigorous, multi-faceted approach: careful pre-planning with power analysis, the formation of collaborative networks for standardized data collection, the integration of novel technologies like portable sequencing, and the use of robust statistical models that account for imperfect detection and complex population structures. When implemented effectively, these protocols provide the high-quality, landscape-scale data essential for understanding disease dynamics, assessing spillover risk, and informing evidence-based conservation and public health interventions.

Ensuring Ethical Implementation and Avoiding Unintended Consequences

Landscape-scale targeted surveillance (LSTS) for wildlife diseases represents a powerful scientific tool for preempting zoonotic outbreaks. However, its implementation carries significant ethical responsibilities and potential for unintended consequences. The deployment of technologies capable of collecting high-resolution ecological data must be balanced with a proactive framework to mitigate harms to wildlife populations, ecosystems, and human communities. This document outlines application notes and experimental protocols designed to embed ethical considerations into the operational DNA of surveillance networks, ensuring that scientific progress aligns with conservation ethics and global health equity.

Current State of Wildlife Disease Surveillance

Modern wildlife disease surveillance has evolved from disparate, localized efforts toward coordinated, landscape-scale systems. The recent development of a minimum data standard marks a pivotal advance, creating a standardized framework for recording, formatting, and sharing wildlife disease data to enhance transparency, reusability, and global utility [12]. These standards are flexible enough to accommodate diverse methodologies—including PCR, ELISA, or pooled testing—across taxa and ecosystems [12]. The strategic incorporation of negative results and comprehensive contextual metadata, long neglected in wildlife pathogen surveillance, is now recognized as critical for enabling rigorous comparisons of disease prevalence across time, geography, and host species [12].

Table: Core Components of Modern Wildlife Disease Surveillance Systems

Component	Description	Ethical Significance
Standardized Data Fields	40 data fields (9 required) and 24 metadata fields (7 required) documenting diagnostic outcomes, sampling context, and host characteristics [12].	Ensures data quality, reproducibility, and equitable contribution across research networks.
FAIR Data Principles	Alignment with Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable principles through platforms like PHAROS, Zenodo, and GBIF [12].	Promotes global health equity by making data accessible to researchers regardless of institutional affiliation.
Landscape-Scale Targeted Sampling	Active surveillance standardized across ecological contexts that targets specific individuals and populations [58].	Enables mechanistic understanding of disease emergence for improved risk assessment.

Ethical Framework and Implementation Protocol

Core Ethical Principles

The ethical implementation of LSTS is governed by four pillars: Equity in benefit sharing and resource allocation, Transparency in methodologies and data provenance, Minimization of harm to wildlife and ecosystems, and Stewardship of data for public health benefit. Operationalizing these principles requires concrete protocols at each project phase.

Pre-Fieldwork Ethical Assessment Protocol

• Stakeholder Mapping and Engagement: Identify all relevant rights-holders and stakeholders, including indigenous communities, local conservation groups, and government agencies. Document consultation processes and incorporate feedback into research design.
• Species Vulnerability Assessment: Categorize target species by conservation status (IUCN Red List), population trends, and sensitivity to disturbance. Adapt sampling methods (e.g., non-invasive sampling for threatened species) to minimize impact.
• Data Sensitivity Review: Classify data types by sensitivity, particularly high-resolution location data for threatened species or zoonotic pathogens. Implement data obfuscation protocols where necessary to prevent misuse such as wildlife culling [12].

Field Implementation Ethical Guidelines

• Sampling Ethics Committee: Establish an internal review board for wildlife research ethics to approve and monitor all field procedures.
• Handling and Restraint Minimization: Limit handling time and use the least invasive restraint methods appropriate for the species. Procedures must be performed by personnel trained in species-specific techniques.
• Biosafety and Biosecurity: Implement strict protocols to prevent pathogen transmission between animals and to handlers, including appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) and equipment decontamination procedures.

Technical Standards and Visualization Protocols

Adherence to Accessibility Standards

All visual components of surveillance reporting, including data dashboards and published figures, must comply with Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2 Level AA to ensure accessibility to individuals with visual impairments [59]. This includes:

• Text Contrast: Ensuring a minimum contrast ratio of 4.5:1 for standard text and 3:1 for large text (≥24 CSS pixels or ≥19 CSS pixels if bold) against background colors [60].
• Non-Text Contrast: Providing a contrast ratio of at least 3:1 for user interface components and graphical objects [59].
• Color Independence: Not using color as the sole means of conveying information [59].

Table: Approved Color Palette with Contrast Validation

Color Name	Hex Code	Use Case	White Text Contrast	Black Text Contrast
Google Blue	#4285F4 [61] [62]	Primary Data	4.63:1 (Fail)	3.59:1 (Pass Large)
Google Red	#EA4335 [61] [62]	Alert Signals	3.99:1 (Fail)	4.92:1 (Pass)
Google Yellow	#FBBC05 [61] [62]	Warnings	1.60:1 (Fail)	11.84:1 (Pass)
Google Green	#34A853 [61] [62]	Confirmatory Data	3.69:1 (Fail)	5.32:1 (Pass)
White	#FFFFFF [61]	Background	—	21:1 (Pass)
Dark Gray	#202124	Background, Text	21:1 (Pass)	—
Light Gray	#F1F3F4	Background	—	15.81:1 (Pass)
Medium Gray	#5F6368	Secondary Text	6.69:1 (Pass)	8.59:1 (Pass)

Standardized Workflow Visualization

The following diagram illustrates the integrated ethical and technical workflow for landscape-scale targeted surveillance, utilizing the approved color palette with validated contrast ratios.

Ethical Surveillance Workflow

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table: Essential Materials for Ethical Wildlife Disease Surveillance

Item / Reagent	Function	Ethical & Practical Considerations
Standardized Data Collection Forms	Ensures consistent recording of all required data and metadata fields per the minimum data standard [12].	Critical for interoperability and long-term data reusability; reduces sampling variability.
Non-Invasive Sampling Kits (e.g., for fecal, hair, or feather collection)	Allows pathogen detection and host genetics sampling without animal handling.	Minimizes stress and risk to vulnerable species; preferred for threatened populations.
Barcoded Sample Tubes	Provides unique, machine-readable identifiers for biological samples.	Prevents sample mix-ups, maintains chain of custody, and integrates with laboratory information management systems (LIMS).
Multi-Pathogen Molecular Assays (e.g., pan-coronavirus PCR)	Enables broad detection of pathogen groups from a single sample.	Efficient use of limited samples; maximizes data yield per animal interaction.
Secure Data Repository (e.g., PHAROS, Zenodo with DOI)	Provides a FAIR-compliant platform for data deposition and sharing [12].	Ensures data persistence, provenance tracking, and proper attribution to data producers.
Data Obfuscation Software	Geographically generalizes sensitive location data for threatened species.	Balances transparency with biosafety and conservation ethics; prevents misuse [12].

The power of landscape-scale targeted surveillance to transform our understanding of disease dynamics comes with a profound responsibility. Ethical implementation is not an impediment to science but a prerequisite for sustainable, equitable, and trusted research practices. By adopting standardized protocols, embedding ethical review into project lifecycles, and prioritizing the minimization of harm, the research community can build a robust early warning system that safeguards both ecological and human health. Widespread adoption of these practices will fortify the scientific infrastructure needed to confront the zoonotic threats of the future with both rigor and integrity.

Measuring Success and Impact: Validation, Analysis, and Comparative Value

Landscape-scale targeted surveillance represents a paradigm shift in wildlife disease monitoring, moving from passive data collection to a strategic, intelligence-driven framework. This approach involves the standardized sampling of specific individuals and populations across diverse ecological contexts to develop a mechanistic understanding of disease emergence [27]. The fundamental premise is that efficient surveillance systems are crucial factors in identifying, monitoring, and tackling outbreaks of infectious diseases, particularly when data scarcity and limited economic resources require a targeted effort from public health authorities [3]. By focusing on high-risk populations where specific risk factors exist, this methodology provides the foundation for improving risk assessment of zoonotic or wildlife-livestock disease outbreaks and predicting hotspots of disease emergence [27] [3].

The transition from basic data collection to actionable intelligence requires integrating multiple surveillance components into a cohesive analytical framework. This involves leveraging partnerships between state and federal public service sectors and academic researchers within structured research networks [27]. The resulting intelligence enables researchers and public health officials to move beyond mere detection to predictive modeling and proactive intervention, ultimately creating a more resilient defense against emerging wildlife diseases that threaten both animal and human populations.

Quantitative Foundations: Surveillance Parameters and Data Standards

Core Surveillance Parameters

Table 1: Key Parameters for Targeted Surveillance Design

Parameter Category	Specific Parameter	Application in Surveillance Design	Data Source
Spatial Considerations	Latitude effects	Northern regions show stronger seasonal sampling patterns; rural/urban risk associations vary by latitude [8]	Raccoon rabies surveillance analysis
	Human population density	Serves as proxy for "urbanness"; influences case detection probability [8]	Raccoon rabies surveillance analysis
Temporal Parameters	Seasonal sampling bias	More samples submitted in summer in northeastern US, though with lower positivity rates [8]	National Rabies Surveillance System
	Spatiotemporal autocorrelation	Recent cases in county/neighbors are strong predictors of future detection [8]	Enhanced Rabies Surveillance database
Epidemiological Metrics	Reporting rate (detection rate)	Fraction of reported cases over total infections; varies significantly over space and time [3]	SEIR modeling approaches
	Surveillance efficacy	Time-varying measure depending on total reports and estimated host population [3]	Reporting data assimilation

Minimum Data Standardization

The implementation of effective surveillance requires robust data standards to ensure interoperability and analytical utility. A recently proposed minimum data standard for wildlife disease research identifies 40 core data fields (9 required) and 24 metadata fields (7 required) sufficient to standardize datasets at the finest possible spatial, temporal, and taxonomic scales [25]. This standard facilitates the sharing, reuse, and aggregation of data by humans and machines through a common structure, set of properties, and vocabulary.

Table 2: Essential Data Fields for Wildlife Disease Surveillance

Data Category	Required Fields	Optional but Recommended Fields	Implementation Purpose
Sample Data	Sample ID, Collection date, Latitude, Longitude	Collector name, Sample type, Storage conditions	Spatial-temporal tracking and sample integrity
Host Data	Host species, Animal ID (if applicable)	Sex, Age, Life stage, Body size, Health status	Understanding infection patterns across host demographics
Parasite/Pathogen Data	Test name, Result, Pathogen taxon (if positive)	Test specificity/sensitivity, GenBank accession, Viral load	Diagnostic accuracy and genetic characterization
Project Metadata	Project title, Creators, License	Funding source, Related publications, Methodology details	Reproducibility and data attribution

This standardized approach is particularly valuable for diverse project types, including first reports of parasites in wildlife species, investigations of mass wildlife mortality events, longitudinal multi-site sampling, and passive surveillance programs [25]. The "tidy data" format, where each row corresponds to a single diagnostic test outcome, enables sophisticated analytical approaches while maintaining practical implementation.

Experimental Protocols and Methodologies

Protocol 1: Implementing Landscape-Scale Targeted Surveillance

Purpose: To establish a standardized framework for deploying landscape-scale targeted surveillance in response to emerging disease threats, using the SARS-CoV-2 surveillance in white-tailed deer as a model [27].

Materials:

• Sampling kits (swabs, blood collection tubes, preservatives)
• GPS units for precise location tracking
• Data recording forms or electronic capture devices
• Cold chain maintenance for sample transport
• Personal protective equipment (PPE)

Procedure:

• Network Establishment: Develop partnerships between academic researchers and state/federal agencies to create a surveillance research network [27]
• Sampling Design: Identify target species and populations across environmental gradients with standardized sampling protocols
• Field Collection: Implement cross-sectional sampling across individual, population, and landscape scales using harmonized methods
• Data Integration: Combine field samples with environmental covariates, host metadata, and spatial-temporal coordinates
• Adaptive Management: Adjust sampling strategies in response to logistical challenges while maintaining core surveillance objectives

Analytical Methods:

• Data assimilation techniques integrating reporting data with process-driven models
• Spatial risk mapping using environmental covariates and host distribution data
• Molecular analysis for pathogen characterization and evolution tracking

Protocol 2: Surveillance System Evaluation and Optimization

Purpose: To identify geographical areas where surveillance levels are potentially insufficient to detect outbreaks using mathematical modeling approaches [3].

Materials:

• Historical case report data (both positive and negative occurrences)
• Host population estimates
• Geographical information system (GIS) software
• Statistical computing environment (R, Python)

Procedure:

• Data Compilation: Gather reporting data (positive and negative cases) with spatial and temporal attributes [3]
• Model Selection: Choose between constant reporting rate (for stable surveillance) or time-varying reporting rate (for dynamic systems) approaches
• Parameter Estimation: Fit susceptible-exposed-infectious (SEI) model parameters using surveillance data
• Risk Mapping: Compute surveillance risk or efficacy parameters across geographical units
• Priority Setting: Identify areas with critical surveillance levels where outbreaks might remain undetected

Analytical Framework: The method combines process-driven SEI models with observed reporting data through two specifications:

• Constant surveillance: ( RR = \frac{C}{I} ) where ( RR ) is reporting rate, ( C ) is reported cases, and ( I ) is total infections
• Time-varying surveillance: ( RR(t) = f(\text{total reports}, \text{host population}) ) adapting to changing surveillance efforts

Visualization: Surveillance Intelligence Framework

Figure 1: Integrated workflow transforming raw surveillance data into actionable public health intelligence through standardized processing and analytical phases.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Research Materials and Analytical Tools

Tool Category	Specific Tool/Reagent	Function in Surveillance	Implementation Example
Field Collection	GPS units	Precise geolocation of samples	Spatial mapping of cases [8]
	Sample preservation media	Maintains sample integrity for testing	Virus viability for sequencing [27]
Laboratory Analysis	PCR primers/probes	Pathogen detection and characterization	Coronavirus identification in bats [25]
	ELISA kits	Antibody detection for exposure studies	Serological surveillance [25]
Data Management	Wildlife Disease Data Standard	Data harmonization and sharing	PHAROS database implementation [25]
	GIS software	Spatial analysis and visualization	Landscape-scale risk mapping [8]
Analytical Frameworks	SEIR models	Understanding disease dynamics	Raccoon rabies modeling [3]
	Reporting rate estimators	Surveillance system evaluation	Identifying detection gaps [3]

Implementation Considerations and Future Directions

Successful implementation of landscape-scale targeted surveillance requires addressing several practical considerations. Logistical challenges in field sampling must be anticipated, with flexible protocols that can be adapted as different challenges arise while maintaining core surveillance objectives [27]. The integration of heterogeneous data sources—including passive surveillance reports, environmental covariates, and host population data—requires careful data curation and standardization [25]. Furthermore, resource allocation strategies must prioritize areas identified as high-risk through quantitative assessment, particularly where low reporting rates might leave epidemics undetected [3].

Emerging opportunities in wildlife disease surveillance include the development of specialist data platforms such as the Pathogen Harmonized Observatory (PHAROS) database, which facilitates standardized data sharing and aggregation [25]. The incorporation of novel data streams from molecular epidemiology, remote sensing, and citizen science promises to enhance spatial-temporal resolution of surveillance intelligence. Finally, the operationalization of model-guided surveillance represents the frontier of the field, moving from retrospective analysis to real-time forecasting of disease emergence risks [3] [8].

Through the systematic implementation of these protocols and frameworks, researchers can transform disconnected surveillance data into actionable intelligence that directly informs public health practice and wildlife management, ultimately enhancing global capacity for rapid response to emerging infectious disease threats.

Validating Surveillance Data with Serology and Pathogen Detection

Effective wildlife disease surveillance is a cornerstone of global health security, essential for protecting public health, agriculture, and biodiversity [54]. At the landscape scale, surveillance generates data to detect emerging pathogens, understand their prevalence, and monitor epidemiological dynamics. However, the value of this data is compromised by fragmented collection methods and inconsistent reporting, which hinder aggregation, analysis, and re-use [25] [12]. Serology (detection of antibodies) and pathogen detection (identification of the infectious agent itself) are two fundamental pillars of disease investigation. Validating data from these methods requires robust, standardized protocols to ensure that results are reliable, comparable, and actionable. This document outlines application notes and experimental protocols for validating surveillance data, framed within a new minimum data standard designed to enhance the transparency and utility of wildlife disease research [25].

A Minimum Data Standard for Wildlife Disease Research

To address inconsistencies in data reporting, a recent initiative has proposed a minimum data standard for wildlife disease research and surveillance. This standard provides a flexible framework for recording and sharing data at the finest possible spatial, temporal, and taxonomic scale [25] [12].

Core Data Fields

The standard identifies 40 core data fields, categorized into sampling, host, and parasite information, with 9 required fields essential for interoperability [25] [12]. The tables below summarize the required and selected optional fields.

Table 1: Required Core Data Fields (9 total)

Variable Name	Category	Type	Description
Sample ID	Sampling	String	A researcher-generated unique identifier for the sample [25].
Host Identification	Host	String	The Linnaean classification of the host animal (ideally species binomial) [11].
Diagnostic Method	Parasite	String	The method used for parasite detection (e.g., "PCR", "ELISA") [25].
Diagnostic Target	Parasite	String	The molecular target of the diagnostic method (e.g., "Spike protein", "N gene") [25].
Test Result	Parasite	String	The outcome of the diagnostic test (e.g., "positive", "negative") [25].
Parasite Identification	Parasite	String	The Linnaean classification of the detected parasite, if applicable [25].
Sample Collection Date	Sampling	Date	The date the sample was collected [25].
Latitude	Sampling	Number	The latitude of the sample collection location in decimal degrees [25].
Longitude	Sampling	Number	The longitude of the sample collection location in decimal degrees [25].

Table 2: Selected Optional Core Data Fields

Variable Name	Category	Type	Description
Animal ID	Host	String	A researcher-generated unique identifier for the individual animal [25].
Organism Sex	Host	String	The sex of the host animal (e.g., "female", "male") [11].
Host Life Stage	Host	String	The life stage of the host (e.g., "juvenile", "adult") [11].
Mass / Length	Host	Number	The mass or length of the host animal, with relevant units [11].
Primer/Probe Citation	Parasite	String	Citation for the primers, probes, or assay used [25].
GenBank Accession	Parasite	String	Accession number for any submitted genetic sequence data [25].
Ct Value	Parasite	Number	Cycle threshold value from quantitative PCR [25].

Project Metadata

In addition to core data fields, the standard includes 24 metadata fields (7 required) to provide project-level context, ensuring datasets are Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR) [25]. Required metadata includes creator information, project title, license, and repository where the data is published.

Experimental Protocols for Assay Validation

The reliability of surveillance data hinges on the performance of the serological and pathogen detection assays used. The following protocols detail the validation of laboratory-developed tests.

Protocol: Validation of a Laboratory-Developed Serological Assay

This protocol is adapted from the validation of IgG ELISA and Immunofluorescent Assay (IFA) for SARS-CoV-2, which can be adapted for wildlife serology [63].

1. Objective: To determine the sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of a laboratory-developed serological assay for use in a specific wildlife host population.

2. Materials and Reagents:

• Recombinant Antigen: For example, mammalian-expressed viral spike protein [63].
• Coated Plates (ELISA) or Fixed Cells (IFA): Substrate for antigen binding.
• Control Sera: Positive control from a confirmed convalescent individual; negative control from pre-pandemic or known negative individuals [63].
• Test Sera: Panels of known positive (n=89 in reference study) and known negative (n=100 in reference study) samples for validation [63].
• Secondary Antibody: Species-specific conjugate for detection.

3. Experimental Workflow:

4. Detailed Methodology:

• Step 1: Assay Development. Express and purify the recombinant antigen (e.g., in HEK 293 cells). Optimize antigen coating concentration, serum dilution, and secondary antibody concentration to establish a standard operating procedure [63].
• Step 2: Control Validation. Identify a high-titer positive control (C++) and a negative control (C-) from pre-characterized sera. Test the internal quality control (IQC) serum in replicate (e.g., 60 determinations) to establish mean values and acceptable ranges for precision [63].
• Step 3: Specificity Testing. Test a panel of negative control sera (e.g., n=100) collected prior to the pathogen's emergence or from confirmed negative animals. Calculate specificity as: (Number of True Negatives / Total Negative Samples) × 100% [63].
• Step 4: Sensitivity Testing. Test a panel of positive control sera (e.g., n=89) from individuals with a confirmed infection (e.g., via RT-PCR). Calculate sensitivity as: (Number of True Positives / Total Positive Samples) × 100% [63].
• Step 5: Data Analysis & Cut-off Determination. Analyze the net optical density (ELISA) or fluorescence (IFA) data. Use the negative panel results to determine a suitable cut-off value that differentiates positive from negative samples, often calculated as the mean of negatives plus a specific multiple (e.g., 3×) of the standard deviation [63].

Protocol: Implementing a Quality Control Protocol for Serology

Rigorous statistical quality control (SQC) is needed to monitor assay performance over time. Traditional SQC protocols can lead to high false rejection rates in serology; an asymmetric protocol is recommended [64].

1. Objective: To establish a QC protocol that minimizes false rejections while maintaining error detection capability for infectious disease serology.

2. Materials:

• Quality Control (QC) materials (negative and positive).
• Standard Reference Materials (SMRs), if available, for benchmarking [64].

3. Experimental Workflow:

4. Detailed Methodology:

• Step 1: Establish Baseline. When a new reagent lot is introduced, run the negative and positive QC materials in replicate (n=15 recommended) to establish a new mean ((\overline{x})) and empirical standard deviation (Sep) [64].
• Step 2: Calculate Asymmetric Control Limits. Use the following rules [64]:
  • For Negative QC Material: Set an Upper Control Limit (UCL) only, calculated as (\overline{x} + \Delta{max}), where (\Delta{max} = \sqrt{K^2 × S_{ep}^2}). K is the coverage factor, typically set to 3. There is no Lower Control Limit.
  • For Positive QC Material: Use standard Westgard rules (1-3s and 2-2s), where 1-3s rejects a run if a single QC value exceeds (\overline{x} ± 3S{ep}), and 2-2s rejects if two consecutive QC values exceed (\overline{x} ± 2S{ep}) on the same side [64].
• Step 3: Routine Monitoring. In subsequent runs, concurrently test QC materials with surveillance samples. A run is rejected if any of the established rules for the respective QC materials are triggered.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Item	Function / Application
Recombinant Antigen	Key reagent for developing in-house serological assays (e.g., ELISA, IFA); mammalian-expressed protein ensures proper folding and antigenicity [63].
Validated Control Sera	Critical for assay validation and daily quality control; includes positive controls (from confirmed infected hosts) and negative controls (from pre-exposed or pathogen-free populations) [63].
Standard Reference Materials (SMRs)	Stable, well-characterized materials used as a benchmark to verify assay performance and distinguish true from false rejections during quality control [64].
Commercial QC Materials	Manufacturer-provided quality control materials used for routine monitoring of assay precision and stability across reagent lots [64].
Diagnostic Primers/Probes	Specific oligonucleotides for pathogen detection PCR assays; must be cited in the data for reproducibility [25].

Integrating Validation into Landscape-Scale Surveillance Design

Validated assays and standardized data must be deployed within a statistically sound sampling framework. The Surveillance Analysis and Sample Size Explorer (SASSE) is an interactive tool that helps wildlife professionals design efficient sampling for objectives like pathogen detection or prevalence estimation [54]. SASSE accounts for real-world complexities such as uncertain host abundance and diagnostic test uncertainty (sensitivity/specificity), which are crucial for generating reliable landscape-level inferences [54]. A tiered sampling strategy is recommended for large-scale projects, combining a limited number of intensively monitored permanent plots with a broader network of temporary plots and model-based inference to extrapolate findings cost-effectively across the landscape [44].

Robust validation of serology and pathogen detection data is non-negotiable for credible wildlife disease surveillance. By integrating the detailed experimental protocols for assay validation and quality control outlined here with the new minimum data standard for reporting, researchers can produce data that are not only scientifically sound but also fully FAIR. This integrated approach, when applied within a thoughtful landscape-scale sampling design, powerfully advances the core goals of wildlife disease research: to understand ecological dynamics, protect biodiversity, and safeguard global health.

Surveillance monitoring is critical for understanding ecological dynamics, managing natural resources, and protecting public health, especially in the context of changing environments and emerging wildlife diseases. This analysis compares two fundamental approaches: landscape-scale surveillance and traditional ground-based monitoring. While traditional methods provide highly detailed, localized data, landscape-scale techniques offer broad spatial coverage and consistent temporal data collection, making them particularly valuable for wildlife disease research and ecosystem health assessment across extensive geographical areas.

The design and implementation of effective surveillance programs require careful consideration of scale, methodology, and objectives. For wildlife disease research specifically, surveillance helps control and prevent zoonotic spillover to humans, protects livestock agriculture, and conserves biodiversity [54]. This document provides a comparative framework to guide researchers in selecting appropriate methods based on their specific surveillance goals, resource constraints, and the ecological processes they aim to monitor.

Methodological Approaches

Landscape-Scale Surveillance Methods

Landscape-scale surveillance employs technologies that can monitor large geographical areas with minimal ground contact, providing data across extensive spatial and temporal scales.

Remote Sensing Technologies:

• InSAR (Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar): This technology uses radar satellites to detect subtle ground movements by analyzing phase differences in signals collected at different times. It can detect ground deformation as small as 1 millimeter, far surpassing the capabilities of most ground-based instruments [65]. InSAR operates effectively regardless of weather conditions or time of day, as radar penetrates cloud cover, ensuring consistent data collection.
• Spectral Analysis: This method characterizes landscape heterogeneity and pattern through analysis of electromagnetic spectra, helping determine appropriate scales of measurement for landscape studies [66].
• Aerial LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging): While sometimes deployed from aircraft rather than satellites, LiDAR uses laser pulses to create highly detailed elevation models and characterize vegetation structure, including forest canopies [65].

Strategic Sampling Frameworks:

• The AusPlots Rangelands Monitoring Method implements a two-stage stratification procedure where researchers first select a bioregion to sample, then determine specific plot locations within that bioregion based on biophysical and disturbance gradients [67]. This approach enhances continental and global comparisons while maintaining practical implementation.
• Permanent Plot Networks: Establishing permanent plots across stratified environmental gradients allows for revisits and long-term change detection, providing valuable data on vegetation composition, structure, and associated soil attributes [67].

Traditional Ground-Based Surveillance Methods

Traditional monitoring involves direct contact with the environment and provides highly detailed, localized data through various field-based techniques.

Direct Measurement Approaches:

• Manual Surveying and Visual Inspections: Field experts conduct in-person checks to assess surface elevation changes, soil health, and ecosystem conditions, recording parameters like moisture levels and visible deformation or degradation [65].
• Soil and Vegetation Sampling: Direct collection of soil and plant samples with laboratory analysis provides precise data on nutrient content, moisture levels, soil density, and other physicochemical properties [67]. These samples are often tracked with barcode labels for long-term storage and subsequent analysis.
• Ground-Penetrating Radar (GPR): This method uses radar pulses to image subsurface soil structure and underlying geology, useful for detecting anomalies not visible at the surface [65].

Instrument-Based Field Measurements:

• In-Ground Sensors: Electronic sensors placed in soil measure moisture levels, temperature, and other quality indicators across root zones, providing continuous, high-resolution data at specific locations [65].
• Instrument-Based Leaf Area Index (LAI) Measures: Specialized instruments quantitatively assess vegetation density and structure, important for understanding ecosystem function [67].
• Three-Dimensional Photo-Panoramas: Advanced imaging techniques capture comprehensive visual data for subsequent analysis of vegetation structure and landscape features [67].

Comparative Performance Analysis

Table 1: Feature-Performance Matrix of Surveillance Methods

Evaluation Criteria	Landscape-Scale Surveillance	Traditional Ground Monitoring
Monitoring Technique	Remote sensing (Satellite/Aerial), InSAR, Spectral Analysis	Manual Surveying, Sensors, LiDAR, GPR, Visual Inspection
Spatial Resolution	~10-100 meters (typical)	Centimeter-level (highly localized)
Temporal Frequency	Daily/Weekly (continuous for many areas)	Biweekly to Monthly (point-in-time measurements)
Data Accuracy	85%-95% (large-scale deformation tracking)	98%+ (localized parameters)
Area Coverage	Thousands of km² per pass; >90% global agricultural land	10–100 km² maximum per operation; 30–40% global agricultural land
Cost Efficiency	$2–$10/km² (subscription/platform-based)	$50–$500/km² (manual labor, equipment)
Implementation Time	1–2 weeks (digital deployment)	4–12 weeks (fieldwork planning & labor)
Detection Sensitivity	Sub-millimeter to millimeter-scale deformation	Limited to changes >10 millimeters typically
Applicability	Excellent for large-scale, inaccessible, dynamic areas	Essential for targeted, species-specific, root-zone data

Table 2: Surveillance Objectives and Appropriate Method Selection

Surveillance Objective	Recommended Approach	Rationale	Key Performance Metrics
Pathogen Detection	Combination with targeted traditional methods	Requires high specificity and sensitivity at specific locations	Diagnostic test performance, sampling design [54]
Prevalence Estimation	Traditional methods with landscape guidance	Direct biological sampling needed for accurate prevalence data	Sample size, host abundance, diagnostic uncertainty [54]
Epidemiological Dynamics	Integrated approach	Combines broad patterns with mechanistic understanding	Transmission rates, ecological drivers, temporal patterns [54]
Landscape-Level Change	Primarily landscape-scale methods	Efficient coverage of large, inaccessible areas	Spatial coverage, cost efficiency, detection sensitivity [65]
Regulatory Compliance	Landscape-scale for reporting	Automated, standardized, auditable datasets	Standardization, documentation, temporal consistency [65]
Soil/Species Parameters	Primarily traditional methods	Direct measurement of specific biological/chemical factors	Parameter specificity, measurement accuracy, granularity [65]

Application Notes for Wildlife Disease Research

Strategic Implementation Framework

Surveillance Design Principles: Effective wildlife disease surveillance requires connecting surveillance objectives to appropriate designs. Key objectives include:

• Detection: Understanding whether a pathogen is present at a given site
• Prevalence: Determining what proportion of individuals are infected or exposed
• Epidemiological Dynamics: Understanding transmission dynamics through time [54]

The Surveillance Analysis and Sample Size Explorer (SASSE) provides a statistical framework for designing surveillance systems that account for sampling biases, diagnostic uncertainty, and abundance estimation challenges specific to wildlife populations [54]. This tool helps researchers develop intuition for choosing appropriate sample sizes and sampling designs that deliver the best surveillance data despite real-world challenges.

Integrated Surveillance Protocols: For comprehensive wildlife disease research, we recommend an integrated approach that leverages the strengths of both methodological families:

• Landscape-scale methods identify areas of concern across broad spatial scales, detecting environmental changes that may influence disease dynamics
• Traditional methods provide ground-truthing and detailed biological sampling at identified hotspots
• Permanent plot networks establish long-term monitoring sites for tracking changes over time [67]

Practical Protocols

Protocol 1: Landscape-Scale Surveillance for Disease Risk Assessment

• Site Selection: Implement stratified sampling across biophysical and disturbance gradients using a two-stage procedure [67]
• Data Collection: Utilize InSAR for detecting ground deformation related to environmental changes that may affect disease dynamics
• Temporal Analysis: Schedule satellite passes for regular intervals (daily/weekly) to track dynamic changes
• Data Integration: Combine deformation data with vegetation indices and climatic variables to identify potential disease risk areas

Protocol 2: Traditional Ground Monitoring for Pathogen Detection

• Plot Establishment: Set up permanent plots using differential GPS for precise location tracking [67]
• Biological Sampling: Collect vegetation and soil samples using standardized protocols with barcode labeling for sample tracking
• Health Assessment: Implement visual inspections and specimen collection for pathogen testing
• Data Recording: Use electronic field data collection to enhance data delivery into accessible databases [67]

Protocol 3: Integrated Surveillance for Epidemiological Dynamics

• Strategic Design: Use SASSE or similar tools to determine appropriate sample sizes accounting for diagnostic test performance and host population characteristics [54]
• Landscape Screening: Apply remote sensing to identify areas of ecological change potentially linked to disease dynamics
• Targeted Ground Truthing: Implement traditional methods at identified locations for direct pathogen detection and prevalence estimation
• Dynamic Monitoring: Establish regular revisit schedules for tracking temporal changes in both landscape features and disease parameters

Visualization of Methodological Workflows

Strategic Decision Framework for Surveillance Design

Integrated Surveillance Implementation Workflow

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 3: Research Reagent Solutions for Surveillance Monitoring

Tool/Reagent	Function	Application Context
Differential GPS	Precise geolocation of monitoring plots	Essential for establishing permanent plots and relocating sites for longitudinal studies [67]
Electronic Field Data Collection Systems	Digital data capture and management	Enhances accuracy and efficiency of field data collection, facilitating rapid data delivery to accessible databases [67]
Barcode Sample Tracking	Unique identification and management of physical samples	Enables long-term storage and retrieval of vegetation and soil samples for subsequent analysis [67]
In-Ground Soil Sensors	Continuous monitoring of soil moisture, temperature, and chemistry	Provides high-resolution data on soil parameters relevant to plant growth and ecosystem function [65]
Leaf Area Index (LAI) Instruments	Quantitative measurement of vegetation density	Standardized assessment of plant canopy structure and biomass [67]
Three-Dimensional Photo-Panorama Equipment	Comprehensive visual documentation of plot conditions	Creates permanent visual records for advanced analysis and change detection over time [67]
SASSE (Surveillance Analysis and Sample Size Explorer)	Statistical tool for surveillance design	Helps determine appropriate sample sizes and sampling designs for specific surveillance objectives [54]
Ground-Penetrating Radar (GPR)	Subsurface imaging and anomaly detection	Characterizes soil structure and identifies underground features not visible at the surface [65]

The comparative analysis of landscape-scale and traditional surveillance methods reveals distinct advantages and limitations for each approach, with optimal wildlife disease research outcomes achieved through strategic integration of both methodologies. Landscape-scale techniques provide unprecedented spatial coverage and temporal consistency, enabling detection of subtle environmental changes across extensive geographical areas. Traditional methods deliver the high-resolution, biologically specific data necessary for understanding disease mechanisms and prevalence at local scales.

For researchers designing surveillance programs, the key considerations include:

• Clearly defining surveillance objectives (detection, prevalence, or dynamics)
• Matching methodological approaches to spatial and temporal requirements
• Implementing stratified sampling designs across environmental gradients
• Utilizing statistical tools like SASSE for sample size determination
• Establishing permanent monitoring networks for longitudinal studies

The future of effective wildlife disease surveillance lies in adaptive, integrated approaches that leverage the strengths of both landscape-scale and traditional methods, enabling comprehensive understanding of disease dynamics from landscape to local scales.

Agent-Based Models as a Validation and Scenario-Planning Tool

Agent-based models are computational simulations that represent a system as a collection of autonomous decision-making entities (agents) interacting within an environment. These models are uniquely suited for studying complex systems where emergent phenomena arise from individual interactions. Within landscape-scale targeted surveillance for wildlife diseases, ABMs provide a powerful framework for validating surveillance strategies and planning for various outbreak scenarios. They incorporate real-world heterogeneities in disease distribution, host behavior, and landscape features that are difficult to capture with traditional statistical models [26]. By simulating individual host animals, their movements, interactions, and the resulting disease dynamics, ABMs allow researchers to test surveillance protocols in silico before costly and logistically challenging field implementation [1].

Application Notes: ABMs in Surveillance Design

The value of ABMs in surveillance design stems from their ability to integrate data across biological scales—from individual animal behavior to landscape-level patterns.

Core Capabilities and Functions

• Addressing Sampling Biases: Hunter-harvested samples, a common data source in wildlife surveillance, are rarely representative of the broader population due to factors like hunter selectivity and uneven land access. ABMs explicitly incorporate these biases, allowing researchers to quantify their impact and adjust sample size calculations accordingly [26]. For instance, a model can simulate how a disease clustered in a specific habitat might be missed by harvests focused on different areas.
• Incorporating Complex Host Ecology: ABMs can encode species-specific behaviors crucial for disease spread. For white-tailed deer, this includes simulating small, stable doe social groups, loose bachelor groups of males, seasonal shifts in sociality (e.g., isolation during fawning), and dispersal patterns of yearlings [26]. These behaviors create non-random contact networks that fundamentally shape disease transmission.
• Optimizing Resource Allocation: By running thousands of simulations, researchers can identify the surveillance strategies (e.g., sample size, spatial distribution, temporal frequency) that maximize the probability of disease detection for a given budget. This transforms surveillance from an ad-hoc effort into a quantitatively justified program [26].

Practical Implementation and Framework

The application of ABMs for surveillance is operationalized through a structured framework, as demonstrated in the case of Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) in Missouri. The framework often consists of two linked models [26]:

• Population Simulation Model: This component, such as the MOOvPOP model for white-tailed deer, generates a realistic, in-silico snapshot of the host population. It uses GIS data to create a landscape of habitat patches and simulates deer as individual agents with attributes like age, sex, and group affiliation, following rules based on empirical data for demography, mortality, and dispersal [26].
• Surveillance Simulation Model: This component, such as MOOvPOPsurveillance, overlays a disease state onto the simulated population and then runs the user-defined surveillance protocol (e.g., hunter-harvest sampling) on this virtual population. The output is used to determine the confidence in disease detection for a given sample size and strategy [26].

Experimental Protocols

This section outlines a standardized protocol for developing and employing an ABM to validate and plan a landscape-scale targeted surveillance program.

Protocol 1: Building a Wildlife Disease ABM Framework

Objective: To create a spatially explicit agent-based model that simulates host population dynamics and disease spread for evaluating surveillance designs.

Workflow Diagram: ABM Development and Application Workflow

Methodology:

• Model Parameterization and Conceptualization:

  • Define the Landscape: Represent the study area as a grid of habitat patches using GIS data (e.g., forest cover, agricultural land). Designate habitat quality based on ecological knowledge (e.g., deer thrive in areas with 25-75% forest cover juxtaposed with agriculture) [26].
  • Define Agent Attributes and Rules: Initialize agents (individual hosts) with attributes such as species, sex, age class (e.g., fawn, yearling, adult), and group membership. Encode behavioral rules derived from literature and field data, including:
    • Social Organization: Rules for forming doe social groups and bachelor groups [26].
    • Temporal Behavior: Seasonal shifts, such as pregnant females seeking isolation or males becoming solitary during rut [26].
    • Dispersal: Schedule and rules for yearling dispersal, triggered by seasonal cues like parturition or rut [26].
  • Define Disease Transmission Logic: Establish rules for disease spread, which can be density-dependent, frequency-dependent, or based on specific contact behaviors within social groups.

• Model Calibration and Validation:

  • Initialize Population: Use demographic data (density, sex ratio, age composition, reproduction, and mortality rates) to create a starting population [26].
  • Achieve Equilibrium: Run the population simulation until it reaches a stable equilibrium in age-sex composition and growth rate [26].
  • Validate Outputs: Compare model-generated patterns (e.g., population density, group size distribution) with independent field data not used for parameterization to ensure the virtual population is realistic.

• Scenario Testing and Output Analysis:

  • Introduce Disease: Take a snapshot of the calibrated, disease-free model population and introduce a pathogen into one or more focal areas based on the disease's ecology [26].
  • Run Surveillance Simulations: Implement the proposed surveillance strategy (e.g., "collect 500 hunter-harvest samples from these counties") repeatedly on the simulated, diseased population.
  • Analyze Performance: Calculate the frequency with which the surveillance strategy successfully detects the disease across multiple simulation runs. This provides a quantitative measure of confidence for that strategy.

Protocol 2: Implementing Landscape-Scale Targeted Surveillance Sampling

Objective: To guide the physical collection of field data aligned with the ABM's structure, ensuring data can be used for model validation and refinement.

Workflow Diagram: Targeted Surveillance Sampling Design

Methodology:

• Define Study Regions: Select multiple study sites that represent different ecological contexts (e.g., varying forest cover, host densities, land use) across the landscape [1].
• Select and Execute Sampling Methods: Implement a hybrid sampling design to capture data at multiple biological scales.
  • Cohort Sampling (Targeted):
    • Procedure: Identify and capture specific individual animals within a population. Mark them (e.g., with ear tags or GPS collars) and repeatedly recapture and resample the same individuals over time [1].
    • Purpose: This "gold standard" method provides high-resolution data on how individual infection status changes over time, which is critical for estimating transmission and recovery rates [1].
  • Cross-Sectional Sampling (Opportunistic/Targeted):
    • Procedure: At the same study sites, sample different individuals at a single point in time or over time without the requirement of tracking specific individuals. This can include hunter-harvest sampling or systematic culling [1].
    • Purpose: This cheaper and logistically simpler method provides broader data on the spatial distribution and prevalence of the disease at the population level [1].
• Data Integration: Combine data from both cohort and cross-sectional sampling. The cohort data provides deep insight into individual-level disease state transitions, while the cross-sectional data provides breadth and context across the landscape. This combined dataset is powerful for parameterizing and validating the ABM [1].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

The following table details key resources and tools essential for developing and applying ABMs in wildlife disease surveillance.

Table 1: Essential Resources for ABM-Based Surveillance

Category	Item/Technique	Function in ABM Surveillance
Modeling & Simulation	NetLogo [68], R/NetLogo-Rogo [68]	Provides high-level primitives for rapid prototyping and programming of ABM visualizations and logic, offering a "low threshold and high ceiling" for model development [68].
Data Integration	GIS Landscape Data [26]	Forms the environmental backdrop of the model; grid-based data on habitat type, land use, and forest cover are used to define resource availability and movement costs for agents.
Parameterization	Host Demographic Data [26]	Used to initialize and calibrate the model; includes empirical data on population density, sex ratios, age structure, birth rates, and mortality (both natural and hunted).
Behavioral Rules	Social Group Dynamics & Dispersal Logic [26]	Encodes species-specific behavior that drives contact patterns and disease spread; includes rules for group formation, seasonal behavior changes, and dispersal triggers and distances.
AI Enhancement	Machine-Learning Regression (e.g., Random Forest) [69]	Helps infer optimal ABM parameter values from empirical data by learning complex relationships between inputs and model outputs, streamlining calibration.
AI Enhancement	Data-Mining Diagnostics [69]	Identifies which model parameters drive the most output variance, helping to focus sensitivity analyses and refine agent behavioral rules.
Field Sampling	GPS Collars/Marking Kits [1]	Essential for conducting cohort studies; enables tracking and repeated sampling of specific individuals to gather individual-level disease state transition data.
Analytical Support	Cross-Sectional Prevalence Data [1]	Serves as a broader-scale dataset for validating model outputs and for integration with targeted cohort data to achieve a mechanistic understanding of disease dynamics.

Data Presentation and Analysis

The quantitative output from ABM simulations provides actionable guidance for designing surveillance. The following tables summarize key metrics and outcomes.

Table 2: Key Metrics for Evaluating Surveillance Confidence via ABM

Metric	Description	Application in ABM
Detection Confidence	The probability (%) of detecting the disease if present, given a specific sample size and strategy.	The primary output of surveillance simulations; calculated as the proportion of simulation runs where ≥1 positive sample is detected.
Sample Size	The number of individuals sampled from the population.	The key variable tested in the ABM to determine the minimum required to achieve a desired level of detection confidence (e.g., 95%).
Effective Sample Size	The sample size adjusted for real-world biases, as determined by the ABM.	The ABM quantifies how biases reduce effective sampling power; a larger nominal sample may be needed to achieve target confidence [26].
Spatial Prevalence	The proportion of infected individuals in a specific geographic area.	A dynamic output of the disease model; often starts very low (e.g., <0.1%) and is clustered, making detection challenging [26].

Table 3: Example ABM-Informed Sample Size Adjustment for CWD Surveillance

Scenario	Assumed Prevalence	Nominal Sample Size for 95% Confidence	ABM-Estimated Effective Sample Size	ABM-Recommended Action
Random Distribution	0.1%	~3000	~3000	Standard sampling tables are sufficient [26].
Clustered Distribution & Biased Sampling	0.1%	~3000	~500 (due to clustering and sampling missing hotspots)	Drastically increase sample size or re-design surveillance to target high-risk areas [26].

Evaluating System Impact on Public Health and Conservation Outcomes

Landscape-scale targeted surveillance is a critical methodology in wildlife disease research, designed to understand ecological drivers of pathogen transmission across individual, population, and landscape scales [1]. This approach moves beyond opportunistic sampling by implementing coordinated, replicated sampling designs across multiple ecological contexts, enabling researchers to identify disease emergence mechanisms, predict outbreak hotspots, and evaluate interventions that benefit both ecosystem health and public health outcomes [1]. This document provides detailed application notes and experimental protocols for implementing such surveillance systems, framed within a holistic "One Health" perspective that recognizes the interconnectedness of human, animal, and environmental health [70].

Quantitative Data Synthesis: Surveillance Design Comparisons

The table below summarizes key quantitative parameters and comparative effectiveness of different wildlife disease surveillance approaches, highlighting the strategic value of landscape-scale targeted designs.

Table 1: Comparative Analysis of Wildlife Disease Surveillance Approaches

Surveillance Attribute	Opportunistic Sampling	Cross-Sectional Targeted Sampling	Cohort Targeted Sampling	Landscape-Scale Targeted Surveillance
Primary Objective	Characterize spatial distribution of disease occurrence [1]	Determine point prevalence and risk factors at a specific time [1]	Estimate state-transition rates (e.g., infection, recovery) within individuals [1]	Understand mechanisms of disease emergence and persistence across ecological contexts [1]
Typical Sample Collection	Leverages pre-existing activities (e.g., hunting, management captures) [1]	One-time sampling of different individuals across populations	Repeated sampling of the same marked individuals over time [1]	Integrated approach combining cohort and cross-sectional designs across multiple sites [1]
Key Strengths	Cost-effective; broad spatial coverage; leverages existing infrastructure [1]	Logistically simpler than cohort studies; provides population-level snapshot [1]	Gold standard for understanding individual infection trajectories and dynamics [1]	Identifies ecological drivers of transmission; predicts landscape-level hotspots of emergence [1]
Key Limitations	Difficult to infer epidemiological parameters due to variable metadata and sampling bias [1]	Cannot directly observe transmission dynamics or individual-level state changes [1]	High cost and logistical complexity; limited sample sizes [1]	Labor-intensive; requires extensive partnerships and interdisciplinary coordination [1]
Quantitative Output	Presence/absence and distribution maps	Prevalence estimates with confidence intervals	Rates of infection, recovery, mortality, and force of infection	Scaled-up models of population-level disease dynamics from individual movement and infection data [1]

Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: Implementing Landscape-Scale Targeted Surveillance for a Novel Pathogen

This protocol outlines the steps for establishing a multi-site surveillance system for a novel zoonotic pathogen, such as SARS-CoV-2 in white-tailed deer, as described in the research by [1].

1. Research Network Formation

• Action: Establish a collaborative network comprising state and federal wildlife agencies, public health departments, academic institutions, and veterinary diagnostic laboratories.
• Rationale: Diverse partnerships are essential for accessing necessary land, leveraging expertise in animal capture and diagnostics, and ensuring the application of a standardized sampling design across a broad geographical area [1].

2. Site and Population Selection

• Action: Select study sites to represent the target species' range and capture a gradient of relevant ecological and anthropogenic variables (e.g., land cover, human population density, climate).
• Rationale: Replicating the sampling design across diverse contexts is fundamental for identifying the ecological drivers of disease transmission and predicting hotspots of emergence [1].

3. Integrated Sampling Design

• Action: Implement a hybrid design that combines:
  • Cohort Sampling: Capture, mark, and collect biological samples (e.g., nasal, rectal, blood) from individual animals. Release and subsequently recapture and resample these same individuals at regular intervals (e.g., quarterly) for at least one year.
  • Cross-Sectional Sampling: Annually, capture and sample a new, random selection of individuals from the same population to supplement cohort data.
• Rationale: Cohort sampling provides critical data on within-host infection persistence and individual state-transition rates, while cross-sectional sampling helps assess overall population prevalence and corrects for potential biases in the cohort [1].

4. Data Collection and Management

• Action: For each captured animal, collect a standardized set of data and samples:
  • Biological Samples: Target tissues and swabs relevant to the pathogen's suspected route of transmission and shedding.
  • Individual-Level Data: Species, sex, age, weight, body condition, and GPS location of capture.
  • Additional Metrics: Fit selected individuals with GPS collars to collect movement data, which can be scaled to model population-level contact rates [1].
• Rationale: Aligning data collection across individual, population, and landscape scales enables future analyses to disentangle the mechanisms driving transmission.

5. Laboratory Analysis

• Action: Test samples using appropriate diagnostic assays (e.g., PCR for pathogen detection, ELISA for antibody presence, genomic sequencing for viral evolution).
• Rationale: Diagnostic results linked with detailed metadata are used to parameterize models of disease dynamics.

Protocol 2: Rapid Risk Analysis for Pathogen Prioritization

This protocol, adapted from [71], provides a semi-quantitative method for prioritizing wildlife pathogens for surveillance.

1. Hazard Identification

• Action: Compile a comprehensive list of exotic and endemic pathogens of concern for wildlife, human, and livestock health. Utilize databases, scientific literature, and expert consultation.

2. Semi-Quantitative Risk Scoring

• Action: For each pathogen, score the following components on a defined scale (e.g., 1-5):
  • Release Assessment (Probability of Entry): Score based on pathways such as legal and illegal wildlife trade, human travel, and migratory birds [71].
  • Exposure Assessment (Likelihood of Spread): Score factors like host range, environmental persistence, and transmission routes [71].
  • Consequence Assessment: Score the potential impacts separately for free-living wildlife, captive wildlife, humans, and livestock. Considerations include morbidity/mortality, economic impact, and conservation status [71].
• Rationale: This structured approach allows for a consistent and transparent comparison of a large number of pathogens where full quantitative assessment is not feasible.

3. Risk Estimation and Ranking

• Action: Calculate a total risk score for each pathogen. A common method is: Risk = (Release Score) x (Exposure Score) x (Consequence Score).
• Rationale: The resulting scores enable managers to rank pathogens objectively, justifying the allocation of limited surveillance resources to the highest-priority threats [71].

Visualization of Surveillance Frameworks

Landscape-Scale Targeted Surveillance Network Architecture

This diagram illustrates the integrated network and data flow required for successful landscape-scale targeted surveillance.

Integrated Sampling and Analysis Workflow

This diagram details the sequential workflow for the integrated field and laboratory activities outlined in Protocol 1.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

The following table details essential materials and methodological solutions for implementing landscape-scale wildlife disease surveillance.

Table 2: Essential Research Reagents and Methodological Solutions for Wildlife Disease Surveillance

Tool Category	Specific Item / Solution	Function / Application
Pathogen Detection & Characterization	PCR & qPCR Assays	Detection of pathogen-specific genetic material to determine active infection and viral load [1].
	ELISA Kits and Virus Neutralization Tests	Detection of pathogen-specific antibodies in serum to determine past exposure and immune status [1].
	Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS)	Genomic characterization of pathogen strains to track transmission pathways and viral evolution [1].
Field Sampling & Data Collection	Animal Capture & Handling Equipment (e.g., traps, nets, biologgers)	Safe and ethical capture and restraint of wildlife for sample collection and marking [1].
	GPS Telemetry Collars	Collection of high-resolution animal movement data to model contact rates and spatial use, scaling individual data to population-level processes [1].
	Standardized Biological Sample Kits (e.g., swabs, vacutainers, preservatives)	Systematic collection and preservation of nasal, oral, rectal, fecal, and blood samples for downstream diagnostic assays [1].
Data Synthesis & Modeling	"Rapid Risk Analysis" Framework	A semi-quantitative, OIE-standardized methodology for scoring and ranking wildlife pathogens based on probability of entry, spread, and consequences to prioritize surveillance efforts [71].
	Morphological Spatial Pattern Analysis (MSPA)	A pixel-based GIS analysis of landscape structure that helps quantify habitat fragmentation, a key factor in wildlife health and disease dynamics [72].
	Output-Based Surveillance (OBS) Framework	A flexible surveillance approach that defines a required outcome (e.g., detect a set prevalence with a set confidence) rather than prescribing specific methods, allowing for adaptation to local contexts and resources [73].

Conclusion

Landscape-scale targeted surveillance represents a paradigm shift from reactive monitoring to a proactive, evidence-generating system essential for managing complex wildlife disease threats. Success hinges on integrating ecological drivers like latitude and host behavior with sophisticated methodologies that address inherent sampling biases. The move towards formalized intelligence systems, which synthesize diverse data streams, is critical for transforming surveillance data into understandable and actionable knowledge for decision-makers. Future efforts must focus on building resilient, integrated research networks and standardizing approaches across regions to enhance preparedness for emerging pathogens, ultimately strengthening our capacity for early detection, rapid response, and predictive risk assessment for zoonotic and wildlife diseases with significant biomedical implications.

References

• 1. Expanding National‐Scale Wildlife Disease Surveillance ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12158667/]
• 2. Strategic planning of prevention and surveillance for ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12501194/]
• 3. Structuring targeted surveillance for monitoring disease ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3730692/]
• 4. Disease outbreak thresholds emerge from interactions ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6048514/]
• 5. Guidelines for Evaluating Surveillance Systems [https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00001769.htm]
• 6. Individual-level patterns of resource selection do not predict ... [https://movementecologyjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40462-023-00435-9]
• 7. The Strategies for Quantitative and Qualitative Remote Data ... [https://formative.jmir.org/2022/4/e30055/]
• 8. Landscape-scale analysis of raccoon rabies surveillance ... [https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0013581]
• 9. The Influence of Seasonal Weather Conditions at High ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41195652/]
• 10. Global phenology maps reveal the drivers and effects of ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-09410-3]
• 11. A minimum data standard for wildlife disease research and ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12182584/]
• 12. Standardizing Wildlife Disease Data for Global Health ... [https://globalbiodefense.com/2025/06/24/wildlife-disease-data-standard/]
• 13. Using wild-animal tracking for detecting and managing ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0169534725001351]
• 14. Molecular epidemiology, evolution, and transmission ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11711587/]
• 15. Landscape-scale analysis of raccoon rabies surveillance ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41004547/]
• 16. Evaluation of contingency actions to control the spread of ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016758772400031X]
• 17. Influence of habitat and baiting strategy on oral rabies ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0168159124001680]
• 18. Ultra-Deep Sequencing of Intra-host Rabies Virus Populations ... [https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0002555]
• 19. The risks of rapid urbanization in developing... | Zurich Insurance [https://www.zurich.com/knowledge/topics/global-risks/the-risks-of-rapid-urbanization-in-developing-countries]
• 20. infectious Human burdens decrease with disease but... urbanization [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5413870/]
• 21. New guidelines for disease surveillance released to better ... [https://www.woah.org/en/new-guidelines-for-disease-surveillance-released-to-better-protect-wildlife/]
• 22. Fine-scale heterogeneity in population density predicts ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-28231-w]
• 23. The role of urbanisation in the spread of Aedes mosquitoes ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8428665/]
• 24. Low biodiversity in cities boosts the risk of disease outbreak [https://www.nature.com/articles/d44148-023-00334-6]
• 25. A minimum data standard for wildlife disease research and ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-025-05332-x]
• 26. An agent-based framework for improving wildlife disease ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7079769/]
• 27. Expanding National-Scale Wildlife Disease Surveillance Systems With Research Networks - PubMed [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40510630/]
• 28. Enhancing Multi-Sector Collaboration and Integrating ... [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40588-025-00257-w]
• 29. Discriminability of node colors in node-link diagrams and ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468502X25000713]
• 30. Expanding National-Scale Wildlife Disease Surveillance ... [https://experts.umn.edu/en/publications/expanding-national-scale-wildlife-disease-surveillance-systems-wi]
• 31. Data Parameters From Participatory Surveillance Systems in ... [https://publichealth.jmir.org/2025/1/e55356]
• 32. A concise guide to developing and using quantitative models ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6949132/]
• 33. Quantitative Analyses in Wildlife Science | Hopkins Press [https://www.press.jhu.edu/books/title/11858/quantitative-analyses-wildlife-science?srsltid=AfmBOooMSQlA1Ff1E6_kIPp0xL5EVw3Es0BAkqcsKi756Jc3nbm0GVoE]
• 34. Persistence of SARS-CoV-2 Alpha Variant in White-Tailed ... [https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/31/7/24-1922_article]
• 35. Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in free-ranging white-tailed ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-39782-x]
• 36. Deer as Viral Reservoirs? SARS-CoV-2 Persists and ... [https://globalbiodefense.com/2025/07/20/sars-cov-2-white-tail-deer-viral-reservoir-human-risk/]
• 37. Domestic and wild animal samples and diagnostic testing ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10614713/]
• 38. Rapid Field-Based Testing of SARS-CoV-2 in Wild and ... [https://www.varizymes.com/blogs/diagnostics/rapid-field-based-testing-of-sars-cov-2-in-wild-and-farmed-animal-populations?srsltid=AfmBOorktQyWkTIDq9p0eu8opO1nxnIABNBh05MsadjEUmRFHdXaApsT]
• 39. Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 antibody detection methods for ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167587725001072]
• 40. Persistence of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies longer ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9448430/]
• 41. Using Social Network Measures in Wildlife Disease Ecology ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5384163/]
• 42. Disease-emergence dynamics and control in a socially- ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/srep25150]
• 43. Harnessing Connections for Efficient Disease Investigation [https://cwhl.vet.cornell.edu/article/harnessing-connections]
• 44. The journey to Nature Positive: Methods for Sampling and ... [https://www.slrconsulting.com/us/insights/the-journey-to-nature-positive-methods-for-sampling-and-quantifying-nature-in-landscape-scale/]
• 45. Temporally Adaptive Sampling: A Case Study in Rare Species ... [https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0120714]
• 46. A Review of Non-Invasive Sampling in Wildlife Disease ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9265025/]
• 47. Evaluating hunting and capture methods for urban wild ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969724036106]
• 48. A minimum data standard for wildlife disease research and ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40544158/]
• 49. CerMapp: A Cloud-Based Geospatial Prototype for ... [https://www.mdpi.com/2220-9964/14/11/453]
• 50. Computational modeling of infectious diseases: insights from ... [https://bmcmedinformdecismak.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12911-025-03063-y]
• 51. Management Agencies can Leverage Animal Social ... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40101760/]
• 52. Reimagining the Science Behind Sample Size [https://cwhl.vet.cornell.edu/article/reimagining-science-behind-sample-size]
• 53. Generalized robust regression techniques and adaptive ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-85328-0]
• 54. Surveillance Analysis and Sample Size Explorer (SASSE) [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12356644/]
• 55. Landscape-scale population trends in the occurrence and ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006320723004998]
• 56. Wildlife-related pathogen surveillance with Nanopore ... [https://ednaconference.com.au/5728]
• 57. Impact of microbiological molecular methodologies on ... [https://environmentalmicrobiome.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40793-025-00704-7]
• 58. Expanding National‐Scale Wildlife Disease Surveillance ... [https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10603767-expanding-nationalscale-wildlife-disease-surveillance-systems-research-networks]
• 59. Contrast requirements for WCAG 2.2 Level AA [https://www.makethingsaccessible.com/guides/contrast-requirements-for-wcag-2-2-level-aa/]
• 60. Elements must meet minimum color contrast ratio thresholds [https://dequeuniversity.com/rules/axe/4.8/color-contrast]
• 61. Google New Color Palette [https://www.color-hex.com/color-palette/51381]
• 62. Google Logo 4 Colors #4285f4, #ea4335, #fbbc05, #34a853 [https://colorswall.com/palette/170959]
• 63. Validation of laboratory developed serology assays for ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9212509/]
• 64. A modified quality control protocol for infectious disease ... [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-67472-1]
• 65. InSAR Vs Ground Monitoring: 2025 Traditional Comparison [https://farmonaut.com/remote-sensing/insar-vs-traditional-ground-monitoring-2025-comparison]
• 66. A comparison of quantitative for examining methods ... landscape [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00133311]
• 67. Frontiers | A Vegetation and Soil Survey Method for Surveillance ... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/ecology-and-evolution/articles/10.3389/fevo.2020.00157/full]
• 68. Design Guidelines for Agent Based Model Visualization [https://www.jasss.org/12/2/1.html]
• 69. Using AI enhanced agent-based models to support management of wild populations | Landscape Ecology [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10980-025-02149-2]
• 70. Bridging the Gap Between Conservation and Health - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7120371/]
• 71. Development of methodology to prioritise wildlife ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167587707000736]
• 72. Using landscape structure to develop quantitative ... [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1470160X12003081]
• 73. A framework for the design, implementation, and evaluation of ... [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10157289/]