Body condition and colonization by fungi of House Sparrows Passer domesticus in the urban and rural environment

Figures & data

Table I. Fungi isolated from ontocenoses of the beak cavity and cloaca of House Sparrows Passer domesticus occurring in two types of habitat

		Urban			Rural
		Number of isolates			Number of isolates
No.	Species of fungi	Beak Cavity	Cloaca	Number of individuals	Beak Cavity	Cloaca	Number of individuals
1	Aspergillus flavus	3	5	6	1	1	1
2	Aspergillus fumigatus	6	5	6	6	8	8
3	Aspergillus niger	5	4	5	4	4	6
4	Aspergillus ochraceus	0	0	0	3	4	4
5	Candida albicans	4	5	5	11	10	12
6	Candida guilliermondii	2	2	2	1	1	1
7	Candida krusei	25	21	27	13	13	16
8	Candida norvengensis	0	0	0	1	1	2
9	Candida parapsilosis	1	0	1	1	0	1
10	Candida rugos	1	1	2	0	0	0
11	Candida tropicalis	0	0	0	3	1	3
12	Cryptoccocus laurentii	1	1	1	0	0	0
13	Cryptoccocus neoformans	2	2	2	1	1	1
14	Fusarium oxysporum	0	0	0	2	0	2
15	Fusarium solani	1	0	4	2	2	4
16	Geotrichum candidum	0	0	0	1	0	1
17	Malassezia furfur	0	1	1	0	0	0
18	Mucor mucedo	0	1	1	1	1	2
19	Mucor racemosus	1	2	2	2	2	2
20	Rhizopus nigricans	0	0	0	2	1	2
21	Rhodotorula glutinis	0	0	0	1	0	1
22	Rhodotorula rubra	0	0	0	1	1	1
23	Saccharomyces octoporus	2	2	2	0	0	0
24	Saccharomycopsis capsularis	0	0	0	1	1	1
25	Trichosporon asahii	0	0	0	1	0	1
26	Trichosporon cutaneum	0	0	0	3	1	3
Total isolates		54	52		62	53

Table II. Number and percentage of birds with a positive test result for the presence of fungi in ontocenoses of the beak cavity and cloaca and scores of the relative risk coefficient of colonization by fungi in the compared groups of birds

	Number (%)
	Urban	Rural	Relative Risk (RR)	95% c.l. RR
Beak Cavity (total)	41 (82.0%)	45 (90.0%)	0.742	0.297–1.854
Urban vs Rural
Cloaca (total)	40 (80.0%)	40 (80.0%)	1.000	0.428–2.337
Urban vs Rural
	Males	Females
Beak Cavity (total)	36 (87.8%)	21 (95.5%)	0.758	0.215–2.667
♂♂ vs ♀♀
Cloaca (total)	37 (90.2%)	19 (86.4%)	1.156	0.316–4.229
♂♂ vs ♀♀
	Adultus	Juvenilis
Beak Cavity (total)	57 (90.5%)	29 (78.4%)	1.547	0.561–4.260
Ad. vs Juv.
Cloaca (total)	56 (88.9%)	25 (67.6%)	1.877	0.740–4.762
Ad. vs Juv.

Table III. General Linear Models (A) and the best fitted model (B) of relation between probability of fungi occurrence in birds ontocenoses, body and physiological birds condition and age of birds (selection on AIC)

A. Models dependent variable: binomial Yes = 1, No = 0, link function: logit
Effect	AIC	Il. likelihood Chi square	P
Factor PC1 – Age	52.869	7.913	0.019
Factor PC1 – Factor PC1 – Age	53.520	9.261	0.026
Factor PC1 – Haemoglobin – Age	53.724	9.057	0.029
Factor PC1 – Factor PC2 – Haemoglobin – Age	53.970	10.811	0.029
B. Model I dependent variable: binomial Yes = 1, No = 0, link function: logit AIC = 52.869; II likelihood chi square = 7.913, P = 0.019
Effect	Parameter	SE	Wald test value	−95.0%C.L.	95%C.L.	P
a	2.111	0.4190	25.366	2.932	1.289	<0.000001
Factor PC1	−0.447	0.2093	4.568	−0.037	−0.086	0.033
Age	0.676	0.3978	2.887	1.456	−0.104	0.089

The best fitted model.

Table IV. Body condition coefficients (mean ± SD) and results of the Mann-Whitney test applied to compare the body condition of birds with positive (Yes) and negative (No) results of the test for fungal presence in the beak cavity ontocenosis

	Urban			Rural
	Yes	No	P	Yes	No	P
F	0.4 ± 0.59	0.7 ± 0.50	0.198	0.7 ± 0.63	0.8 ± 0.84	0.782
logBM	1.426 ± 0.034	1.449 ± 0.025	0.021	1.443 ± 0.034	1.467 ± 0.060	0.124
logT	1.307 ± 0.018	1.321 ± 0.019	0.034	1.311 ± 0.021	1.326 ± 0.014	0.095
BM/WL	0.349 ± 0.026	0.370 ± 0.010	0.006	0.360 ± 0.028	0.376 ± 0.045	0.271
logBM/logWL	0.757 ± 0.018	0.770 ± 0.007	0.009	0.764 ± 0.018	0.774 ± 0.028	0.185
BM/TL	0.487 ± 0.043	0.519 ± 0.032	0.039	0.489 ± 0.051	0.505 ± 0.043	0.525
BM/T	1.317 ± 0.098	1.341 ± 0.040	0.471	1.358 ± 0.114	1.391 ± 0.155	0.549

F – degree of fat score; logBM – body mass logarithm; logT – tarsus length logarithm; BM/WL – body mass/wing length; logBM/logWL – body mass logarithm/wing length logarithm; BM/TL – body mass/tail length; BM/T – body mass/tarsus length.

Table V. Body condition coefficients (mean ± SD) and results of the Mann-Whitney test applied to compare the body condition of birds with positive (Yes) and negative (No) results of the test for fungal presence in the cloaca ontocenosis

	Urban			Rural
	Yes	No	P	Yes	No	P
F	0.4 ± 0.59	0.8 ± 0.42	0.023	0.7 ± 0.65	0.8 ± 0.67	0.645
logBM	1.425 ± 0.034	1.448 ± 0.024	0.021	1.442 ± 0.032	1.459 ± 0.059	0.255
logT	1.308 ± 0.018	1.319 ± 0.018	0.111	1.310 ± 0.022	1.323 ± 0.013	0.077
BM/WL	0.348 ± 0.025	0.372 ± 0.011	0.001	0.359 ± 0.024	0.374 ± 0.047	0.350
logBM/logWL	0.756 ± 0.018	0.771 ± 0.008	0.002	0.764 ± 0.016	0.772 ± 0.030	0.289
BM/TL	0.485 ± 0.042	0.524 ± 0.031	0.004	0.488 ± 0.047	0.505 ± 0.063	0.361
BM/T	1.314 ± 0.097	1.348 ± 0.047	0.239	1.357 ± 0.099	1.377 ± 0.186	0.767

F – degree of fat score; logBM – body mass logarithm; logT – tarsus length logarithm; BM/WL – body mass/wing length; logBM/logWL – body mass logarithm/wing length logarithm; BM/TL – body mass/tail length; BM/T – body mass/tarsus length.

Figure 1. Glucose levels in birds with positive (Yes) and negative (No) results of the test for fungal presence in the urban (Urban) and rural (Rural) population. (Figure show means and 95% c.l.)

Figure 2. Haemoglobin levels in birds with positive (Yes) and negative (No) results of the test for fungal presence in the urban (Urban) and rural (Rural) population. (Figure show means and 95% c.l.)