Fig. 2: Change in age distribution among “wild type” PRNP homozygote mule deer at Table Mesa. | Communications Biology

Fig. 2: Change in age distribution among “wild type” PRNP homozygote mule deer at Table Mesa.

From: Apparent stability masks underlying change in a mule deer herd with unmanaged chronic wasting disease

Fig. 2

Proportional distribution of sampled Table Mesa mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) homozygous for serine (S) at PRNP codon 225 (225SS)—“wild type”—across three age groups (1–2-year-old, 3–4 year-old, or ≥5-year-old) in 2005 (n = 85) or in 2018–2019 (n = 74). The change in age distributions between the two study periods (2 × 3 Fisher’s exact test P = 0.035) appeared to be driven by capture of fewer individuals ≥5 years old and an accompanying increase in 3–4-year-old individuals in the 2018–2019 sample. Because captures tended to focus on obviously adult animals our samples may have underrepresented the younger age class by largely excluding 1-year-olds, but this potential bias was consistent between the two study periods and would not give rise to differential capture/sampling probabilities between the two older age groups. Bars are the proportion of the sample in an age group from the respective study periods. Capped vertical lines are 95% binomial confidence intervals; numbers shown at the bottom of bars are respective sample sizes (number of individual deer).

Back to article page