| Literature DB >> 23977300 |
Jocelyn C Mullins1, Giuliano Garofolo, Matthew Van Ert, Antonio Fasanella, Larisa Lukhnova, Martin E Hugh-Jones, Jason K Blackburn.
Abstract
We modeled the ecological niche of a globally successful Bacillus anthracis sublineage in the United States, Italy and Kazakhstan to better understand the geographic distribution of anthrax and potential associations between regional populations and ecology. Country-specific ecological-niche models were developed and reciprocally transferred to the other countries to determine if pathogen presence could be accurately predicted on novel landscapes. Native models accurately predicted endemic areas within each country, but transferred models failed to predict known occurrences in the outside countries. While the effects of variable selection and limitations of the genetic data should be considered, results suggest differing ecological associations for the B. anthracis populations within each country and may reflect niche specialization within the sublineage. Our findings provide guidance for developing accurate ecological niche models for this pathogen; models should be developed regionally, on the native landscape, and with consideration to population genetics. Further genomic analysis will improve our understanding of the genetic-ecological dynamics of B. anthracis across these countries and may lead to more refined predictive models for surveillance and proactive vaccination programs. Further studies should evaluate the impact of variable selection of native and transferred models.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23977300 PMCID: PMC3747089 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0072451
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Geographic distribution of the training and testing points used for ecological niche model building and evaluation.
Occurrences are shown for (A) the United States, (B) Italy and (C) Kazakhstan. Model training points are illustrated in green and independent data for model evaluation are yellow.
Environmental variables used to develop ecological niche models.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Elevation (m) | Altitude | WorldClim† |
| Annual Temperature Range (°C) | BIO7 | WorldClim |
| Annual Mean Temperature (°C) | BIO1 | WorldClim |
| Precipitation of Driest Month (mm) | BIO14 | WorldClim |
| Precipitation of Wettest Month (mm) | BIO13 | WorldClim |
| Annual Precipitation (mm) | BIO12 | WorldClim |
| NDVI Amplitude (no units) | wd1014a1 | TALA‡ |
| Mean NDVI (no units) | wd1014a0 | TALA |
† (www.worldclim.org) [35]
‡Trypanosomiasis and Land Use in Africa (TALA) Research Group (Oxford, United Kingdom) [57]
Sample sizes and accuracy metrics for all native models and projections.
| Training Landscape | United States | Italy | Kazakhstan†
| |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Projection | Native | IT | KZ | Native | KZ | US | Native | KZ | IT | US |
| Training | 48 | - | - | 28 | - | - | 24 | - | - | - |
| Testing | 12 | 35 | 39 | 7 | 39 | 60 | 8 | 15 | 35 | 60 |
| AUC |
| 0.51 | 0.48 |
| 0.56 | 0.43 |
| 0.71 | 0.45 | 0.48 |
| SE | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.09 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.09 | 0.08 | 0.05 | 0.04 |
| Z | 5.84‡ | 7.72‡ | 5.99‡ | 3.86‡ | 97.91‡ | 16.42‡ | 3.13‡ | 4.52‡ | 15.93‡ | 7.71‡ |
| Total Omission | 0 | 62.1 | 13.2 | 0 | 86.8 | 96.4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Average Omission | 6.7 | 71 | 51 | 1.4 | 74.8 | 82.2 | 0 | 19.2 | 10 | 17.7 |
| Total Commission | 8.38 | 0 | 0.84 | 27.86 | 0 | 0 | 19.77 | 13.17 | 9.04 | 28.67 |
| Average Commission | 22.88 | 7.71 | 43.54 | 50.21 | 0.05 | 3.17 | 46.3 | 54.28 | 90.9 | 83.35 |
| SAO | 16.67 | - | 89.47 | 14.29 | - | 100 | 0 | 46.15 | 100 | 62.50 |
Native projection are under the curve (AUC) scores are shown in bold for comparison. SE = standard error, Z = z-score, SAO = summed area omission.
† Native training and testing are for southern training area only
‡ statistically significant value
Figure 2Predicted distribution of by native and transferred projections.
Native models were built for (A) the United States, (B) Italy and (C) Kazakhstan. Color ramp indicates the level of model agreement from zero (no models predict presence) to ten (all models in the best subset predict presence).