| Literature DB >> 25567933 |
Elena Gómez-Díaz1, Paul F Doherty2, David Duneau3, Karen D McCoy1.
Abstract
Vector organisms are implicated in the transmission of close to a third of all infectious diseases. In many cases, multiple vectors (species or populations) can participate in transmission but may contribute differently to disease ecology and evolution. The presence of cryptic vector populations can be particularly problematic as differences in infection can be difficult to evaluate and may lead to erroneous evolutionary and epidemiological inferences. Here, we combine site-occupancy modeling and molecular assays to evaluate patterns of infection in the marine cycle of Lyme borreliosis, involving colonial seabirds, the tick Ixodes uriae, and bacteria of the Borrelia burgdorferi s.l. complex. In this cycle, the tick vector consists of multiple, cryptic (phenotypically undistinguishable but genetically distinct) host races that are frequently found in sympatry. Our results show that bacterial detection varies strongly among tick races leading to vector-specific biases if raw counts are used to calculate Borrelia prevalence. These differences are largely explained by differences in infection intensity among tick races. After accounting for detection probabilities, we found that overall prevalence in this system is higher than previously suspected and that certain vector-host combinations likely contribute more than others to the local dynamics and large-scale dispersal of Borrelia spirochetes. These results highlight the importance of evaluating vector population structure and accounting for detection probability when trying to understand the evolutionary ecology of vector-borne diseases.Entities:
Keywords: Lyme disease bacteria; pathogen detection; seabirds; site-occupancy models; transmission ecology
Year: 2010 PMID: 25567933 PMCID: PMC3352467 DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-4571.2010.00127.x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evol Appl ISSN: 1752-4571 Impact factor: 5.183
Figure 1Intensity of infection of Lyme borreliosis bacteria (mean number of spirochetes per infected sample) in three tick races associated with puffins, murres, and kittiwakes, respectively. The error bars are standard errors (SE).
Model selection results for models estimating prevalence (ψ) of Borrelia spp. in Ixodes uriae host races
| Model | ΔQAICc | QAICc weights | Model likelihood | Number of parameters | Deviance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.48 | 1.00 | 8 | 168.68 | |
| 1.59 | 0.21 | 0.45 | 9 | 167.83 | |
| 1.65 | 0.21 | 0.44 | 6 | 175.05 | |
| 3.14 | 0.10 | 0.21 | 7 | 174.21 | |
| 13.16 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 5 | 188.84 |
We modeled Borrelia occupancy of ticks as a constant regardless of which seabird species they fed on (ψconstant) and as a function of tick race (ψtickrace). We modeled detection as a constant (pconstant), a function of tick race (ptickrace), a function of the relative quantity of bacteria in a linear (pquantity), and quadratic () fashion, as well as a function of engorgement status (pengorge). We ran all combinations of additive effects. Only the top five models are presented. ΔQAICc is the QAICc scaled so the lowest value is zero (for ease of interpretation). QAICc weights are the model weights. The model likelihood is the QAICc weight of the model of interest divided by the QAICc weight of the best model. This value is the strength of evidence of one model relative to other models in the set. Number of parameters and deviance [difference in the −2log(likelihood) of the model of interest and the −2log(likelihood) of the saturated model] are also given.
Figure 2Detection probability of Borrelia spp. as a function of the quantity of bacteria in tick races associated with three seabird species (A: puffin; B: kittiwake; C: murre). The dotted lines are standard errors (SE).
Comparisons of naïve and corrected prevalence for three host races of Ixodes uriae (±1 SE)
| Tick race | Naïve prevalence | Corrected prevalence (Ψ) | Bias |
|---|---|---|---|
| Puffin | 0.53 (0.13) | 0.57 (0.15) | 0.04 |
| Kittiwake | 0.12 (0.07) | 0.22 (0.14) | 0.10 |
| Murre | 0.11 (0.08) | 0.41 (0.32) | 0.30 |
| All races | 0.22 (0.06) | 0.40 (0.14) | 0.18 |
The naïve prevalence was calculated from the raw data as the number of ticks observed with Borrelia spp. divided by the total number of ticks tested and the SE was based on a binomial distribution. The corrected prevalence takes into account the detection probability and is the model-averaged estimate across the entire model set, and thus accounts for both uncertainty in the estimation process, the detection process, and the model set. The corrected estimate for all tick races combined was from the highest ranking model in which prevalence was considered constant across tick races. Bias was calculated as the corrected prevalence minus the naïve prevalence. Naïve and corrected prevalence are based on the unknown tick sample only (see Materials and methods section).