| Literature DB >> 30615683 |
Marine Combe1, Rodolphe Elie Gozlan1, Soushieta Jagadesh1, Camilla Jensen Velvin1, Rolland Ruffine2, Magalie Pierre Demar3,4, Pierre Couppié3,5, Felix Djossou3,6, Mathieu Nacher7, Loïc Epelboin3,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Zoonotic pathogens respond to changes in host range and/or pathogen, vector and host ecology. Environmental changes (biodiversity, habitat changes, variability in climate), even at a local level, lead to variability in environmental pathogen dynamics and can facilitate their transmission from natural reservoirs to new susceptible hosts. Whilst the environmental dynamics of aquatic bacteria are directly linked to seasonal changes of their habitat they also rely on the ecological processes underpining their transmission. However data allowing the comparison of these ecological processes are lacking. Here we compared the environmental dynamics of generalist and vector-borne aquatic bacterial pathogens in the same unit of time and space, and across rural and urban habitats in French Guiana (South America). PRINCIPALEntities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30615683 PMCID: PMC6336349 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0007074
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Fig 1Diversity of environmental sites found positive for Leptospira sp. and M. ulcerans DNA during the period surveyed in French Guiana.
A: urban site U30; B: urban site U1; C: urban site U4; D: rural site R9.
Site characteristics.
Each site was tested for the presence of Leptospira sp. DNA and M. ulcerans DNA. Urban samples were collected from september 2016 to october 2017, while rural samples were collected over the period november 2015-march 2017. When a site was found positive for the bacteria’s DNA at least one time we indicated it as positive +. When a site was always found negative we added the symbol - See Supporting Information S1 Table for qPCR CT-values.
| Site | Area | Latitude | Longitude | Sample type | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| U1 | Urban | 4.93037 | -52.33123 | Water/Sediment | + | + |
| U2 | Urban | 4.93052 | -52.33151 | Water/Sediment | - | - |
| U3 | Urban | 4.93084 | -52.33136 | Water/Sediment | - | - |
| U4 | Urban | 4.92697 | -52.33201 | Water/Sediment | + | + |
| U5 | Urban | 4.92958 | -52.33241 | Water/Sediment | + | + |
| U6 | Urban | 4.92951 | -52.33275 | Water/Sediment | - | + |
| U7 | Urban | 4.93505 | -52.32441 | Sediment | - | - |
| U8 | Urban | 4.93507 | -52.31910 | Sediment | + | + |
| U9 | Urban | 4.93318 | -52.31406 | Sediment | + | - |
| U10 | Urban | 4.93754 | -52.29153 | Sediment | + | - |
| U11 | Urban | 4.93876 | -52.29340 | Sediment | - | - |
| U12 | Urban | 4.93359 | -52.28977 | Sediment | - | - |
| U13 | Urban | 4.93902 | -52.29546 | Sediment | - | - |
| U14 | Urban | 4.93756 | -52.31689 | Sediment | - | - |
| U15 | Urban | 4.92430 | -52.31720 | Sediment | - | - |
| U16 | Urban | 4.91917 | -52.31267 | Sediment | + | - |
| U17 | Urban | 4.92512 | -52.31252 | Sediment | + | - |
| U18 | Urban | 4.91295 | -52.27134 | Sediment | - | - |
| U19 | Urban | 4.91655 | -52.27012 | Sediment | - | - |
| U20 | Urban | 4.88598 | -52.26323 | Sediment | + | - |
| U21 | Urban | 4.86061 | -52.25690 | Sediment | - | - |
| U22 | Urban | 4.88733 | -52.27473 | Sediment | - | - |
| U23 | Urban | 4.88917 | -52.27728 | Sediment | - | - |
| U24 | Urban | 4.89426 | -52.28606 | Sediment | + | - |
| U25 | Urban | 4.89277 | -52.28524 | Sediment | + | - |
| U26 | Urban | 4.90125 | -52.27906 | Sediment | - | - |
| U27 | Urban | 4.89999 | -52.27838 | Sediment | - | - |
| U28 | Urban | 4.90269 | -52.27752 | Sediment | - | - |
| U29 | Urban | 4.90765 | -52.28439 | Sediment | - | - |
| U30 | Urban | 4.91411 | -52.28640 | Sediment | + | + |
| U31 | Urban | 4.93293 | -52.33434 | Sediment | - | + |
| U32 | Urban | 4.93108 | -52.33344 | Sediment | - | + |
| U33 | Urban | 4.92908 | -52.33273 | Sediment | + | + |
| U34 | Urban | 4.93546 | -52.33200 | Sediment | + | - |
| U35 | Urban | 4.93514 | -52.33314 | Sediment | + | + |
| U36 | Urban | 4.93687 | -52.32674 | Sediment | + | + |
| U37 | Urban | 4.93896 | -52.29173 | Sediment | - | - |
| U38 | Urban | 4.93357 | -52.33455 | Sediment | - | - |
| U39 | Urban | 4.93278 | -52.33372 | Sediment | - | - |
| U40 | Urban | 4.93132 | -52.29587 | Sediment | + | - |
| U41 | Urban | 4.93198 | -52.29520 | Sediment | - | - |
| U42 | Urban | 4.89001 | -52.27864 | Sediment | - | - |
| U43 | Urban | 4.90012 | -52.26398 | Sediment | + | - |
| U44 | Urban | 4.89958 | -52.26347 | Sediment | + | - |
| U45 | Urban | 4.86795 | -52.27754 | Sediment | + | - |
| U46 | Urban | 4.86671 | -52.28035 | Sediment | - | - |
| U47 | Urban | 4.87460 | -52.33138 | Sediment | + | - |
| U48 | Urban | 4.87628 | -52.33044 | Sediment | + | - |
| U49 | Urban | 4.84565 | -52.32909 | Sediment | + | - |
| U50 | Urban | 4.84776 | -52.32204 | Sediment | + | - |
| U51 | Urban | 4.88733 | -52.27473 | Sediment | - | - |
| R1 | Rural | 4.83808 | -52.35325 | Water/Sediment | - | - |
| R2 | Rural | 4.62168 | -52.93251 | Water/Sediment | - | - |
| R3 | Rural | 4.61602 | -52.90554 | Water/Sediment | - | - |
| R4 | Rural | 4.55858 | -52.90674 | Water/Sediment | - | - |
| R5 | Rural | 4.54898 | -52.89271 | Water/Sediment | - | + |
| R6 | Rural | 4.54141 | -52.88958 | Water/Sediment | - | - |
| R7 | Rural | 4.50403 | -52.87810 | Water/Sediment | - | - |
| R8 | Rural | 5.16008 | -52.89310 | Water/Sediment | - | - |
| R9 | Rural | 5.39410 | -52.99201 | Water/Sediment | + | + |
| R10 | Rural | 5.31043 | -53.04884 | Water/Sediment | - | - |
| R11 | Rural | 5.31534 | -53.04665 | Water/Sediment | - | - |
| R12 | Rural | 5.31910 | -53.04499 | Water/Sediment | - | - |
| R13 | Rural | 5.32946 | -53.03592 | Water/Sediment | - | + |
| R14 | Rural | 5.44505 | -53.15818 | Water/Sediment | - | - |
| R15 | Rural | 5.07358 | -53.05289 | Water/Sediment | - | - |
| R16 | Rural | 5.34028 | -52.92822 | Sediment | - | - |
| R17 | Rural | 5.03535 | -52.51648 | Sediment | - | + |
| R18 | Rural | 4.86015 | -52.27552 | Sediment | - | - |
Number of urban sites found positive for Leptospira sp. and M. ulcerans DNA during the 6 sampling periods.
The number of positive sites over the total number of sites tested, the prevalence and the climatic conditions are indicated. Months where no samples were collected are indicated by a dash. Climatic data were recorded at the Cayenne climatic station (Météo France) (http://www.meteofrance.com/climat/outremer/cayenne).
| Month | Season | Positive (prevalence) | Positive (prevalence) | Rainfall (mm) | Mean temperature (°C) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| September 2016 | Dry | 1/6 (16.7%) | 4/6 (66.7%) | 35.4 | 27.9 |
| October 2016 | Dry | 2/34 (5.9%) | 4/34 (11.8%) | 0.2 | 28.5 |
| November 2016 | Dry | - | - | 34.8 | 28.5 |
| December 2016 | Rainy | - | - | 474.0 | 27.3 |
| January 2017 | Rainy | - | - | 286.7 | 26.9 |
| February 2017 | Rainy | 17/36 (47.2%) | 4/36 (11.1%) | 270.4 | 26.7 |
| March 2017 | Rainy | - | - | 300.8 | 27.1 |
| April 2017 | Rainy | - | - | 315.4 | 27.8 |
| May 2017 | Rainy | 8/36 (22.2%) | 2/36 (5.6%) | 666.7 | 27.0 |
| June 2017 | Rainy | - | - | 267.7 | 27.2 |
| July 2017 | Dry | 2/36 (5.6%) | 5/36 (13.9%) | 97.4 | 27.2 |
| August 2017 | Dry | - | - | 4.0 | 28.2 |
| September 2017 | Dry | - | - | 36.6 | 28.4 |
| October 2017 | Dry | 4/21 (19.0%) | 8/21 (38.1%) | 41.5 | 28.4 |
Fig 2Localization of environmental sites tested for the presence of Leptospira sp. and M. ulcerans DNA.
A: Rural sites sampled from november 2015 to march 2017; B: Urban sites localized in Cayenne and sampled from september 2016 to october 2017. All sites were surveyed during the dry and the rainy seasons. Lep: Leptospira sp. DNA; MU: M. ulcerans DNA. A site was considered positive when the bacteria’s DNA was found at least at one time period. For Leptospira sp. quantitative data were considered positive for CT-values < 40, whilst for M. ulcerans CT-threshold was set at 38. Maps were created with QGIS (version 2.18.20).
Fig 3Prevalence of Leptospira sp. and M. ulcerans DNA in the environment through time.
The prevalence of each bacterium in the environment was calculated based on the ratio between the number of positive urban sites and the total number of sites tested (%). Urban sites were sampled during the dry and the rainy season, allowing to follow the dynamics of each pathogen in space and time. Blue histograms show M. ulcerans positive sites, purple histograms represent Leptospira sp. positive sites, the green line represents the total precipitations per month (mm) and the red dashed line the mean temperature per month (°C). Precipitations and temperatures were recorded by Météo France in Cayenne (http://www.meteofrance.com/climat/outremer/cayenne).
Fig 4Prevalence of Leptospira sp. and M. ulcerans DNA in environmental sites during the dry and rainy seasons.
The prevalence of each bacterium in the environment was calculated based on the ratio between the number of positive urban sites and the total number of sites tested (%). Using raw data we performed a logistic binomial (positive/negative) regression (R version 3.5.1) that clearly showed significant differences between the dry and the rainy seasons for both pathogens, whith Leptospira sp. being more prevalent (5.20 times higher; p-value = 0.00012) in the environment during the rainy season and M. ulcerans during dry periods (2.86 times higher; p-value = 0.0339).