| Literature DB >> 30963872 |
Patrick M Brock1, Kimberly M Fornace2, Matthew J Grigg3, Nicholas M Anstey3, Timothy William4,5, Jon Cox2, Chris J Drakeley2, Heather M Ferguson1, Rowland R Kao1,6.
Abstract
The complex transmission ecologies of vector-borne and zoonotic diseases pose challenges to their control, especially in changing landscapes. Human incidence of zoonotic malaria ( Plasmodium knowlesi) is associated with deforestation although mechanisms are unknown. Here, a novel application of a method for predicting disease occurrence that combines machine learning and statistics is used to identify the key spatial scales that define the relationship between zoonotic malaria cases and environmental change. Using data from satellite imagery, a case-control study, and a cross-sectional survey, predictive models of household-level occurrence of P. knowlesi were fitted with 16 variables summarized at 11 spatial scales simultaneously. The method identified a strong and well-defined peak of predictive influence of the proportion of cleared land within 1 km of households on P. knowlesi occurrence. Aspect (1 and 2 km), slope (0.5 km) and canopy regrowth (0.5 km) were important at small scales. By contrast, fragmentation of deforested areas influenced P. knowlesi occurrence probability most strongly at large scales (4 and 5 km). The identification of these spatial scales narrows the field of plausible mechanisms that connect land use change and P. knowlesi, allowing for the refinement of disease occurrence predictions and the design of spatially-targeted interventions.Entities:
Keywords: Plasmodium knowlesi; boosted regression trees; disease ecology; disease occurrence prediction; malaria; zoonoses
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30963872 PMCID: PMC6367187 DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2018.2351
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Proc Biol Sci ISSN: 0962-8452 Impact factor: 5.349
The 10 scalable landscape variables classified from Landsat satellite imagery used in the analysis [26]. (Grid cells estimated as greater than 50% tree crown cover density were defined as forested. Perimeter area ratio (P : A) was used as a proxy for fragmentation as variation in P : A was more evenly distributed across variables than any other measure.)
| variable name | details | composite year |
|---|---|---|
| cover (previous year) | proportion of forested grid cells | 2014 |
| cover P : A (previous year) | perimeter area ratio of forested grid cells | 2014 |
| cleared (previous year) | proportion of non-forested grid cells | 2014 |
| cleared P : A (previous year) | perimeter area ratio of non-forested grid cells | 2014 |
| loss (previous year) | proportion of grid cells that changed from forested to non-forested | 2014 |
| loss P : A (previous year) | perimeter area ratio of grid cells that changed from forested to non-forested | 2014 |
| loss (previous 5 years) | proportion of grid cells that changed from forested to non-forested | 2010–2014 |
| loss P : A (previous 5 years) | perimeter area ratio of grid cells that changed from forested to non-forested | 2010–2014 |
| gain (all years) | proportion of grid cells that changed from non-forested to forested | 2000–2012 |
| gain P : A (all years) | perimeter area ratio of grid cells that changed from forested to non-forested | 2000–2012 |
| NDVI | normalized difference vegetation index, calculated from composite Landsat image | 2014 |
| NDVI SD | standard deviation of normalized difference vegetation index, calculated from composite Landsat image | 2014 |
| elevation | metres above sea level (ASTER global digital elevation model (GDEM)) | 2014 |
| slope | maximum rate of change in elevation, calculated from ASTER GDEM | 2014 |
| population density | population density estimates | 2010 |
| aspect | direction of the steepest down slope (in degrees), calculated from ASTER GDEM | 2014 |
Figure 1.(a–p) Relative variable importance (RVI) of all variable-scale combinations from BRT models of P. knowlesi occurrence (176 predictors). See table 1 for variable definitions. Green points represent the whole-study-site, blue points the mainland-only model. Purple boxes indicate the 16 variable-scale combinations with the highest RVIs, detail of which is shown in the electronic supplementary material, figure S1a.
Figure 2.Marginal effect curves of the 16 variable-scale combinations with the highest relative variable importance across the whole study site (176 predictors).
Figure 3.The locations of all households included in the study, showing (a) occurrence probability predictions from the whole-study-site model (176 predictors); (b) the prediction error from the same model; and (c) the location of the two clusters of case households.