| Literature DB >> 31404077 |
Renata L Muylaert1,2, Ricardo Siqueira Bovendorp1,3, Gilberto Sabino-Santos4,5,6, Paula R Prist7, Geruza Leal Melo8, Camila de Fátima Priante1, David A Wilkinson2, Milton Cezar Ribeiro1, David T S Hayman2.
Abstract
Several viruses from the genus Orthohantavirus are known to cause lethal disease in humans. Sigmodontinae rodents are the main hosts responsible for hantavirus transmission in the tropical forests, savannas, and wetlands of South America. These rodents can shed different hantaviruses, such as the lethal and emerging Araraquara orthohantavirus. Factors that drive variation in host populations may influence hantavirus transmission dynamics within and between populations. Landscape structure, and particularly areas with a predominance of agricultural land and forest remnants, is expected to influence the proportion of hantavirus rodent hosts in the Atlantic Forest rodent community. Here, we tested this using 283 Atlantic Forest rodent capture records and geographically weighted models that allow us to test if predictors vary spatially. We also assessed the correspondence between proportions of hantavirus hosts in rodent communities and a human vulnerability to hantavirus infection index across the entire Atlantic Forest biome. We found that hantavirus host proportions were more positively influenced by landscape diversity than by a particular habitat or agricultural matrix type. Local small mammal diversity also positively influenced known pathogenic hantavirus host proportions, indicating that a plasticity to habitat quality may be more important for these hosts than competition with native forest dwelling species. We found a consistent positive effect of sugarcane and tree plantation on the proportion of rodent hosts, whereas defaunation intensity did not correlate with the proportion of hosts of potentially pathogenic hantavirus genotypes in the community, indicating that non-defaunated areas can also be hotspots for hantavirus disease outbreaks. The spatial match between host hotspots and human disease vulnerability was 17%, while coldspots matched 20%. Overall, we discovered strong spatial and land use change influences on hantavirus hosts at the landscape level across the Atlantic Forest. Our findings suggest disease surveillance must be reinforced in the southern and southeastern regions of the biome where the highest predicted hantavirus host proportion and levels of vulnerability spatially match. Importantly, our analyses suggest there may be more complex rodent community dynamics and interactions with human disease than currently hypothesized.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31404077 PMCID: PMC6748440 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0007655
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Fig 1Interactions between hantaviruses and their hosts in South American Atlantic Forest and its boundaries.
Araraquara-Paranoa orthohantavirus (ARQV), Castelo dos Sonhos orthohantavirus (CASV), Juquitiba-Araucaria orthohantavirus (JUQV-ARAUV), Lechiguanas orthohantavirus (LECV), and Pergamino orthohantavirus (PERV) are genotypes of Andes orthohantavirus (ANDV); Rio Mearim orthohantavirus (RIOMM) and Anajatuba orthohantavirus (ANJV) are genotypes of Rio Mamore orthohantavirus (RIOMV); Laguna Negra orthohantavirus (LANV); Jabora orthohantavirus (JABV) [1,15–19]. Known-pathogenic viruses interactions have red connecting lines, others blue.
Optimum model covariates for each rodent host group and virus genotype in the Alantic Forest.
Best supported model types for each of the response variables are given, selected based on a Monte Carlo procedure (999 randomizations). Fixed effects do not vary geographically, and estimates are shown. Geographically varying estimates are provided in S2 Table. R2 adjusted values represent the value for a fixed model and a GW model, respectively.
| Response variable | Fixed effects | Geographically varying effects | R2 adjusted |
|---|---|---|---|
| All hantavirus hosts | Habitat diversity (β = 7.67), Sugarcane amount (β = 0.22) | Rainfall, Small mammal species richness, Defaunation index, Sampling effort, Tree plantation amount | 0.19 / 0.59 |
| Hosts of pathogenic hantavirus genotypes | Sugarcane amount (β = 0.82), Tree plantation amount (β = 2.74) | Habitat diversity, Rainfall, Small mammal species richness | 0.21 / 0.69 |
| ARQV hosts | Sugarcane amount, (β = 2.18), Habitat diversity (β = 2.04) | Rainfall | 0.07 / 0.24 |
| JUQV-ARAUV hosts | Habitat diversity (β = 4.14), Maize amount (β = 2.55), Pasture amount (β = 1.95) | Rainfall, Small mammal species richness | 0.16 / 0.57 |
| LANV hosts | - | Small mammal species richness | 0.06 / 0.03 |
| Rainfall (β = 2.09), Maize amount (β = 2.75) | Defaunation index | 0.16 / 0.42 | |
| Tree plantation amount (β = 2.15) | Defaunation index, Pasture amount | 0.12 / 0.20 | |
| Habitat diversity (β = 2.08) | Small mammal species richness, Defaunation index | 0.02 / 0.49 | |
| Rainfall (β = 0.31) | Habitat diversity, Defaunation index, Small mammal species richness, Sampling effort | 0.03 / 0.21 | |
| Habitat diversity (β = -0.36), Defaunation index (β = 0.59) | Rainfall, Sampling effort | 0.01 / 0.09 | |
| - | Rainfall, Small mammal species richness, Defaunation index | 0.02 / 0.06 | |
| Habitat diversity (β = 0.87), Tree plantation amount (β = 1.27), Sugarcane amount (β = 0.43) | Maize amount, Pasture amount, Defaunation index, Average rainfall | 0.10 / 0.21 | |
| Average rainfall (β = -0.03) | - | 0.003 / 0.001 | |
| Habitat diversity (β = 2.81), Pasture amount (β = 2.08) | Small mammal species richness | 0.01 / 0.32 | |
| Sugarcane amount (β = 1.73), Habitat diversity (β = 0.71), Average rainfall (β = 0.51) | - | 0.05 / 0.15 | |
| - | Average rainfall | 0.03 / 0.06 | |
| Average rainfall (β = 0.23) | - | 0.0008 / 0.002 |
Fig 2Predicted rodent hantavirus host proportion (PHHC) in the Atlantic Forest rodent community using selected mixed geographically weighted models.
A-D: best supported predictors and their spatially varying values for known hosts of hantavirus genotypes (%); E-G: best supported predictors and their spatially varying values for hosts of pathogenic hantavirus genotypes.
Fig 3Hotspot maps.
A. Predicted pathogenic genotype hantavirus host proportions in the community (PHHC). B. Human vulnerability to hantavirus disease (HCPS) of municipalities within the Atlantic Forest. For comparison we used Voronoi polygon optimization based on coordinates of 280 sampling sites. C. Spatial matching (%) of hotspots and coldspots of both variables. Number of Voronoi polygons in each class is in parentheses.
Fig 4Best supported predictors from geographically weighted models explaining hosts of potentially pathogenic hantavirus genotypes proportions in rodent communities (PHHC) in the Atlantic Forest.
The colored loess lines indicate the level of spatial clustering of vulnerability to hantavirus infection in humans.