| Literature DB >> 32050663 |
Abdourahmane Sow1,2,3, Birgit Nikolay4,5,6, Oumar Faye1, Simon Cauchemez4,5,6, Jorge Cano7, Mawlouth Diallo8, Ousmane Faye1, Bakary Sadio1, Oumar Ndiaye1, Scott C Weaver9, Anta T Dia2, Amadou Alpha Sall1, Denis Malvy3.
Abstract
In Senegal, chikungunya virus (CHIKV) is maintained in a sylvatic cycle and causes sporadic cases or small outbreaks in rural areas. However, little is known about the influence of the environment on its transmission. To address the question, 120 villages were randomly selected in the Kedougou region of southeastern Senegal. In each selected village, 10 persons by randomly selected household were sampled and tested for specific anti-CHIKV IgG antibodies by ELISA. We investigated the association of CHIKV seroprevalence with environmental variables using logistic regression analysis and the spatial correlation of village seroprevalence based on semivariogram analysis. Fifty-four percent (51%-57%) of individuals sampled during the survey tested positive for CHIKV-specific IgG. CHIKV seroprevalence was significantly higher in populations living close to forested areas (Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), Odds Ratio (OR) = 1.90 (1.42-2.57)), and was negatively associated with population density (OR = 0.76 (0.69-0.84)). In contrast, in gold mining sites where population density was >400 people per km2, seroprevalence peaked significantly among adults (46% (27%-67%)) compared to all other individuals (20% (12%-31%)). However, traditional gold mining activities significantly modify the transmission dynamic of CHIKV, leading to a potential increase of the risk of human exposition in the region.Entities:
Keywords: Chikungunya; Senegal; environmental risk; gold mining; spatial autocorrelation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32050663 PMCID: PMC7077306 DOI: 10.3390/v12020196
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Viruses ISSN: 1999-4915 Impact factor: 5.048
Figure 1Spatial variation in chikungunya virus (CHIKV) IgG seroprevalence. (A) Seroprevalence by village and rural community. (B) Spatial variation in population density. (C) Observed and predicted seroprevalence by population density. The 95% confidence interval (CI) of the prediction was obtained by bootstrap (2000 iterations). (D) Age patterns by population density (≤400 vs. >400 people per km2).
Figure 2Seroprevalence by age group and exact binomial 95% confidence intervals.
Figure A1(A) Semivariogram of CHIKV village prevalence and (B) village random effects adjusting for log-transformed population density. Envelopes to assess significance of spatial dependency were computed by simulating 1000 permutations.
Univariable analysis of the association between CHIKV seroprevalence and environmental variables. The models were adjusted for clustering of individuals in villages and rural communities (random intercept).
| Environmental Variables | OR (95%CI) | LRT | AIC |
|---|---|---|---|
| EVI_max (per 0.1 increase) | 1.54 (1.16; 2.02) | 0.002 | 1354 |
|
|
|
|
|
| EVI_sd (per 0.01 increase) | 1.14 (1.03; 1.27) | 0.010 | 1357 |
|
|
|
|
|
| NDVI_mean (per 0.1 increase) | 1.85 (1.35; 2.52) | <0.001 | 1350 |
| NDVI_sd (per 0.01 increase) | 1.16 (1.03; 1.30) | 0.012 | 1357 |
| MIR_max (per 0.1 increase) | 0.68 (0.35; 1.35) | 0.258 | 1362 |
|
|
|
|
|
| MIR_sd (per 0.01 increase) | 1.02 (0.82; 1.28) | 0.829 | 1363 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Distance to rivers (km) | 1.02 (0.99; 1.05) | 0.202 | 1361 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Slope (degree) | 1.12 (0.98; 1.29) | 0.089 | 1360 |
| Altitude (meters) | 1.00 (1.00; 1.00) | 0.937 | 1363 |
| Forest area (proportion, per 0.1 increase) | 1.06 (0.99; 1.13) | 0.081 | 1360 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Accessibility (travel time to city per hour increase) | 1.00 (1.00; 1.00) | 0.985 | 1363 |
|
| |||
| Village only | NA | 0.003 | 1362 |
| Rural community only | NA | 0.094 | 1368 |
|
|
|
|
|
NDVI: Normalized Difference Vegetation Index; EVI: Enhanced Vegetation Index; MIR: mid-infrared band; OR: Odds Ratio, CI: confidence interval; LRT: likelihood ratio test; AIC: Akaike information criterion.
Univariable analysis of the association between CHIKV seroprevalence and environmental variables using 3km buffers around villages. The models were adjusted for clustering of individuals in villages and rural communities (random intercept).
| OR (95%CI) | LRT | AIC | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| EVI_max (per 0.1 increase) | 1.79 (1.22; 2.56) | 0.002 | 1355 |
| EVI_mean (per 0.1 increase) | 2.84 (1.55; 5.22) | 0.001 | 1352 |
| EVI_sd (per 0.01 increase) | 1.17 (1.02; 1.31) | 0.018 | 1358 |
| NDVI_max (per 0.1 increase) | 2.58 (1.71; 3.97) | <0.001 | 1347 |
| NDVI_mean (per 0.1 increase) | 2.14 (1.54; 3.82) | <0.001 | 1350 |
| NDVI_sd (per 0.01 increase) | 1.16 (1.01; 1.30) | 0.028 | 1359 |
| MIR_max (per 0.1 increase) | 0.44 (0.18; 1.08) | 0.067 | 1360 |
| MIR_mean (per 0.1 increase) | 0.09 (0.03; 0.25) | <0.001 | 1347 |
| MIR_sd (per 0.01 increase) | 0.94 (0.72; 1.22) | 0.638 | 1363 |
| Distance to water bodies (km) | 1.01 (1.00; 1.03) | 0.044 | 1360 |
| Distance to rivers (km) | 1.02 (0.99; 1.05) | 0.196 | 1361 |
| Population density per km2 (log-transformed) | 0.73 (0.64; 0.81) | <0.001 | 1339 |
| Slope (degree) | 1.03 (0.90; 1.18) | 0.674 | 1363 |
| Altitude (meters) | 1.00 (1.00; 1.00) | 0.825 | 1363 |
| Forest area (proportion, per 0.1 increase) | 1.07 (0.99; 1.16) | 0.071 | 1360 |
| Distance to forest (km) | 0.87 (0.75; 1.01) | 0.062 | 1360 |
| Accessibility (travel time to city per hour increase) | 1.00 (1.00; 1.00) | 0.966 | 1363 |
|
| |||
| Village only | NA | 0.003 | 1362 |
| Rural community only | NA | 0.094 | 1368 |
| Village and rural | NA | <0.001 | 1361 |
Multivariable analysis of the association between CHIKV seroprevalence and environmental variables. The models were adjusted for population density (log-scale) and clustering of individuals in villages (random intercept).
| Environmental Variables | OR (95%CI) | LRT | AIC |
|---|---|---|---|
| Population density per km2 (log-transformed) | 0.76 (0.69; 0.84) | 0.008 | 1338 |
| NDVI_max (per 0.1 increase) | 1.17 (0.76; 1.81) | 0.485 | 1340 |
| Distance to forest (km) | 0.97 (0.86; 1.10) | 0.614 | 1340 |
| Distance to water bodies (km) | 1.00 (0.99; 1.01) | 0.735 | 1340 |
NDVI: Normalized Difference Vegetation Index, OR: Odds Ratio, CI: confidence interval, LRT: likelihood ratio test, AIC: Akaike information criterion.
Multivariable analysis of the association between CHIK seroprevalence and environmental variables using 3km buffers around villages. The models were adjusted for population density (log-scale) and clustering of individuals in villages (random intercept).
| Environmental Variables | OR (95%CI) | LRT | AIC |
|---|---|---|---|
| Population density per km2 (log-transformed) | 0.73 (0.64; 0.81) | <0.001 | 1337 |
CHIKV seroprevalence by sex and age group in villages where population density was >400 people per km2.
| Sexe | Age Group | nb CHIKV_IgG (+) | nb Individual Surveyed | ChikV Seroprevalence Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| male | (5–10) | 2 | 10 | 20% |
| (10–20) | 5 | 22 | 23% | |
| (20–40) | 10 | 22 | 45% | |
| (40–60) | 2 | 4 | 50% | |
| >60 | 0 | 1 | 0% | |
| Subtotal | 19 | 59 | 32% | |
| female | (5–10) | 3 | 11 | 27% |
| (10–20) | 3 | 16 | 19% | |
| (20–40) | 2 | 18 | 11% | |
| (40–60) | 1 | 3 | 33% | |
| >60 | 1 | 2 | 50% | |
| Subtotal | 10 | 50 | 20% |