Literature DB >> 33692875

Trade-offs with telemetry-derived contact networks for infectious disease studies in wildlife.

Marie L J Gilbertson1, Lauren A White2, Meggan E Craft1.   

Abstract

Network analysis of infectious disease in wildlife can reveal traits or individuals critical to pathogen transmission and help inform disease management strategies. However, estimates of contact between animals are notoriously difficult to acquire. Researchers commonly use telemetry technologies to identify animal associations; but such data may have different sampling intervals and often captures a small subset of the population. The objectives of this study were to outline best practices for telemetry sampling in network studies of infectious disease by determining (1) the consequences of telemetry sampling on our ability to estimate network structure, (2) whether contact networks can be approximated using purely spatial contact definitions, and (3) how wildlife spatial configurations may influence telemetry sampling requirements.We simulated individual movement trajectories for wildlife populations using a home range-like movement model, creating full location datasets and corresponding "complete" networks. To mimic telemetry data, we created "sample" networks by subsampling the population (10-100% of individuals) with a range of sampling intervals (every minute to every three days). We varied the definition of contact for sample networks, using either spatiotemporal or spatial overlap, and varied the spatial configuration of populations (random, lattice, or clustered). To compare complete and sample networks, we calculated seven network metrics important for disease transmission and assessed mean ranked correlation coefficients and percent error between complete and sample network metrics.Telemetry sampling severely reduced our ability to calculate global node-level network metrics, but had less impact on local and network-level metrics. Even so, in populations with infrequent associations, high intensity telemetry sampling may still be necessary. Defining contact in terms of spatial overlap generally resulted in overly connected networks, but in some instances, could compensate for otherwise coarse telemetry data.By synthesizing movement and disease ecology with computational approaches, we characterized trade-offs important for using wildlife telemetry data beyond ecological studies of individual movement, and found that careful use of telemetry data has the potential to inform network models. Thus, with informed application of telemetry data, we can make significant advances in leveraging its use for a better understanding and management of wildlife infectious disease.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Contact rate; disease ecology; disease modeling; network structure; remote contact detection; social network analysis; spatial overlap; telemetry sampling

Year:  2020        PMID: 33692875      PMCID: PMC7938897          DOI: 10.1111/2041-210x.13355

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Methods Ecol Evol            Impact factor:   7.781


  31 in total

1.  Susceptible-infected-recovered epidemics in dynamic contact networks.

Authors:  Erik Volz; Lauren Ancel Meyers
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2007-12-07       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 2.  Reality mining of animal social systems.

Authors:  Jens Krause; Stefan Krause; Robert Arlinghaus; Ioannis Psorakis; Stephen Roberts; Christian Rutz
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2013-07-13       Impact factor: 17.712

Review 3.  The dynamic nature of contact networks in infectious disease epidemiology.

Authors:  Shweta Bansal; Jonathan Read; Babak Pourbohloul; Lauren Ancel Meyers
Journal:  J Biol Dyn       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 2.179

4.  Disease outbreak thresholds emerge from interactions between movement behavior, landscape structure, and epidemiology.

Authors:  Lauren A White; James D Forester; Meggan E Craft
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-06-25       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 5.  Disease implications of animal social network structure: A synthesis across social systems.

Authors:  Pratha Sah; Janet Mann; Shweta Bansal
Journal:  J Anim Ecol       Date:  2018-01-22       Impact factor: 5.091

Review 6.  Going through the motions: incorporating movement analyses into disease research.

Authors:  Eric R Dougherty; Dana P Seidel; Colin J Carlson; Orr Spiegel; Wayne M Getz
Journal:  Ecol Lett       Date:  2018-02-14       Impact factor: 9.492

Review 7.  Epidemic dynamics at the human-animal interface.

Authors:  James O Lloyd-Smith; Dylan George; Kim M Pepin; Virginia E Pitzer; Juliet R C Pulliam; Andrew P Dobson; Peter J Hudson; Bryan T Grenfell
Journal:  Science       Date:  2009-12-04       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  Distinguishing epidemic waves from disease spillover in a wildlife population.

Authors:  Meggan E Craft; Erik Volz; Craig Packer; Lauren Ancel Meyers
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2009-02-25       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  Constructing, conducting and interpreting animal social network analysis.

Authors:  Damien R Farine; Hal Whitehead
Journal:  J Anim Ecol       Date:  2015-08-11       Impact factor: 5.091

10.  Wind in November, Q fever in December.

Authors:  Hervé Tissot-Dupont; Marie-Antoinette Amadei; Meyer Nezri; Didier Raoult
Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 6.883

View more
  2 in total

1.  Network structure of resource use and niche overlap within the endophytic microbiome.

Authors:  Matthew Michalska-Smith; Zewei Song; Seth A Spawn-Lee; Zoe A Hansen; Mitch Johnson; Georgiana May; Elizabeth T Borer; Eric W Seabloom; Linda L Kinkel
Journal:  ISME J       Date:  2021-08-19       Impact factor: 10.302

2.  A new method for characterising shared space use networks using animal trapping data.

Authors:  Klara M Wanelik; Damien R Farine
Journal:  Behav Ecol Sociobiol       Date:  2022-08-26       Impact factor: 2.944

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.