Spatiotemporal analysis of bubonic plague in Pernambuco, northeast of Brazil: Case study in the municipality of Exu.

Along with other countries in America, plague reached Brazil through the sea routes during the third pandemic. A brief ports phase was followed by an urban phase that took place in smaller inland cities and finally, it attained the rural area and established several foci where the ecological conditions were suitable for its continued existence. However, the geographic dispersion of plague in Brazil is still poorly studied. To better understand the disease dynamics, we accessed satellite-based data to trace the spatial occurrence and distribution of human plague cases in Pernambuco, Northeastern Brazil and using the municipality of Exu as study case area. Along with the satellite data, a historical survey using the Plague Control Program files was applied to characterize the spatial and temporal dispersion of cases in the period of 1945-1976. Kernel density estimation, spatial and temporal clusters with statistical significance and maximum entropy modeling were used for spatial data analysis, by means of the spatial analysis software packages. The use of geostatistical tools allowed evidencing the shift of the infection from the urban to the wild-sylvatic areas and the reemergence of cases after a period of quiescence, independent of the reintroduction from other plague areas.

Introduction

Plague is a focal zoonosis, affecting primarily rodents and eventually, humans and other mammals. The infection spectrum is wide and the main presentations are the bubonic, pneumonic and septicemic forms; the contamination occurs mainly through flea bites, inhalation of aerosols or contact with infected secretions or tissues [1]. It is caused by Yersinia pestis, a Gram-negative bacillus that belong to the Enterobacteriaceae family [2] and is categorized in the Biohazard Class 3 and Bioterrorism Agents Group A [3]. This zoonosis is one of the oldest and most feared diseases of mankind and remains a threat still nowadays. Over the centuries, this infection wiped out millions of lives, impacted the people way of life, having a huge influence in science and arts over the ages and it still represents the iconic perception of a pandemics until nowadays [4].

Currently, the global incidence of human plague is the lowest reported by the WHO in 30 years. During the 2013–2018 period, the areas that have reported human cases were limited to sub-Saharan Africa, Asia, and North and South America, and most cases are reported by Madagascar, followed by the Democratic Republic of the Congo [5].

However, it is not uncommon the sudden reappearance of cases after several decades of epidemiological silence in natural plague foci causing fear, panic and loss of life and in the economics. In 2003 the plague reappeared in Algeria after >50 years of quiescence [6]. In 1994, the city of Surat, India, experienced a pneumonic plague outbreak that caused panic, population evasion and a severe impact on local economy [7]. Other episodes occurred in 2009 in the city of Ziketan, China, and in 2019 in the Mongolian border with China and Russia which resulted in the closure of the borders between these countries [5].

Along with other countries in America, plague only reached Brazil during the third pandemic, in the year of 1899. Transported by steamships, the disease caused its first outbreaks in port cities. However, due to inland transportation of goods, plague quickly reached Brazilian countryside, establishing several natural foci where the ecological conditions were congenial for its persistence [8]. The Brazilian plague foci are scattered throughout a large area ranging from the Northeastern State of Ceará to the Southeastern State of Minas Gerais and another separated area at the State of Rio de Janeiro [9-11].

The activities of the infection in these foci are independent in time and space [9]; after several successive outbreaks of varied sizes until the decade of 1980, cases in Brazil decreased and the last confirmed human case was in 2005 [12, 13]. Despite its current quiescent state, we must remain vigilant and maintain rigorous epidemiological surveillance. Of note, attempts to eradicate plague by some countries (USA, USSR) were unsuccessful and therefore this was discontinued and disapproved [14, 15].

The availability of new technological resources allowed the development of new studies on the plague activities, which is crucial for improving the understanding of the disease dynamics and to establish effective monitoring and surveillance strategies, capable of recognizing eventual issues that may precede spillovers to human populations. This study aimed to better understand the plague dynamics in Pernambuco, Northeastern Brazil by analyzing the spatial occurrence and distribution of cases and using the municipality of Exu as study case area by performing a historical survey of human cases and characterizing the spatial and temporal dispersion of cases.

Methods

Study area

The study was carried out in the state of Pernambuco, Northeast Brazil, and the municipality of Exu was used for the case study of plague. This municipality lies in the mesoregion Sertão, has an area of 1,336,788 km2, an estimated population in 2019 of 31,825 inhabitants, Municipal Human Development Index (2010) of 0.576 and a warm and dry climate with scarcity and irregular rainfall (Biome Caatinga). Situated in the ecological complex of Chapada do Araripe, 600–700 m in altitude, about 200 km long and 30 km wide, is limited to the municipalities of Bodocó to the west, Granito to the south, Moreilândia to the east and to the north with Crato in the state of Ceará [16, 17].

Data collection

Data on the occurrence of human plague cases in the state of Pernambuco were obtained from the forms named Comunicado Sobre Ocorrência de Peste Humana (Notification on the Occurrence of Human Plague) from the Plague Control Program; CONCEPAS system (http://cyp.fiocruz.br/index?services); and activity records from the Plague Laboratory, available in the National Reference Service in Plague of the Aggeu Magalhães Institute, Fiocruz PE.

Information on the early occurrences of plague in the state is sparse and incomplete, therefore for the 1902 to 1944 period only data relating the occurrence of the first case per municipality were obtained. For the 1945 to 1976 period, collected data included the date and place of the occurrence, patient’s gender, age, clinical features, and classification of the case (suspected, positive or negative). All data were compiled and organized into a database (DB) using Excel software.

For geospatial analyses, the vector data obtained were: municipal limits of 1970 and 2010 from the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE) (https://www.ibge.gov.br/geociencias/organizacao-do-territorio/15774-malhas.html?=&t=downloads). The drainage (hydrography) from the Mineral Resources Research Company (CPRM) (https://www.cprm.gov.br/en/Hydrology-83). The Digital Elevation Model (DEM) data was obtained from the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) refined for the Brazilian territory from the original resolution of 3 arc seconds to 1 arc second using a geostatistical approach (http://www.dsr.inpe.br/topodata/) using the script (https://code.earthengine.google.com/ccf3b9ff46eb845e1b88f68550e9a22a) on the Google Earth Engine (GEE) platform. All geospatial data were obtained from free access and use platforms.

Data analysis

The DB was separated into two groups: (1) DBM (Database by Municipality), containing both the years of the first plague case by municipality during 1902–1966, and all cases recorded by municipality for the 1945–1976 period; (2) DBE (Exu Database), which was separated into two sub-groups corresponding to the epidemic periods of 1945–1954 and 1961–1976 and a quiescence period of 1955–1960. The localities of the DBE cases (suspected, positive or negative) in the study period (1945–1976) were georeferenced in loco, with a GPS (Global Positioning System), model eTrex Vista Cx, Garmin (Kansas City, USA), configured in the UTM (Universal Transverse Mercator) projection system, Datum WGS-84. To georeference, a landmark (house, church or gate) was standardized for each of the localities. The GPS data was transferred to GPS TrackMaker Pro 4.9.603 (Geo Studio Technology, Belo Horizonte, Brazil) and the geographic coordinates were organized and stored in the shape file format, that was used with the DB to create a spatial database (SDB).

Descriptive epidemiology was used to analyze the distribution of cases by gender, clinical features, age, location (urban or rural area) and period of the occurrence. Unfortunately, due to the lack of standardization of the records over time, some of the clinical variables were not available for all patients.

The spatial analyzes performed in these groups were: (1) map of spatial and temporal distribution to spatially visualize the location of the disease and the number of cases in the municipalities of Pernambuco and in the localities (sitio, fazenda, povoado) of Exu (choropleth maps); (2) Kernel density estimation (KDE) to identify the location of clusters for case occurrences. For KDE, the following parameters were used: quadratic function, density calculation and adaptive radius on both banks; (3) spatial scanning map (Scan) to identify spatial and temporal clusters with statistical significance. The Scan used the Poisson model (Retrospective Space-Time analysis scanning for clusters with high rates using the Discrete Poisson model) based on the resident population in Pernambuco for the analysis in the DBM and the Exponential model using the DEM attribute obtained by Google Earth Engine (GEE) to search for spatial and/or temporal clusters of exceptionally short or long survival in DBE (Retrospective Space-Time analysis scanning for clusters with short or long survival using the Exponential model).

Data processing, interpretation, visualization and analysis were performed using ArcGIS (http://www.arcgis.com/), SatScan (https://www.satscan.org/) and TerraView (http://www.dpi.inpe.br/terralib5/wiki/doku.php). Fig 1 illustrates the methodology for collecting, storing and analyzing spatiotemporal data. The surface and boundaries of the municipality of Exu during the study period are different from the present, because some small rural communes called Povoados (Tabocas, Viração, Timorante) were emancipated and became new urban areas named Vilas (Villages).

Fig 1

Workflow for collection, storage and analysis of spatiotemporal data.

Results and discussion

Entry and dissemination of the human plague in Pernambuco, Northeast Brazil

In 1902, just three years after the plague entered Brazil, the state of Pernambuco was affected by the disease [11]. According to the data collected in this study, from the introduction until the last case (1982), 56 municipalities (30.4%) of the extant 184, registered plague cases (Fig 2). Since its arrival, strict sanitary control measures undertaken eliminated the infection from the port city (Fig 2A), however, they failed to prevent its spread to the countryside [8, 11]. During the period of 1913–1918, the disease spread to the Agreste mesoregion, reaching eight clustered municipalities (Fig 2B). In 1919, the plague spread further throughout the state, reaching two new mesoregions, one municipality in the Zona da Mata or Forest Zone and four in the Sertão (Fig 2C). From 1920–1936, 16 new municipalities were attaint for the first time including an only one municipality in São Francisco mesoregion (Fig 2D).

Fig 2

Emergence and dissemination of human plague cases by municipality in the mesoregions of the state of Pernambuco, Northeast Brazil, 1902–1966.

On top: Localization of Pernambuco and Brazil in South America and the mesoregions. A-F: Spatial and temporal distribution of the human plague cases, showing the municipalities affected for the first time (dark red) and those previously affected (light red). Shapefiles of Pernambuco and counties limits were obtained from IBGE (public-domain access).

The Fig 2E and 2F presents the two largest epidemic periods for the state. In the first period, 1945–1954, only one new municipality was affected, in the year 1948 (Fig 2E), in the second, 1961–1966, which was the period with the highest number of cases, 14 new municipalities registered plague cases (Fig 2F). It is important to note that after 1966, no new municipality registered occurrence of plague case until 1982, the date of the last notification in the state.

Establishment of the plague in Pernambuco, Northeast Brazil

According to the epidemiological records, there were 954 plague-suspected cases notified in Pernambuco during the period from 1945 to 1976. Out of these, 525 (55.0%) were considered positive based on the epidemiological-clinical criterion for the classification of cases at the time [9, 11].

The 954 plague-suspected and the 525 positive cases originated from 57 (31%) and 37 (20%), respectively, of the extant 184 municipalities in the state of Pernambuco (Fig 3A). Exu (red) concentrates the largest number of positive cases (267), followed by Bodocó (45 cases), Araripina (37 cases) and other five municipalities, all located in the ecological complex of Chapada do Araripe, in the Sertão mesoregion. In this same mesoregion, the ecological complex of Triunfo—São José do Belmonte registered 17 and 12 positive cases (yellow), respectively. This mesoregion, despite not concentrating the largest number of plague afflicted municipalities, is doubtless of great epidemiological importance, since it concentrates the largest number of plague cases in Pernambuco during the studied period (398 cases—75,8% of the total positive cases).

Fig 3

Spatial distribution and risk analysis of human plague cases in Pernambuco, Northeast Brazil between the years 1945–1976 with the identification of the mesoregions.

(A) Spatial distribution of human plague by number of occurrences per municipality; (B) Identification of risk areas for the occurrence of the disease by application of KDE and Scan in cases of human plague in Pernambuco. Shapefiles of Pernambuco and counties limits were obtained from IBGE (public-domain access).

In the Agreste mesoregion, the highest number of positive cases was registered in the municipalities of Bom Conselho (20), Cachoeirinha (13) and Panelas (11) and other 31 municipalities registered one to 10 plague-positive cases. These municipalities are located in the Planalto da Borborema, another focal plague area involved in the 1961–1976 epidemics in the state of Pernambuco.

It is noteworthy that in the period of the study, when the plague was already established in Pernambuco, no new cases were reported in the metropolitan region or in the mesoregion of São Francisco, although in this later at least one case had been registered in the 1920–1936 period as seen in Fig 2D. In the Forest mesoregion, only one municipality registered three positive cases (green). The absence of cases in these areas could be related to their ecological and geographical conditions, such as altitude, vegetation and the temperature unsuitable for the persistence of the infection. In contrast, in the Agreste and Sertão mesoregions, the plague encountered the congenial ecotopes to maintain the wild cycle and establish permanent foci in the ecological complexes of Chapada do Araripe and Planalto da Borborema [9, 10].

The Kernel density analysis (KDE) of the number of cases reported in Pernambuco revealed that the municipality of Exu from the Chapada do Araripe focus is at higher risk for the occurrence of plague (Fig 3B). Exu appeared at the epicenter of the Kernel patch that radiates in decreasing intensity as it moves away from the Chapada slope towards the plains and the neighboring municipalities of Moreilândia, Bodocó, Granito and Crato. The Fig 3B shows as well the presence of two statistically significant spatiotemporal clusters obtained by the Scan analysis, one that encompasses the municipality of Exu with a relative risk (RR) 268.24 times higher for the occurrence of plague in comparison with the other municipalities of Pernambuco in the period 1964–1975 and another cluster located in the Agreste mesoregion with RR = 9.55 in the period 1961–1965.

These preliminary findings led us to perform a more detailed analysis using the Municipality of Exu as a model to better understand the dynamics of plague’s transmission and maintenance in Brazil.

Plague in Exu

From the 525 positive cases in the state of Pernambuco, 267 (50.9%) originated in the municipality of Exu. All cases reported in Exu in the analyzed period were the primary bubonic form, characterized by the presence of the bubo, which was generally single, extremely painful, accompanied by high fever and torpor. The temperature (recorded in 43 patients) ranged from 37° to 41°C (mean 38.7°C) and the buboes (recorded in 42 patients) located in the following anatomical sites: inguinal-crural (36), axillary (4), cervical (2). There was no record of pneumonic plague, but 14 patients had septicemia confirmed by a positive Y. pestis blood culture and this septicemia was probably evolution from the primary bubonic infection [18, 19].

Although data on response to treatment and patient follow-up were unavailable for several cases, those that could be accessed had satisfactory response to the standard treatment by Sulfadiazine and Streptomycin and most cases recovered; the few deaths were attributed to lack or late treatment as stated by Karimi et al. [18]. According to Freitas [19] with the use of sulfa-antibiotics therapy replacing the use of serum in treatment from 1943 on, deaths declined significantly.

Regarding the age at diagnosis, patients were grouped in: early childhood (0 to 6 years = 44), childhood (7 to 12 years = 39), adolescents (13 to 18 = 20), adults (19 to 59 = 38) and elderly (≥60 = 3). Among the patients, 220 were men (61.1%) and 140 women (38.9%). Regarding seasonality, from 1961 to 1976, although cases were recorded in all months of the year but February and April, most cases occurred from July to November, with 8 to 17 cases per month. A positive association was observed between the plague cases and increased rodent reservoir and flea vector populations and higher number of naturally infected rodent and fleas in the fields in the municipality of Exu [9, 18, 20].

Analysis of the spatial distribution of the cases reveals that Exu city (urban area) concentrates the largest number of cases and is surrounded by smaller spots in neighbor rural sites. The spatial contiguity between them favors the exchange between the commensal and wild rodent hosts (Fig 4). Of note, once the infection disseminated to the rural zone, most affected areas (localities x cases) were concentrated close to the Chapada slope, while rather dispersed in the plateau (brown). Indeed, according to Baltazard [9], all the plague cases from the municipalities of Exu and Bodocó occurred along the green and fertile slopes with numerous islets of dense brushwood, permeated by springs issues from the Chapada. The few cases in the contiguous plains were limited to a 30–50 km zone neighboring the Chapada slopes. This is a congenial ecosystem for the coexistence of the wild rodent reservoirs of the bacteria, the flea vectors and the humans [21].

Fig 4

Spatial distribution of human plague cases in Exu, Pernambuco, Northeast Brazil, in the period 1945–1976 considering the number of cases per locality and the relationship with altimetry.

Shapefile of Exu was obtained from IBGE; DEM from SRTM (http://www.dsr.inpe.br/topodata/); and Hydrography from CPRM. Images were used for illustrative purposes only.

In order to study the dissemination of plague cases in the municipality of Exu over time, three distinct periods were stratified: (1) ten years of activity (1945–1954); (2) quiescence for six years (1955–1960) and (3) 15 years of activity (1961–1975). Based on this stratification, it was possible to visualize the dissemination of the plague from the urban to the rural areas (Fig 5A and 5B).

Fig 5

Spatiotemporal distribution of human plague cases in Exu, Pernambuco, Northeast Brazil.

(A) Showing the concentration of human plague cases in the urban area of Exu in the period of 1945–1955; (B) Dispersion of cases to the rural areas during the second epidemic period 1961–1975; and the timeline shift within each period stratified by color scale: dark green, cases at the beginning of each period and dark red, those at the end of each period (C) distribution of cases by locality 1945–1954 and (D) 1961–1975. Shapefile of Exu was obtained from IBGE; and Hydrography from CPRM. Image was used for illustrative purposes only.

In the period of 1945–1954, from the 74 cases in the municipality, 32 (43%) were urban and 42 (57%) were rural, spread in 33 localities. In Exu city the most numerous cases were recorded in 1945 (9) and 1946 (19), followed by 1948 (2), 1951 (1) and 1952 (1). This period can be considered the end of the urban phase (Fig 5A) when the infection raged into the city houses through the population of the commensal rats (Rattus rattus) and was likely transmitted by the rat fleas (Xenopsylla cheopis) or by Pulex irritans, the so called “human flea” [22] and even by Ctenocephalides felis, the cat fleas. Karimi et al. [20] reported the occurrence of infected free-living X. cheopis and P. irritans in the soil of the houses or in the bedding of the deceased patients from Exu. Further evidence of the potential role of C. felis and P. irritans in plague transmission was provided elsewhere [23-25]. No cases were registered in the city during the following 11 years (1952–1963), reappearing only in 1964, three years after the re-emergence and the outburst of plague cases in the rural areas.

In contrast to the first epidemic period (1945–1954), there were only 9 cases in the city (4.7%) in the second period (1961–1975), while in the rural area there were 184 cases (95.3%) (Fig 5B). This change in the occurrences pattern could be due to the control measures employed to eliminate rats and fleas from the city houses based on the use of poisons and insecticidal (DDT and BHC) spraying [11, 19]. On the other hand, the continued pressure of spraying insecticides up to three times a year for many years, led to the insecticidal resistance among the Xenopsylla and Pulex flea populations, which may have contributed to the upsurge of the plague in the 1960s [9, 20].

Fig 5C shows that at the beginning of the first period (1945–1954), the cases were concentrated in the city of Exu and surroundings as well as in the small rural communes and surroundings such as the povoados Tabocas, Viração and Timorante (green) and at the end of the period (red) the cases occurred further away from the city. In the beginning of the second period (Fig 5D), the cases were concentrated in the rural area around the povoados Viração and Tabocas (green), and at the end of the period (red) they spread across the plain towards the povoado Timorante and to the south, to the neighboring municipality of Bodocó.

Such findings demonstrate that the first epidemics started in the city urban area and disseminated to the rural areas mainly where the human detector was more numerous. In the second epidemics, which counted the largest number of cases (193–72.3% of cases), the plague was already disseminated practically throughout all the municipality territory. In this period the plague was well established among the wild fauna [21]. The rodent Necromys lasiurus is the most common wild rodent, the most frequently infected by plague and carrying infected fleas (Polygenis bolhsi jordani and P. tripus) which played likely the more important role in the spread of plague and the human cases [9, 18, 20].

The analysis of risk areas by KDE in the municipality of Exu confirmed the dynamics of the plague dispersion. In the first epidemic period (1945–1954) cases predominated in the city—urban phase, represented by the risk spot (Fig 6A). It is also possible to note the presence of two significant spatiotemporal clusters obtained by the Scan analysis, one with a long survival rate located in the urban center of Exu with an LLR of 0.41 in the period from 1945–1948 and another with a short survival rate located in the northwest part of the municipality (rural area) with LLR = 0.52 in the period from 1945–1946. Such findings highlight the higher risk and duration for the occurrence of cases in the urban zone in that period, certainly associated with commensal rats R. rattus and the rat fleas X. cheopis [20].

Fig 6

Application of KDE and Scan in the human plague cases in Exu, Pernambuco, Northeast Brazil in the period 1945–1955 (A) and 1961–1975 (B). Retrospective Space-Time analysis scanning for clusters with short or long survival using the Exponential model. Log Likelihood Ratio (LLR). Shapefile of Exu was obtained from IBGE; and Hydrography from CPRM. Image was used for illustrative purposes only.

In the second epidemic period (1961–1975), the risk spot for the occurrence of cases (KDE) is concentrated in the rural area, mainly in the povoados Viração, Tabocas and Zé Gomes (Fig 6B), where the number of human detectors was higher. There was also a marked presence of two significant spatiotemporal clusters obtained by the Scan analysis, one with a long survival rate located in the northern part of the municipality (rural area) with LLR = 1.62 in the period 1968–1974 and the other with short survival rate located in the part south of the municipality (enrolling the urban center of Exu) with LLR = 1.04 in the period 1969–1975. These results demonstrate the higher prevalence of the plague in the rural areas during this second epidemic period in Exu.

These results enlighten the dynamics of the epidemization and epizootization of the plague in Exu. However, the absence of cases in the quiescence period (1955–1960) could be misleading considering that there was no investigation of the circulation of the bacillus in the nature and the only indicator of the infection activity was the human cases and it can be assumed that the occurrences could be under-reported [9].

Globally, the mechanisms of persistence of the infection in the plague foci in different regions of the world during the interepizootic periods are not yet fully understood [4, 14]. It was hypothesized that during the quiescence period the infection could remain in the nature in an enzootic form as a low-level circulation of the rodent-flea-rodent cycle with more time in the fleas’ organism or in the rodents as a chronic form of the plague. It is also postulated that the bacteria would endure inside the burrows of certain rodent species, where the microclimate would allow its survival in debris from dead animals, in the soil contaminated with flea feces and in soil parasites [9, 14, 21, 26].

Conclusion

During the studied period it was demonstrated the transition of the infection from the urban to the rural areas in Exu, Pernambuco state, Northeast of Brazil and the reemergence of cases after a quiescence period without reintroduction from other foci. After six years of quiescence, the plague reappeared in 1961 in the rural area, in a sitio 16 km far from the city of Exu. This case would be served as an alert and the epidemics from 1964 onward could had been avoided or constrained. However, there was not a surveillance system or a predictive model at that time. Therefore, the case was not properly considered and consequently, in the following 15 years until 1975, the plague spread throughout the municipality territory and reached places that had not been affected in the previous epidemic periods.

At the beginning of the first epidemic period analyzed (1945–1954), the infection was still raging mainly in the urban area maintained by the commensal rats and their fleas and then moved to the rural area from which it reemerged after 6 years of silence, reappearing in the city only three years later while it was already largely active on the rural areas. Unexpectedly after a long period of continuous activity and at a time of larger expansion when it reached several municipalities in the Chapada do Araripe, the plague suddenly disappeared in this focus since 1975. This disappearance was confirmed not only by the absence of human cases but also by the absence of the plague bacillus among the rodent hosts and flea vectors and a decreasing in positive sentinel/indicator animals through the bacteriological and serological surveillance activities [12, 27]. The causes for this disappearance are not known. Purportedly it could be attributed to the rarefaction of rodent populations decimated by successive epizootics and which were unable to recover due to climatic changes [9].

This change of pattern was surprising and contrary to what was expected, as predicted by Baltazard [9], which would be a gradual reduction of the cases and the retreat of the infected area with persistence in Exu until the total halt of the infection activities in the focus.

However, this silence must not be interpreted as extinction of the focus, because at any time, by an unknown mechanism the infection can reactivate. Due to its cyclical characteristics—alternating periods of activity and quiescence, depending on a series of complex factors—the plague can reemerge, causing new epizootics and reaching the human populations [28, 29].

Since it is so widespread in wildlife rodent reservoirs and considering the particularities of the focal areas, the eradication of the plague is a momentarily unattainable objective and not even recommended in the face of the failure of the eradication attempts carried out by some countries [15, 30]. It is therefore essential to maintain the monitoring and control of this zoonosis in order to avoid future spillovers for the human populations.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file.

11 Jan 2021

PONE-D-20-35938

Spatiotemporal analysis of bubonic plague in Pernambuco, Northeast of Brazil: case study in the Municipality of Exu.

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Almeida,

Thank you very much for submitting your manuscript, "Spatiotemporal analysis of bubonic plague in Pernambuco, Northeast of Brazil: case study in the Municipality of Exu" (PONE-D-20-35938), for consideration at PLOS ONE. As with all papers reviewed by the journal, your manuscript was reviewed by members of the editorial board and by several independent reviewers. In light of the reviews (below this email), we would like to invite the resubmission of a significantly-revised version that takes into account the reviewers' comments.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Feb 25 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Abdallah M. Samy, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments:

Please address carefully all comments below from Reviewer #1; we have to unassign any other reviewers to avoid any further delay on this manuscript.

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We note that Figure 1 in your submission contains copyrighted images. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

(1) You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure 1 to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license.

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

(2) If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

3. We note that Figures 2-6 in your submission contain map images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

(1) You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure(s) [#] to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license.

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

(2) If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful:

USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/

The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/

Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html

NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/

Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/

USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/#

Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: No

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: I feel the paper has the potential to be published in this journal. First, the authors have did a good job to edit the historical data of plague in South America. I appreciate this very much. The data is very valuable with detailed time and location information.

However, the author had a poor data analysis. The paper is too descriptive to be accepted at the current form. There are available approaches to estimate the transmission rates using historical data (e.g. Xu et al. 2014. Wet climate and transportation routes accelerate spread of human plague. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences. 281: 1780), and then analyze the potential factors affecting the transmission rate, and identify the key factors.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

3 Feb 2021

ADDITIONAL EDITOR COMMENTS/ JOURNAL REQUIREMENTS:

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

Response: We followed the PLOS ONE's style requirements.

2. We note that Figure 1 in your submission contains copyrighted images. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission.

Response: In this new version of the manuscript, we provide a modified version of Figure 1 that does not contain any images or logos under copyright protection.

3. We note that Figures 2-6 in your submission contain map images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission.

Response: We thank the editorial team for bringing this issue into attention. In this reviewed version, we added into the Methods session the links to access the databases used to build figures 2-6. It is, however, important to highlight that for some of these database, the CC-BY 4.0 license is not applicable. Please find below further details on each of these databanks:

• IBGE (Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics) is a federal government institute in Brazil that collects and provides public-domain access to national data. IBGE is the main provider of data and population statistics in the country, serving the needs of the most diverse segments of civil society, as well as the federal, state and municipal government. IBGE offers a complete and current view of the country, through the performance of its main functions, such as: Coordination of Cartographic and Statistics Information Systems, Production of Statistical Information, Production of Geoscientific Information, Production of Census Information, Production of Environmental Information, Dissemination of Information, Higher Education Management, Research and Extension. Of note, all data available at the IBGE website is open to public access. Many papers that used IBGE databases have been published in PLOS ONE over the years, such as: Influence of Environmental Governance on Deforestation in Municipalities of the Brazilian Amazon (https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0131425); The dynamics of coffee production in Brazil (https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219742); Parity of Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Women in Brazil: Does the Reported Number of Children Born Depend upon Who Answers National Census Questions? (https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123826).

• CPRM (Mineral Resources Research Company) is the Brazilian official agency legally bound to gather data and information on Brazilian geology, minerals and water resources. Similarly to IBGE, CPRM is a federal public institute in Brazil that provides public-domain access. CPRM offers a robust set of databases, theme-based georeferenced information systems, documents, maps and images for the general public’s usage. Indeed, many papers that used CPRM databases have also been published in PLOS ONE over the years, such as: Mapping human vulnerability to climate change in the Brazilian Amazon: The construction of a municipal vulnerability index (https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190808); Neogene sharks and rays from the Brazilian ‘Blue Amazon’ (https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182740); Anthropogenic landscape decreases mosquito biodiversity and drives malaria vector proliferation in the Amazon rainforest (https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245087).

• SRTM (Shuttle Radar Topography Mission): We accessed the data from INPE (National Institute for Space Research). SRTM is an international research effort that, through a CC BY 4.0 license, offer free access to data on digital elevation models on a near-global scale to the general public (https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/ShuttleRetrospective/page6.php). Many articles were published in Plos One using data from SRTM platform, such as: Predictive Models of Primary Tropical Forest Structure from Geomorphometric Variables Based on SRTM in the Tapajós Region, Brazilian Amazon (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0152009); Drivers of metacommunity structure diverge for common and rare Amazonian tree species (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0188300); Large-Scale Wind Disturbances Promote Tree Diversity in a Central Amazon Forest (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0103711).

Additionally, we also added in the figures caption the data source and specified that images were used for illustrative purposes only.

REVIEWERS' COMMENTS:

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Response: No answer needed.

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: No

Response: Here, we approached the dynamics of plague in the municipality of Exu by using spatial scanning functions to identify spatial and temporal clusters with statistical significance, such as: Retrospective Space-Time analysis scanning for clusters with high rates using the Discrete Poisson model; and Retrospective Space-Time analysis scanning for clusters with short or long survival using the Exponential model. Moreover, we applied the Kernel analysis to identify the location of clusters for case occurrences which is very important to evidence the results here described.

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Response: In this reviewed version we added to the supplemental files our data bank on patients clinical and epidemiological features, as well as a case-by-case sheet with all confirmed plague cases in the State of Pernambuco, including dates, locations and the coordinates for each municipality affected. Furthermore, as mentioned above, we added in the methods session the links to access all the geographical data used in this work. For the analysis performed at the municipality of Exu, we listed the cases by date and by location (up to the name of the districts) and whether it is at the rural or urban zone. However, we cannot publish the precise coordinates of the residences where the cases in Exu took place due to the patient data protection.

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Response: No answer needed.

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: I feel the paper has the potential to be published in this journal. First, the authors have did a good job to edit the historical data of plague in South America. I appreciate this very much. The data is very valuable with detailed time and location information.

However, the author had a poor data analysis. The paper is too descriptive to be accepted at the current form. There are available approaches to estimate the transmission rates using historical data (e.g. Xu et al. 2014. Wet climate and transportation routes accelerate spread of human plague. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences. 281: 1780), and then analyze the potential factors affecting the transmission rate, and identify the key factors.

Response: We would like to thank the reviewer for the insightful comments and suggestions. As explained in question #2 our manuscript used spatial statistical analyzes to process data presenting in the results of this study. We believe that combined, these approaches addressed the main objective of the study, which was to better understand the plague dynamics in Pernambuco state, Northeastern Brazil. By analyzing the spatial occurrence and distribution of cases and using the municipality of Exu as study case we were able to characterize the spatial and temporal dispersion of cases. With this in mind, we believe that although the manuscript has some descriptive information, the spatial statistical analyzes support the findings and the whole discussion that has as goal to better understand how the plague occurred in one of the main foci of transmission in Brazil, the Chapada do Araripe in Exu.

We are grateful for the indication of the article “Wet climate and transportation routes accelerate spread of human plague” (Society B-Biological Sciences. 281: 1780) to improve our manuscript, but there are some technical considerations that make such analyzes impossible to be carried out in the territorial unit presented in our study - the county of Exu in Pernambuco. First, the analysis was carried out in a country with continental territory such as China (9,597,000 km²), and our study presents the analysis in a very small territory (Exu: 1,473 km²). In addition, the period studied in China was almost 2 centuries (1772 to 1964) while ours was performed only for 32 years (1945-1976) for the municipality of Exu. These differences compromise data analysis when using methodologies such as Trend-Surface Analysis (TSA) and Nearest Neighbor Approach (NNA). Such methods were used to analyze the plague spread in China considering the location of the cases and the geographic historical data, such as the occurrence of rivers and routes. However, for our territorial unit there are no historical data on roads, which makes it difficult to perform such analysis.

We think that our data analysis approach using Retrospective Space-Time analysis scanning for clusters with short or long survival using the Exponential model clarify how the plague dispersion occurred in our study area (Exu) over the study period.

However, we will consider the methods TSA and NNA to analyze data on the occurrence of plague in Brazil in future studies over larger territories, since this manuscript is part of a larger project that investigate the main foci of the disease in the country. We will be happy to publish them in Plos One as soon as the analyzes are completed.

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Response: No answer needed.

Submitted filename: Response to the Reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file.

19 Mar 2021

Spatiotemporal analysis of bubonic plague in Pernambuco, Northeast of Brazil: case study in the Municipality of Exu.

PONE-D-20-35938R1

Dear Dr. Almeida,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript, "Spatiotemporal analysis of bubonic plague in Pernambuco, Northeast of Brazil: case study in the Municipality of Exu" (PONE-D-20-35938R1), has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Abdallah M. Samy, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

26 Mar 2021

PONE-D-20-35938R1

Spatiotemporal analysis of bubonic plague in Pernambuco, Northeast of Brazil: case study in the Municipality of Exu.

Dear Dr. de Almeida:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Abdallah M. Samy

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE