| Title |
Modeling the Effects of Augmentation Strategies on the Control of Dengue Fever With an Impulsive Differential Equation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11538-016-0208-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xianghong Zhang, Sanyi Tang, Robert A. Cheke, Huaiping Zhu |
| Abstract |
Dengue fever has rapidly become the world's most common vector-borne viral disease. Use of endosymbiotic Wolbachia is an innovative technology to prevent vector mosquitoes from reproducing and so break the cycle of dengue transmission. However, strategies such as population eradication and replacement will only succeed if appropriate augmentations with Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes that take account of a variety of factors are carried out. Here, we describe the spread of Wolbachia in mosquito populations using an impulsive differential system with four state variables, incorporating the effects of cytoplasmic incompatibility and the augmentation of Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes with different sex ratios. We then evaluated (a) how each parameter value contributes to the success of population replacement; (b) how different release quantities of infected mosquitoes with different sex ratios affect the success of population suppression or replacement; and (c) how the success of these two strategies can be realized to block the transmission of dengue fever. Analysis of the system's stability, bifurcations and sensitivity reveals the existence of forward and backward bifurcations, multiple attractors and the contribution of each parameter to the success of the strategies. The results indicate that the initial density of mosquitoes, the quantities of mosquitoes released in augmentations and their sex ratios have impacts on whether or not the strategies of population suppression or replacement can be achieved. Therefore, successful strategies rely on selecting suitable strains of Wolbachia and carefully designing the mosquito augmentation program. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 45 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 11% |
| Professor | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 8 | 17% |
| Unknown | 7 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 28% |
| Mathematics | 9 | 19% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 6% |
| Engineering | 3 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 17% |
| Unknown | 8 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 October 2016.
All research outputs
#18,478,448
of 22,896,955 outputs
Outputs from Bulletin of Mathematical Biology
#886
of 1,102 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,039
of 319,867 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bulletin of Mathematical Biology
#14
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,896,955 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,102 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 319,867 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.