↓ Skip to main content

Modelling Transmission of Vector-Borne Pathogens Shows Complex Dynamics When Vector Feeding Sites Are Limited

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Modelling Transmission of Vector-Borne Pathogens Shows Complex Dynamics When Vector Feeding Sites Are Limited
Published in
PLOS ONE, May 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0036730
Pubmed ID
Authors

Arik Kershenbaum, Lewi Stone, Richard S. Ostfeld, Leon Blaustein

Abstract

The relationship between species richness and the prevalence of vector-borne disease has been widely studied with a range of outcomes. Increasing the number of host species for a pathogen may decrease infection prevalence (dilution effect), increase it (amplification), or have no effect. We derive a general model, and a specific implementation, which show that when the number of vector feeding sites on each host is limiting, the effects on pathogen dynamics of host population size are more complex than previously thought. The model examines vector-borne disease in the presence of different host species that are either competent or incompetent (i.e. that cannot transmit the pathogen to vectors) as reservoirs for the pathogen. With a single host species present, the basic reproduction ratio R(0) is a non-monotonic function of the population size of host individuals (H), i.e. a value [Formula: see text] exists that maximises R(0). Surprisingly, if [Formula: see text] a reduction in host population size may actually increase R(0). Extending this model to a two-host species system, incompetent individuals from the second host species can alter the value of [Formula: see text] which may reverse the effect on pathogen prevalence of host population reduction. We argue that when vector-feeding sites on hosts are limiting, the net effect of increasing host diversity might not be correctly predicted using simple frequency-dependent epidemiological models.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 4%
United States 2 4%
Israel 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Mexico 1 2%
Switzerland 1 2%
Unknown 46 85%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 33%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 22%
Professor 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Student > Master 3 6%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 6 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 43%
Environmental Science 11 20%
Mathematics 4 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 7 13%
Attention Score in Context

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 09 May 2012.
All research outputs
#15,243,120
of 22,664,644 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#129,816
of 193,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,218
of 163,481 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,461
of 3,797 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,664,644 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,509 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 163,481 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,797 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.