Scaling up from epidemiology to biogeography: local infection patterns predict geographical distribution in fish parasites
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Aim We investigated how the spatial distribution of parasites, measured as either their geographical range size or their frequency of occurrence among localities, relates to either their average local abundance or the variance in their abundance among localities where they occur. Location We used data on the abundance of 46 metazoan parasite species in 66 populations of threespine sticklebacks, Gasterosteus aculeatus , from Europe and North America. Methods For each parasite species, frequency of occurrence was calculated as the proportion of stickleback populations in which it occurred, and geographical range size as the area within the smallest possible polygon delimited using the coordinates of the localities where it occurred. Generalized linear models were used to assess how these two measures of spatial distribution were influenced by several predictor variables: geographical region (North America or Europe), life cycle (simple or complex), average local abundance, the coefficient of variation in abundance across localities, and median prevalence (proportion of infected hosts within a locality). Results Our analyses uncovered four patterns. First, parasites in North America tend to have higher frequencies of occurrence among surveyed localities, but not broader geographical ranges, than those in Europe. Second, parasite species with simple life cycles have wider geographical ranges than those with complex cycles. Third, there was a positive relationship between average abundance of the different parasite species and their frequency of occurrence, but not between average abundance and geographical range size. Fourth, the coefficient of variation in abundance covaried positively with both the frequency of occurrence and geographical range size across the different parasite species. Thus, all else being equal, parasites showing greater site‐to‐site variability in abundance occur in a greater proportion of localities and over a broader geographical area than those with a more stable abundance among sites. Main conclusions Local infection patterns are linked with large‐scale distributional patterns in fish parasites, independently of host effects, such that local commonness translates into regional commonness. The mechanisms linking parasite success at both scales remain unclear, but may include those that maintain the continuum between specialist and generalist parasites. Regardless, the observed patterns have implications for the predicted changes in the geographical distributions of many parasites in response to climate change.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».