MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W6958904 · doi:10.5070/v422110250

West Nile Virus in North American Wildlife

2006· article· en· W6958904 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
G. McLean Robert

Notice bibliographique

RevueProceedings - Vertebrate Pest Conference · 2006
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueMosquito-borne diseases and control
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésWest Nile virusOutbreakGeographyWildlifeBird migrationBiologyEcologyVirusVirology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Since the invasion of the mosquito-borne, West Nile virus (WNv) into North America in New York City (NYC) in 1999, the distribution of the virus has expanded throughout most of the continent during the ensuing years, causing mortality in hundreds of thousands of native and exotic birds and producing tens of thousands of equine and human cases. The initial outbreaks in the NYC area in 1999 were intense in local bird populations, with small outbreaks in humans and equines. Then, WNv spread north and south from this focal area during the next 2 years. The northward and southward sequence of dissemination continued as WNv began to encompass the remainder of the continent. Migrating birds are thought to be the one of the major contributors to the rapid dissemination of this mosquito-borne virus. The temporal and spatial pattern and rapidity of the continental spread of WNv, as detected by the national surveillance system, match the semi-annual migratory movements of hundreds of millions of North American birds. The subsequent dissemination of the virus to Canada, the Caribbean, Mexico, Central America, and now South America fits this method of spread as well. The strain of WNv introduced into the U.S. had increased virulence for North American birds, which quickly became apparent after its introduction and from the subsequent avian epizootics it caused. More than 200 species of birds experienced mortality, especially corvid species such as the American crow, blue jay, and several species of magpies, and recently the greater sage grouse. These species were particularly susceptible to this virulent strain of virus, as demonstrated in experimental studies and from dramatic die-offs during the summer virus transmission seasons. Bird mortality from WNv peaks during August-September at the height of the mosquito-transmission period but extends from April to November each year in some states. This mortality in crows and other corvid species was used as a sensitive sentinel system to detect the presence and movement of the virus through a public health reporting and laboratory testing national surveillance program. Mammal species were frequently infected, and some suffered mortality. The nationwide bird mortality from WNv infections was dramatic in North America during the last 7 years, but the actual impact of the mortality on bird populations is not known because of the insensitivity of national population data available on birds. Few regional declines in bird populations have been detected; however, the impact of WNv on local populations of crows and sage grouse has been observed in some localities. The geographical distribution of WNv activity is not continuous across local landscapes, and unexposed birds can then serve as a source to repopulate local impacted areas when overall populations are high. West Nile virus persists through the winter periods and reappears annually in the spring in temperate regions of the continent. The mechanisms responsible for this recrudescence are unique and largely unknown. Focusing on these overwintering locations with targeted mosquito control could suppress early season initiation of virus transmission and possibly prevent subsequent summer amplification. Integrated pest management aimed at controlling mosquito populations is currently the only effective approach to control this disease.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,013
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,011
Tête enseignante GPT0,235
Écart entre enseignants0,225 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations3
Publié2006
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueProceedings - Vertebrate Pest ConferenceMême sujetMosquito-borne diseases and controlTravaux en français237 207