MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2751021520 · doi:10.1098/rspb.2017.0475

Interacting effects of wildlife loss and climate on ticks and tick-borne disease

2017· article· en· W2751021520 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Georgia Titcomb, Brian F. Allan, Tyler Ainsworth, Lauren H. Henson, Tyler Hedlund, Robert M. Pringle, Todd M. Palmer, Laban Njoroge, Michael G. Campana, Robert C. Fleischer, John Naisikie Mantas, Hillary S. Young

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicZoonotic diseases and public health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Environmental BiologyPrinceton Environmental Institute, Princeton UniversityNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDirectorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic SciencesNational Science Foundation of Sri LankaUniversity of WyomingUniversity of FloridaNational Geographic Society
KeywordsDefaunationWildlifeBiologyTickEcologyWildlife diseaseAbundance (ecology)Tick-borne diseaseContext (archaeology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Both large-wildlife loss and climatic changes can independently influence the prevalence and distribution of zoonotic disease. Given growing evidence that wildlife loss often has stronger community-level effects in low-productivity areas, we hypothesized that these perturbations would have interactive effects on disease risk. We experimentally tested this hypothesis by measuring tick abundance and the prevalence of tick-borne pathogens ( Coxiella burnetii and Rickettsia spp . ) within long-term, size-selective, large-herbivore exclosures replicated across a precipitation gradient in East Africa. Total wildlife exclusion increased total tick abundance by 130% (mesic sites) to 225% (dry, low-productivity sites), demonstrating a significant interaction of defaunation and aridity on tick abundance. When differing degrees of exclusion were tested for a subset of months, total tick abundance increased from 170% (only mega-herbivores excluded) to 360% (all large wildlife excluded). Wildlife exclusion differentially affected the abundance of the three dominant tick species, and this effect varied strongly over time, likely due to differences among species in their host associations, seasonality, and other ecological characteristics. Pathogen prevalence did not differ across wildlife exclusion treatments, rainfall levels, or tick species, suggesting that exposure risk will respond to defaunation and climate change in proportion to total tick abundance. These findings demonstrate interacting effects of defaunation and aridity that increase disease risk, and they highlight the need to incorporate ecological context when predicting effects of wildlife loss on zoonotic disease dynamics.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.514

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations43
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological SciencesSame topicZoonotic diseases and public healthFrench-language works237,207