Forecasting parasite sharing under climate change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Species are shifting their distributions in response to climate change. This geographic reshuffling may result in novel co-occurrences among species, which could lead to unseen biotic interactions, including the exchange of parasites between previously isolated hosts. Identifying potential new host-parasite interactions would improve forecasting of disease emergence and inform proactive disease surveillance. However, accurate predictions of future cross-species disease transmission have been hampered by the lack of a generalized approach and data availability. Here, we propose a framework to predict novel host-parasite interactions based on a combination of niche modelling of future host distributions and parasite sharing models. Using the North American ungulates as a proof of concept, we show this approach has high cross-validation accuracy in over 85% of modelled parasites and find that more than 34% of the host-parasite associations forecasted by our models have already been recorded in the literature. We discuss potential sources of uncertainty and bias that may affect our results and similar forecasting approaches, and propose pathways to generate increasingly accurate predictions. Our results indicate that forecasting parasite sharing in response to shifts in host geographic distributions allow for the identification of regions and taxa most susceptible to emergent pathogens under climate change. This article is part of the theme issue 'Infectious disease macroecology: parasite diversity and dynamics across the globe'.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".