Download
slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Modeling West Nile virus Distribution from Surveillance Data PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Modeling West Nile virus Distribution from Surveillance Data

Modeling West Nile virus Distribution from Surveillance Data

142 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

Modeling West Nile virus Distribution from Surveillance Data

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Modeling West Nile virus Distribution from Surveillance Data Josh Bader 16 February 2009 University of California-Santa Barbara Department of Geography

  2. Outline • Biogeography Background • WNV Background • My Research • Conceptual model • Predicting WNV distribution • Identify optimal surveillance location

  3. Source: birds.cornell.edu

  4. Biogeography • Intersection of life sciences and geography • Also ecology, geology, molecular biology • Two divisions • Historical • Evolutionary perspective • Pleistocene Ice Age • Ecological • Modern persective • Why are species where they are (were)?

  5. Biology • Process behind spatial distributions • Without tolerance limits, a species will occupy all available areas--maximum dispersion • Limits determined by: • Biotic factors • Abiotic factors • Genetics • Population dynamics • Intraspecies and interspecies • Often related to fundamental niche of species

  6. Potential range map Deductive Approach Biological Information Geographic Information • Habitat Req. • Tolerance limits • Presence/Absence • Land cover, etc. Inductive Approach

  7. Biogeography Links • California Wildlife Habitat Relationships • http://www.dfg.ca.gov/bdb/html/cwhr.html • GAP Analysis • California: http://www.biogeog.ucsb.edu/projects/gap/gap_proj.html • National: http://gapanalysis.nbii.gov/

  8. http://www.biogeog.ucsb.edu/projects/gap/gap_proj.html

  9. Outline • Biogeography Background • WNV Background • My Research • Conceptual model • Predicting WNV distribution • Identify optimal surveillance location

  10. West Nile virus • First isolated in Uganda—1937 • First detected in US—1999 • Since spread to entire contiguous 48 states • Infection can cause range of symptoms • Mild: West Nile fever • Severe: Encephalitis and Meningitis • 2003: 9862 cases & 264 deaths • 2004: 2539 cases & 100 deaths • 2005: 3000 cases & 119 deaths • 2006: 4219 cases & 161 deaths • 2007: 906 cases & 26 deaths • 2008: 1370 cases & 37 deaths http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/westnile/index.htm

  11. Source: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/westnile/Mapsactivity/surv&control06Maps.htm

  12. http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/westnile/Mapsactivity/surv&control07Maps.htmhttp://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/westnile/Mapsactivity/surv&control07Maps.htm

  13. http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/westnile/Mapsactivity/surv&control08Maps.htmhttp://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/westnile/Mapsactivity/surv&control08Maps.htm

  14. http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/westnile/index.htm

  15. Surveillance • Human • Mandatory reporting to CDC • Blood donations • Point of infection difficult to ascertain • Mosquito • Set trap locations • Trap placement important

  16. Surveillance • Sentinel chickens • Similar to mosquito • Show seroconversion • Effort > warning • Veterinary • Similar to human surveillance • Mainly equines • Vaccine available http://www.hhs.state.ne.us/wnv/

  17. Surveillance • Dead bird • Good early indicators • Rely on public participation • Find a dead birdCall hotline • 1-877-WNV-BIRD • Species and condition important • Volunteered geographic information

  18. Know Your WNV Hosts A. B. C. F. D. E.

  19. Surveillance Links • California • http://westnile.ca.gov/latest_activity.php • National (CDC) • http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/westnile/index.htm • National (USGS) • http://diseasemaps.usgs.gov/

  20. http://westnile.ca.gov/

  21. http://westnile.ca.gov/

  22. http://diseasemaps.usgs.gov/

  23. Why map WNV? • Ultimate goal: limit human infection • Map migration across the country • Identify areas of high risk for mosquito control and health alerts • Determine outbreak patterns • Perennial: Japanese encephalitis • Sporadic: St. Louis encephalitis http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/westnile/index.htm

  24. Previous Work • Disease Mapping • Largely descriptive • Little predictive value • No process behind pattern • Geographic Correlation • Sin Nombre—mice • Lyme—ticks • DYCAST • Predict hotspots from dead bird reports • Urban areas http://westnile.ca.gov/2005_maps.htm

  25. Outline • Biogeography Background • WNV Background • My Research • Conceptual model • Predicting WNV distribution • Identify optimal surveillance location

  26. Research Objectives • Define a conceptual model for WNV distribution • Predict WNV distribution from surveillance data and ancillary environmental variables • Identify optimal areas for additional surveillance sampling

  27. I. Conceptual Model • Ecological/biogeographical approach • Mapping WNV as function of pertinent life cycle components • Virus propagation areas • Amplification and transmission • “Reproductive range” • WNV only needs reservoir host (birds) and vector (mosquito) • Human, sentinel, and veterinary instances can be considered sterile

  28. I. Habitat suitability models • Based on Hutchinson’s (1957) concept of niche • Hypervolume where species is found within suitable ranges for all variables • Biology reflected in habitat selection • Fundamental niche • Realized niche does not often match fundamental niche • Includes biotic interactions and competitive exclusion • Species is not at equilibrium • Number of multivariate techniques • Probabilistic techniques are similar • High suitability implies high presence probability

  29. I. Hosts + Vectors • Suitability/probabilistic techniques classify area for one species • Multiple reservoir and vector species • Need at least one host and one vector • P(H) = P(H1U H2) = P(H1) + P(H2) – P(H1∩H2) • P(V) = P(V1U V2) = P(V1) + P(V2) – P(V1∩V2) • P(WNV) = P(H ∩V)

  30. Study Area • W Kern County • W of Sierra Nevada mountains • 10,000 sq. km • Kern Co. MVCD • Jepson’s ecoregions • Rural & urban • 20+ data points for for 2 intermediate hosts and 2 vectors • 2004 season

  31. Intermediate Hosts • Corvids most important • Susceptible, conspicuous, recognizable • 8 species within study area • American Crow • Corvus brachyrhynchus • cosmopolitan • Woodlands, grasslands, croplands, and urban areas • Western Scrub-jay • Aphelocoma californicus • More selective • Woodlands & shrublands—Oak • Residential urban areas

  32. Vectors • Genus Culex • Permanent water breeders • Bloodfeeding usually close to breeding sites • Culex tarsalis • Western encephalitis mosquito • Irrigation ditches, riparian • Culex pipiens quinquefasciatus • Southern House mosquito • Urban environments (e.g. sewer catch basins) http://www.usask.ca http://www.fehd.gov.hk

  33. Variable Selection • 7-10 Eco-geographic variables (EGV) per species • 1 km --- 10,000 pixels • General EGVs • Elevation, Percent Urban, Distance to water • Species Specific • Mosquitoes—hydrographic; Birds—land cover • Neighborhood layers will account for species range size • Mosquitoes—0.03-0.04 sq. km • Jays--0.03 sq km; Crow--0.1-0.5 sq km

  34. II. Presence/absence Methods • Presence/absence • Ex. regression • Potentially more predictive power • Reliable absences difficult to obtain for animals • Species is present, but not detected • Imperfect detectability of target species • Species is absent, even though habitat is suitable • Presence-only • Ex. ENFA • Trade off: predictive power vs. unreliable absences

  35. II. Bayesian Model • Conditional probabilities of Bayes Theorem • Probability of WNV positive given a series of EGV values • Advantages • Presence-only when EGVs known everywhere • Easy to integrate new presences • Presence and EGV data—rasters • Matlab • For each species, two sets of histograms • Global—EGV values over entire study area • Presence subset—EGV values at presence locations • Multivariate probability density functions

  36. II. Bayes Theorem P(H1|EGV) = P(H1) * P(EGV| H1) _______________________________________ P(H1)*P(EGV| H1) + P(absence)*P(EGV|absence) P(H1) = probability of WNV positive intermediate host of species 1 over the entire study area P(EGV| H1) = probability of EGV value within WNV positive H1 subset Denominator = probability of EGV value within global set P(EGV)

  37. II. Simulation • Problem: presence subset not exhaustive • P(H1) not known • P(EGV| H1) not fully characterized • Needs to be augmented • Total presence probability P(H1) estimated from focal species range within study area • Maximum WNV dispersal • Additional presences simulated until threshold met • Areas near presences are preferentially weighted • P(EGV| H1) updated • Presence probability map for simulated P(EGV| H1) • Many simulations (n=1000) • Distribution of presence probabilities for each pixel

  38. Prob. Crow (H1) Prob. Host Prob. Jay (H2) Prob. WNV Prob. Tars. (V1) Prob. Vector Prob. Quin. (V2) II. Flowchart • Composite probability map for each species • Combined using definition of P(WNV)

  39. II. Presence/Absence Maps • Convert WNV probability to binary presence/absence • Receiver Operating Characteristic plots • Determines threshold that most accurately separates 2 classes • Requires validation dataset • Sentinel data • For each threshold, sensitivity-specificity pair is calculated • Sensitivity: true positive fraction • a / (a + c) • 1 – Specificity: false positive fraction • d / (b + d)

  40. ROC plots • Tangent line defines optimal sensitivity-specificity pair • Corresponding threshold considered best separation value • Slope can be function of false positive and false negative costs • AUC can be used as index of overall modelaccuracy • Use threshold to change probability to binary map Fielding and Bell 1997

  41. III. Optimizing Surveillance • Surveillance is expensive • Improve efficiency • Identify areas for additional sampling that provide the most information on virus activity • Improve separation between presence/absence classes • Optimal site • Ambiguous P(WNV)—near threshold • Presence simulated and change quantified • Change in AUC of ROC plot

  42. III. Optimizing Surveillance • Optimal sampling strategy • Number and locations of surveillance points • Loss function--monetary • Surveillance costs • Traps, testing, travel • Surveillance benefits • Improved efficiency of mosquito control • Less human cases • Suggestions to Kern Co. MVCD

  43. Conclusion • WNV endemic to US • Public health significance • Spatial aspect of WNV is important • Direct surveillance • Direct mitigation • Research Objectives • Provide a model for mapping zoonotic disease • Method of relating presence-only data to EGV • Assessing the value of additional surveillance • Address academic and management issues • GIS works for both

  44. Acknowledgements • Dr. Michael Goodchild • Dr. Phaedon Kyriakidis • Dr. Keith Clarke • Dr. Wayne Kramer Questions ??