Using contact networks to explore mechanisms of parasite transmission in wildlife

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

45 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A hallmark assumption of traditional approaches to disease modelling is that individuals within a given population mix uniformly and at random. However, this assumption does not always hold true; contact heterogeneity or preferential associations can have a substantial impact on the duration, size, and dynamics of epidemics. Contact heterogeneity has been readily adopted in epidemiological studies of humans, but has been less studied in wildlife. While contact network studies are becoming more common for wildlife, their methodologies, fundamental assumptions, host species, and parasites vary widely. The goal of this article is to review how contact networks have been used to study macro- and microparasite transmission in wildlife. The review will: (i) explain why contact heterogeneity is relevant for wildlife populations; (ii) explore theoretical and applied questions that contact networks have been used to answer; (iii) give an overview of unresolved methodological issues; and (iv) suggest improvements and future directions for contact network studies in wildlife.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)389-409
Number of pages21
JournalBiological Reviews
Volume92
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2017

Fingerprint

wildlife
Parasites
parasites
Population
Macros
Epidemiologic Studies
epidemiological studies
duration
Direction compound
methodology

Keywords

  • contact network
  • contact network epidemiology
  • disease modelling
  • parasite
  • pathogen
  • social network
  • transmission
  • wildlife

Cite this

Using contact networks to explore mechanisms of parasite transmission in wildlife. / White, Lauren A.; Forester, James D; Craft, Meggan E.

In: Biological Reviews, Vol. 92, No. 1, 01.02.2017, p. 389-409.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{535ec08994604f49ace554ea54981c73,
title = "Using contact networks to explore mechanisms of parasite transmission in wildlife",
abstract = "A hallmark assumption of traditional approaches to disease modelling is that individuals within a given population mix uniformly and at random. However, this assumption does not always hold true; contact heterogeneity or preferential associations can have a substantial impact on the duration, size, and dynamics of epidemics. Contact heterogeneity has been readily adopted in epidemiological studies of humans, but has been less studied in wildlife. While contact network studies are becoming more common for wildlife, their methodologies, fundamental assumptions, host species, and parasites vary widely. The goal of this article is to review how contact networks have been used to study macro- and microparasite transmission in wildlife. The review will: (i) explain why contact heterogeneity is relevant for wildlife populations; (ii) explore theoretical and applied questions that contact networks have been used to answer; (iii) give an overview of unresolved methodological issues; and (iv) suggest improvements and future directions for contact network studies in wildlife.",
keywords = "contact network, contact network epidemiology, disease modelling, parasite, pathogen, social network, transmission, wildlife",
author = "White, {Lauren A.} and Forester, {James D} and Craft, {Meggan E}",
year = "2017",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/brv.12236",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "92",
pages = "389--409",
journal = "Biological Reviews",
issn = "1464-7931",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Using contact networks to explore mechanisms of parasite transmission in wildlife

AU - White, Lauren A.

AU - Forester, James D

AU - Craft, Meggan E

PY - 2017/2/1

Y1 - 2017/2/1

N2 - A hallmark assumption of traditional approaches to disease modelling is that individuals within a given population mix uniformly and at random. However, this assumption does not always hold true; contact heterogeneity or preferential associations can have a substantial impact on the duration, size, and dynamics of epidemics. Contact heterogeneity has been readily adopted in epidemiological studies of humans, but has been less studied in wildlife. While contact network studies are becoming more common for wildlife, their methodologies, fundamental assumptions, host species, and parasites vary widely. The goal of this article is to review how contact networks have been used to study macro- and microparasite transmission in wildlife. The review will: (i) explain why contact heterogeneity is relevant for wildlife populations; (ii) explore theoretical and applied questions that contact networks have been used to answer; (iii) give an overview of unresolved methodological issues; and (iv) suggest improvements and future directions for contact network studies in wildlife.

AB - A hallmark assumption of traditional approaches to disease modelling is that individuals within a given population mix uniformly and at random. However, this assumption does not always hold true; contact heterogeneity or preferential associations can have a substantial impact on the duration, size, and dynamics of epidemics. Contact heterogeneity has been readily adopted in epidemiological studies of humans, but has been less studied in wildlife. While contact network studies are becoming more common for wildlife, their methodologies, fundamental assumptions, host species, and parasites vary widely. The goal of this article is to review how contact networks have been used to study macro- and microparasite transmission in wildlife. The review will: (i) explain why contact heterogeneity is relevant for wildlife populations; (ii) explore theoretical and applied questions that contact networks have been used to answer; (iii) give an overview of unresolved methodological issues; and (iv) suggest improvements and future directions for contact network studies in wildlife.

KW - contact network

KW - contact network epidemiology

KW - disease modelling

KW - parasite

KW - pathogen

KW - social network

KW - transmission

KW - wildlife

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84950156053&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84950156053&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/brv.12236

DO - 10.1111/brv.12236

M3 - Article

C2 - 26613547

AN - SCOPUS:84950156053

VL - 92

SP - 389

EP - 409

JO - Biological Reviews

JF - Biological Reviews

SN - 1464-7931

IS - 1

ER -