Ecosystem change and zoonoses in the Anthropocene

Abstract

Changes in land use, animal populations and climate, primarily due to increasing human populations, drive the emergence of zoonoses. Force of infection (FOI), which for these diseases is a measure of the ease with which a pathogen reaches the human population, can change with specific zoonoses and context. Here, we outline three ecosystem categories-domestic, peridomestic and sylvatic, where disease ecology alters the FOI of specific zoonoses. Human intervention is an overriding effect in the emergence of zoonoses; therefore, we need to understand the disease ecology and other influencing factors of pathogens and parasites that are likely to interact differently within ecological and cultural contexts. Planning for One Health and community ecology, such as an ecological impact assessment, is required to prepare and manage the emergence and impact of zoonoses in the Anthropocene.

Symposium report: emerging threats for human health – impact of socioeconomic and climate change on zoonotic diseases in the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia), Russia

“…During the Symposium, the current state of knowledge on zoonotic diseases in the Republic of Sakha was summarised. The findings presented support current research that connects anthropogenic changes in land use to intensified contact between people and ecological systems [41,42]. By sharing more habitats, the potential for transmission of zoonotic pathogens increases.…”

The accelerated infectious disease risk in the Anthropocene: more outbreaks and wider global spread

“…There may be several reasons why the number of outbreaks is increasing, which are reasons due to local conditions at the source of the outbreak (e.g., probably the presence of a seafood market for the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, Zhou et al, 2020). Such factors may be the increasing number of drug-resistant microbes, higher contact rates with wildlife, increased livestock and global food production, urbanization, deforestation, agricultural intensification, and others (Wilcox and Gubler, 2005;Jones et al, 2008;Plowright et al, 2008;Keesing et al, 2010;Smith and Guégan, 2010;Morand et al, 2014;Johnson et al, 2015;Hassell et al, 2017;Jorgensen et al, 2018;McMahon et al, 2018;Rohr et al, 2019).…”

“…In addition, we have a growing understanding that the presence of abundant biodiversity and healthy ecosystems has an overall positive effect on human well-being and health (Chivian and Bernstein, 2008;Wood et al, 2014;Sandifer et al, 2015;Walther et al, 2016;Morand and Lajaunie, 2017;McMahon et al, 2018) which should count as an additional health benefit of the economic degrowth scenario.…”

Human-induced changes in habitat preference by capybaras (Hydrochoerus hydrochaeris) and their potential effect on zoonotic disease transmission

“…This is likely due to high availability of nutritious resources from agricultural crops and cultivated exotic grasses, and to lower predation risk in human-modified landscapes [13]. The proximity between wildlife and humans has been shown to lead to increase human wildlife conflicts, including zoonotic disease transfer [8]. Across human-modified landscapes, large groups of capybaras have been linked to increased crop damage [14] and vehicle collisions [15], as well as public health issues related to BSF spread [16].…”

“…An increasing number of wild species is being forced to adapt to human-modified landscapes and to live within close proximity to humans [1, 2, 3]. Across these landscapes, human disturbance is linked to shifts in wildlife spatial ecology [4, 5, 6], ultimately affecting zoonosis spread and transmission [7, 8]. In that context, obtain accurate data to address questions on the potential effects of wild species’ habitat use in zoonotic disease transmission is a challenging and crucial goal to wildlife managers and public health institutions.…”