Influence of landscape on the spread of an infection

Timischl, Werner

doi:10.1007/bf02462075

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Disease epidemics, often exacerbated by movement among populations, have decimated both freeranging and captive wildlife populations in the past (Table 1). Timschl (1984) studied the effect of land-Enhanced spread of contagious diseases is among the potential negative effects of increased movement among populations. Within the vast epidemiology literature, mathematical epidemiologists have considered the spread of disease in structured populations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disease in Metapopulation Models: Implications for Conservation

Hess¹

1996

Ecology

318

282

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. Ecological Society of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Ecology. Abstract.Several conservation measures are intended to enhance the movement of individuals among populations. These include the establishment of wildlife corridors, captive breeding and release programs, and translocation of individuals among populations. Many metapopulation models show that increasing movement among populations reduces the chance of metapopulation extinction. However, epidemiological models indicate that increased contact among populations enhances the spread of disease and can trigger epidemics. I have synthesized elements of mathematical epidemiology with metapopulation models. An analytic model showed that highly contagious diseases of moderate severity spread widely, increasing the probability of metapopulation extinction. I also used a simulation model to examine four spatial arrangements of populations: island, necklace, loop, and spider. When infected individuals were allowed to move freely among populations, all of the arrangements exhibited qualitative behavior similar to that exhibited by the analytic models. The most dangerous diseases were those for which infected populations grew large enough to produce dispersers that infected other populations, but which also reduced the geometric rate of increase for infected populations to near unity. Under those conditions, random demographic and environmental events caused metapopulation extinction. Major differences among the spatial arrangements emerged when a quarantine population was established. A centralized quarantine in the spider and necklace arrangement yielded the most dramatic reductions in metapopulation extinction probability. A single quarantine patch was of little value in an island arrangement. These results have several implications for managing metapopulations. Most notably, some spatial arrangements of populations are more amenable to disease control than others, and establishing a quarantine population can increase the probability of detecting new diseases and reduce the impact of diseases that do appear.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disease in Metapopulation Models: Implications for Conservation

Hess¹

1996

Ecology

318

282

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An inadvertent consequence of road corridors could be facilitation of spread of disease as seen with other diseases and systems (Marquardt 2005, Eisenberg et al 2006, Xu et al 2014. Incorporating topography and landscape features is recommended when developing wildlife disease control tactics (Timischl 1984, Moore 1999, Rosatte et al 2010. The Island Fox Working Group recommends that vaccination strategies should consider island geography (Coonan 2012).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We could find no studies, however, discussing the influence of roads on spread of disease when roads are not considered movement barriers to, but conversely enhance movements of, host animals. Modeling and empirical studies have observed the spread of rabies in corridors aligning with topographical features (Timischl 1984, Moore 1999, Russell et al 2004). Hess (1994) emphasized the influence of conservation corridors on contagious disease.…”

mentioning

confidence: 94%

Island fox spatial ecology and implications for management of disease

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Disease, predation, and genetic isolation resulted in 4 of 6 island fox (Urocyon littoralis) subspecies being listed as endangered in 2004. Potential for disease outbreaks continues to pose a major threat to the persistence of these isolated, endemic populations. We examined how roads influence the spatial ecology of San Clemente Island foxes (U. l. clementae), particularly in regard to spread of disease, to provide management recommendations for preventing or minimizing a disease outbreak on San Clemente Island, California, USA. Home range areas (truex¯ = 0.75 km2) and core areas (truex¯ = 0.19 km2) of foxes on San Clemente Island were 0.36–1.23 and 2.17 times larger, respectively, than estimates from Santa Cruz Island foxes (U. l. santacruzae). Home ranges and core areas were 78% larger and 73% larger, respectively, for foxes near roads than for foxes away from roads. Home ranges were also largest when foxes were not caring for offspring (i.e., seasons of pup‐independence and breeding). We did not detect any dispersal movements, but foxes living near roads moved 33% farther in 2‐hours periods than foxes not living near roads. Foxes near roads move faster, range more widely, and could more rapidly spread a pathogen throughout the island; therefore, roads might serve as transmission corridors. We recommend reducing this risk by increasing widths of vaccination firewalls (areas where vaccination is used to induce a disease‐resistant or immune population of foxes), ensuring these areas deliberately intersect roads, and vaccinating a higher proportion of foxes living near roads. Disease risk models incorporating these strategies could inform the lowest risk scenarios. © 2018 The Wildlife Society.

show abstract

Managing Landscapes for Vulnerable, Invasive and Disease Species

Zavaleta¹,

Pasari²

2007

Managing and Designing Landscapes for Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the focus of conservation moves from protected areas to include working landscapes, management must accommodate multiple goals. In this context, management focused on individual species must be well justified. Conservation practices that target carefully selected individual species can complement pattern-based criteria needed to maintain species richness and ecosystem function by providing mechanistic rationale and quantifiable targets for conservation actions. However, most treatments of landscape design do not consider the compatibility of management for individual diseasecausing species, invasive species and threatened species simultaneously. We summarize recommendations from landscape epidemiology and invasion management and evaluate whether they are congruent with general principles for vulnerable species' protection. Many, but not all, broad strategies for controlling invasive and disease species appear compatible with strategies for protecting vulnerable species. Local circumstances, scale considerations and the relative importance of landscape and other interventions should guide management of trade-offs among conflicting goals.

show abstract

Influence of landscape on the spread of an infection

Cited by 4 publications

References 2 publications

Disease in Metapopulation Models: Implications for Conservation

Disease in Metapopulation Models: Implications for Conservation

Island fox spatial ecology and implications for management of disease

Managing Landscapes for Vulnerable, Invasive and Disease Species

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About