Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Summary and Assessment Vector-Borne Diseases: Understanding the Environmental, Human Health, and Ecological Connections Vector-borne infectious diseases, such as malaria, dengue fever, yellow fever, and plague, cause a significant fraction of the global infectious disease burden; indeed, nearly half of the worldâs population is infected with at least one type of vector-borne pathogen (CIESIN, 2007; WHO, 2004a). Vector-borne plant and animal diseases, including several newly recognized pathogens, reduce agricul- tural productivity and disrupt ecosystems throughout the world. These diseases profoundly restrict socioeconomic status and development in countries with the highest rates of infection, many of which are located in the tropics and subtropics. From the perspective of infectious diseases, vectors are the transmitters of disease-causing organisms; that is, they carry pathogens from one host to another. By common usage, vectors are normally considered to be invertebrate animals, usually arthropods, but they may also include fomites, which are defined as â[a]ny inanimate object that may be contaminated with disease-causing microorganisms and thus serves to transmit diseaseâ (Hardy Diagnostics, 2007), or rodents, which The Forumâs role was limited to planning the workshop, and the workshop summary report has been prepared by the workshop rapporteurs as a factual summary of what occurred at the workshop. â The variations in efficiency of disease transmission in vectors fluctuates with climate and other environmental conditions. While this is an extremely important topic in epidemiology, it was not a major topic at this workshop.
VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES carry the agent from a reservoir to a susceptible host. Vectors of human disease are typically species of mosquitoes and ticks that are able to transmit viruses, bacteria, or parasites to humans and other warm-blooded hosts. For the purposes of this discussion, a disease that is transmitted to humans, plants, or animals by any agent, arthropod, or fomite is a vector-borne disease. Over the past 30 yearsâfollowing decades during which many mosquito- borne human illnesses were controlled in many areas through the use of habitat modification and pesticidesâmalaria and dengue fever have reemerged in Asia and the Americas, West Nile virus (WNV) has spread rapidly throughout the United States following its 1999 introduction in New York City, and chikungunya fever has resurged in Asia and Africa and emerged in Europe (Gubler, 1998, 2007; Roos, 2007; Yergolkar et al., 2006). The world has also recently witnessed the emergence and spread of Lyme and other tick-borne diseases (Barbour and Fish, 1993), including bluetongue (a devastating viral disease, transmitted to ruminant livestock by insect vectors, that first appeared in northern Europe in 2006), and the citrus tristeza virus (an aphid-borne disease that has killed tens of millions of citrus trees worldwide, and which currently threatens California orange crops) (Chung and Brlansky, 2006; Bar-Joseph et al., 1989). The considerable economic, ecological, and public health impacts of vector- borne diseases are expected to continue, given limited domestic and international capabilities for detecting, identifying, and addressing likely epidemics. Much remains to be discovered about the biology of these diseases, and in particular about the complex biological and ecological relationships that exist among patho- gens, vectors, hosts, and their environments. Such knowledge is essential to the development of novel and more effective intervention and mitigation measures for vector-borne diseases. The Forum on Microbial Threats of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) con- vened a public workshop in Fort Collins, Colorado, on June 19 and 20, 2007, in order to examine the global burden of vector-borne diseases of humans, ani- mals, and plants, and to discuss prospects for successful mitigation and response strategies. Through invited presentations and discussions, participants explored the biological and ecological context of vector-borne diseases; their health and economic impacts; emerging domestic and global diseases; public, animal, and â reservoir is a source from which an infectious agent may be disseminated, such as the deer A mouse being a reservoir host for hantavirus (Hardy Diagnostics, 2007). â And Mexico and Canada, as well. âSee Osburn in Chapter 2 and http://www.iah.bbsrc.ac.uk/John_Gloster_3apr07.htm. â An epidemic, often synonymous with an outbreak, is the occurrence of more cases of disease (or injury, or any other health condition) than expected in a given area or among a specific population during a particular period. Outbreaks are sometimes defined as highly localized epidemics. Pandemics are epidemics that occur in multiple countries or continents, usually affecting a substantial proportion of the population (HHS, 2006).
SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT plant health preparedness; prevention, control, and therapeutic measures; scien- tific and technological advances; and integration strategies to address current and future threats. ORGANIZATION OF THE WORKSHOP SUMMARY This workshop summary was prepared for the Forum membership in the name of the rapporteurs and includes a collection of individually authored papers and commentary. Sections of the workshop summary not specifically attributed to an individual reflect the views of the rapporteurs and not those of the Forum on Microbial Threats, its sponsors, or the IOM. The contents of the unattributed sections are based on the presentations and discussions at the workshop. The workshop summary is organized into chapters as a topic-by-topic description of the presentations and discussions that took place at the workshop. Its purpose is to present lessons from relevant experience, to delineate a range of pivotal issues and their respective problems, and to offer potential responses as described by workshop participants. Although this workshop summary provides an account of the individual presentations, it also reflects an important aspect of the Forum philosophy. The workshop functions as a dialogue among representatives from different sectors and allows them to present their beliefs about which areas may merit further attention. The reader should be aware, however, that the material presented here expresses the views and opinions of the individuals participating in the workshop and not the deliberations and conclusions of a formally constituted IOM study committee. These proceedings summarize only the statements of participants in the workshop and are not intended to be an exhaustive exploration of the subject matter or a representation of consensus evaluation. The Vector-Borne Disease Threat: Past, Present, and Future Resurgence and Emergence of Human Vector-Borne Diseases Infectious diseases transmitted by insects and other animal vectors have long been associated with significant human illness and death. In the 17th through early 20th centuries, human morbidity and mortality due to vector-borne diseases outstripped that from all other causes combined (Gubler, 1998). The early 20th century discovery that mosquitoes transmitted diseases such as malaria, yellow fever, and dengue led quickly to the draining of swamps and ditches where mos- quitoes bred, and eventually to the use of pesticides, which reduced populations of these disease vectors. The adoption of vector control measures, including the
VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES application of a variety of environmental management tools and approaches, coupled with improvements in general hygiene, enabled much of the world to experience decades of respite from major vector-borne diseases in the first half of the 20th century. This success proved fleeting, however, and vector control programs waned due to a combination of factors including the development of pesticide resistance orâsometimes doomed by their own successâthe loss of financial support when vector-borne diseases were no longer perceived as an important public health threat. Today, vector-borne diseases are once again a worldwide concern and a significant cause of human morbidity and mortality, as Figure SA-1 illustrates (WHO, 2004c). Table SA-1 lists the disease burden (calculated in disability- adjusted life years, or DALYs) associated with each of several major human vector-borne diseases (WHO, 2004b). Malaria accounts for the most deaths by far of any human vector-borne dis- ease. The causative agents, Plasmodium spp., currently infect approximately 300 million people and cause between 1 and 3 million deaths per year, mainly in sub- Saharan Africa (Breman, 2001). As described by keynote speaker Duane Gubler, of the University of Hawaii, malaria provides a particularly dramatic example of vector-borne disease reemergence (Gubler, 1998). As stated by Scott and Morrison (see Chapter 2), when done properly, vector control is a well-documented and effective strategy for prevention of mosquito-borne disease. Familiar examples of successful mosquito vector interventions include: the worldwide reduction of malaria in temperate regions and parts of Asia during the 1950s and 1960s (Curtis, 2000; Rugemalila et al., 2006); yellow fever during construction of the Panama Canal; yellow fever throughout most of the Americas during the 1950s and 1960s (Soper, 1967); dengue in Cuba and Singapore (Ooi et al., 2006); and more recently, dengue in parts of Vietnam (Kay and Nam, 2005). Following the drastic depopulation of its vector, the anopheline mosquito, in the first half of the 20th century, malaria began its resurgence in Asia in the late 1960s. In Sri Lanka, where only 17 cases of malaria were reported in 1963, an epidemic of more than 440,000 cases erupted 5 years later after preventive vector control strategies were replaced with case-finding and drug treatment. Similarly, by the mid-1970s, millions of new post-control cases had occurred in India. In Africa, a recent upsurge in infection, punctuated by several major epidemics, has erupted in endemic areas (Nchinda, 1998). Explosive epidemics have also marked the resurgence of plague, dengue, and yellow fever, a situation that Gubler characterized as particularly worrisome. â Some of these approaches include improvements in drainage and sanitation systems; filling stand- ing water areas (pits/ponds/lagoons/irrigation ditches, etc.) that can be breeding sites for vector larvae; and the use of treated mosquito nets and covering of domestic water tanks and other potable water sources. The effective application of these environmental control measures greatly reduces the reli- ance on pesticides for vector control (Center for Science and Environment, 1999).
Deaths from vector-borne disease VBD Deaths/million 0-1 1-20 20-50 50-200 Estimates by WHO sub-region for 2002 (WHO World Health Report, 2004). The boundaries shown on this map do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the 200-500 part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area 500-1,900 or of its authorities, or concerning the delimination of its frontiers or boundaries. Dotted lines on maps No data represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement. Â© WHO 2005. All rights reserved. FIGURE SA-1 Deaths from vector-borne diseases. SOURCE: Reprinted with permission from the World Health Organization (2004c). `SA-1 Landscaspe view
VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES TABLE SA-1â Estimates of the Global Burden of Disease Caused by Major Vector-Borne Diseases Disease Million DALYsa Mosquito-borne infections Malaria 46.5 Lymphatic filariasis 5.8 Dengue 0.62 Japanese encephalitis 0.71 Othersb Onchocerciasis 0.48 Leishmaniasis 2.1 African trypanosomiasis 1.5 Chagas disease 0.67 DALY = disability-adjusted life year. aTotal of DALYs for these diseases represent 17 percent of the global disease burden due to para- sitic and infectious diseases. bSynanthropic* flies play a major role in the transmission of trachoma and diarrhoeal diseases, but the attributable burden is not readily estimated; other arboviruses and typhus organisms may be of major public health significance but accurate data are not available. *Animals that live in close association with humans (Montana State University Entomology Group, 2007). SOURCE: Reprinted from Townson et al. (2005) with permission from the World Health Organization. Plague is carried by rodent fleas, which transmit the pathogen Yersinia pestis when they bite animals or humans (CDC, 2005a). Millions of people in Europe died from plague in the Middle Ages; today, antibiotics are effective against plague when administered promptly following infection. A 1994 plague epidemic in Surat, India, produced one of the first health emergencies that had a major documented impact on the global economy, Gubler said. When inadequate pub- lic health and government response to initial cases led to panic, nearly a quarter of the cityâs population fled Surat to other Indian towns and cities, carrying the disease with them. For the first time in 33 years, the World Health Organization (WHO) implemented the International Health Regulations (IHR) to contain the potential pandemic, resulting in a ban on shipping and travel that cost India an estimated $3 billion and the global economy nearly twice that sum. Dengueâs resurgence has been marked not only by epidemics, but also by the emergence of a more severe form of disease, dengue hemorrhagic fever (DHF) (Gubler, 1998). Ecological disruption in Southeast Asia, brought on by World âThe 1918-1919 influenza pandemic undoubtedly had worldwide economic repercussions; how- ever, little data are available quantifying the immediate and long-term economic consequences of this disease event.
SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT 1,000,000 900,000 800,000 700,000 Number of Cases 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 9 9 9 9 9 5 95 96 97 98 99 00 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -2 55 60 70 80 90 00 19 19 19 19 19 20 Year FIGURE SA-2â Dengue/dengue hemorrhagic fever, average annual number of cases reported to WHO, 1955-2005. SOURCE: Courtesy of WHO. SA-2 War II, led to increased transmission of dengue and, eventually, a pandemic. As illustrated in Figure SA-2, dengue/DHF is one of the worldâs fastest-growing vector-borne diseases (see Gubler in Chapter 1) (WHO, 2007a). The summer of 2007 brought the worst dengue epidemic in nearly a decade to Asia (Mason, 2007). By Julyâwell before transmission was expected to have peakedâIndonesia alone had experienced over 100,000 infections and 1,100 deaths. The epidemic was apparently spurred by weather conditions: a period of drought, during which water stored around homes provided an ideal habitat for mosquitoes to breed. This was followed by unusually hot, humid weather, in which adult mosquitoes thrive (ProMed-Mail, 2007; Anyamba et al., 2006). Yellow fever, which along with dengue was controlled in the Americas by a variety of mosquito abatement techniques through the mid-20th century, remains â However, chikungunya, hantavirus pulmonary syndrome, and Lyme disease may have a higher percentage of new cases based on local populations that are immunologically naÃ¯ve being exposed to and acquiring these newly emerging diseases (IOM, 2003; Chretien et al., 2007).
VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES a constant threat, with concerns that it might make its first appearance in Asia (see Gubler in Chapter 1). Yellow fever virus has caused major epidemics in Africa and South America (Gubler, 2001; Monath, 2001), and sylvatic reservoirs in these areas provide an ongoing threat for its reintroduction into Aedes aegypti- infested metropolitan areas throughout the world. Ae. aegypti is also the principal vector of the dengue viruses (IOM, 2003). The virus was apparently carried by infected birds (and possibly mammals as well) abetted by a vast and diverse population of mosquitoes (see Gubler in Chapter 1 and Petersen in Chapter 2). Indeed, Gubler concluded, nearly all of the most important vector-borne human diseases have exhibited dramatic changes in incidence and geographic range in recent decades. Impact of Vector-Borne Animal and Plant Diseases The majority of emerging, reemerging, and novel human infectious diseases are zoonoses (diseases that can be transmitted from animal reservoirs to humans), of which vector-borne diseases comprise a large percentage (IOM, 2003). Rift Valley fever (RVF), an acute mosquito-borne viral disease, primarily affects live- stock (e.g., cattle, buffalo, sheep, goats) but can also be transmitted to humans through direct contact with the tissues or blood of infected animals, as well as by mosquito bites (see Linthicum et al. in Chapter 1 and Peters in Chapter 2) (CDC, 2007a). Outbreaks of RVF among animals can spread to humans; the largest reported human outbreak, which occurred in Kenya during 1997-1998, resulted in an estimated 89,000 infections and 478 deaths (CDC, 2007b). African try- panosomiasis, also known as African sleeping sickness, causes estimated losses in cattle production of more than $1 billion per year, and perhaps five times that amount in lost opportunities for development (FAO, 2007a). The disease currently affects an estimated 500,000 people in sub-Saharan Africa but threatens an esti- mated human population of 60 million, as well as 50 million head of cattle (FAO, 2007a). Given the rapid growth of human and domesticated animal populations, and their increasing contact with each other and with wild animals, the zoonotic disease threat is expected to increase (Karesh and Cook, 2005; Murphy, 1998; NRC, 2005). Vector-borne diseases have the potential to cause enormous economic harm when they affect livestock and crops, and even the threat of infection can severely limit trade. For example, bluetongue, a viral disease transmitted among sheep and cattle by biting midges, results in annual losses of approximately $3 billion due to morbidity and mortality of animals, trade embargoes, and vaccination costs (see Osburn in Chapter 2) (FAO, 2007b; Osburn, 2007). Although considerable attention and resources have been committed to agriculturally important vector- borne diseases such as bluetongue, RVF, and African trypanosomiasis, relatively little is known about the vast majority of vector-borne disease-causing organ- isms that currently infect only wild animals. Yet such diseases can disrupt entire
SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT ecosystems and, under the right conditions, could potentially expand their host range to include livestock, pets, or humans (Marin/Sonoma Mosquito and Vector Control District, 2005). Vector-borne plant diseases profoundly affect agricultural productivity and ecosystem dynamics (Gergerich and Dolja, 2006; Purcell, 1982; Weintraub and Beanland, 2006). Examples include the bacterium, Xylella fastidiosa, which damages a wide range of plant species; in grapevines, it causes Pierceâs disease, a significant threat to Californiaâs table grape and wine industries (see Almeida in Chapter 1) (Fletcher and Wayadande, 2002; NRC, 2004). Emerging vector- borne viral and bacterial diseases of citrus, most of which were introduced into the Americas since 2000, threaten 85 percent of the worldâs orange juice produc- tion, which resides in the United States and Brazil (Almeida, 2007; Woodall, 2007). Due in part to the difficulty of discerning whether damage to plants has been caused by disease, insects, or adverse weather conditions, the overall impact of vector-borne plant diseases cannot be accurately estimated (Almeida, 2007; Gergerich and Dolja, 2006); however, annual losses in crop quality and yield associated with certain vector-borne viruses are measured in the billions of dol- lars (Bowers et al., 2001; Gergerich and Dolja, 2006; Hull, 2002; Sherwood et al., 2003). Vector-borne plant diseases also cause immeasurable damage to ecosystems, which may not be recognized until it threatens human health, safety, or prosperity. For example, Sudden Oak Death (SOD)âan emerging infectious disease that has been spread across wild lands by hikers, mountain bikers, and equestrians (i.e., human âvectorsâ)âwas recognized after it caused widespread dieback of several tree species in West Coast forests (see subsequent section, âLessons Learned: Case Studies of Vector-Borne Diseasesâ and Chapter 2) (California Oak Mortality Task Force, 2004; Rizzo and Garboletto, 2003). These losses are likely to reduce shelter and food sources for wildlife, increase fire frequency and intensity, and compromise water quality due to soil surface exposure. Moreover, such ecologi- cal effects can be long-lasting. For example, changes in forest composition in the Canadian Rocky Mountains, which resulted from the deaths of lodgepole pines due to an infestation of bark beetles, have persisted for as long as 65 years (Cur- rent Results, 2007; Dykstra and Braumandl, 2006). Back to the Future Infectious diseases have always accompanied humans, animals, plants, and goods in their travels. âSince the beginning of recorded history, disease epidemics have been associated with trade,â Gubler observed, noting that the plague epi- demic that killed one in every four Europeans in the 14th century is believed to have been introduced to the continent by commercial trade with Asia. The rapid expansion of global trade and transportation since 1700 has been associated with the spread of mosquito-borne diseases such as yellow fever and dengue. Dutch
10 VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES Elm disease (so named because it was first described in Holland, in 1921) also originated in Asia and probably arrived in the United States on a shipment of lumber from Europe in the 1930s, after which it devastated American elms in forests and on city streets (Plant Disease Diagnostic Clinic, Cornell University, 2005; Riveredge Farms, 2004). Todayâs integrated global economy has accelerated the transnational flow of capital, knowledge, people, livestock and animal products, and plant materials, as well as the introduction of pathogens and their vectors to new hosts and geo- graphic ranges. Presented with these opportunities, several vector-borne diseases considered most problematic 100 years ago, such as malaria, dengue, plague, and yellow fever, once again pose serious threats to public health. While we have gained considerable insights into the biology and management of certain vector-borne diseases over the past century, limited capacity exists to apply that knowledge. In addition, as many workshop participants observed, much remains to be learned about the ecology and epidemiology of a broad spectrum of vector- borne diseases, including those that have recently emerged. Subsequent sections of this summary therefore explore both what we know and what we most need to understand about the biology of vector-borne diseases, the factors that precipitate disease emergence and resurgence, discussion about key research areas needed to fill the current gaps, and strategies for disease detection and response. Hallmarks of Vector-Borne Disease Vector-borne diseases are transmitted among their human, animal, or plant hosts by arthropods, usually insects. A broader definition of vector-borne disease recognizes that other animals can serve in the role of infectious disease vector by harboring pathogens that cause disease only in susceptible populations. These unconventional âreservoirsâ include invertebrates other than arthropods (e.g., snails, in the case of schistosomiasis), rodents (which spread a variety of viral diseases, including hantavirus pulmonary syndrome [HPS]), and even humans (as noted earlier in the case of SOD). Mosquitoes, ticks, and biting flies spread viruses, bacteria, and parasites within and among a variety of warm-blooded hosts. Arthropod-borne viruses (arboviruses) comprise the largest class of vector-borne human pathogens; over 500 arboviruses have been described, 20 percent of which are known to cause human disease (Gray and Banerjee, 1999; Gubler, 1998; Jacobson, 2007). These include dengue and DHF, yellow fever, RVF, and WNV (one among a number of arboviral causes of encephalitis) (CDC, 2005b; Gubler, 1998; WHO, 2005). Vector-pathogen relationships are central to the epidemiology of many â Arthropods (members of the phylum Arthropoda) are invertebrates with jointed limbs, segmented bodies, and exoskeletons made of chitin. They include insects, spiders, crustaceans (e.g., shrimp, lobsters), and centipedes.
SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT 11 important plant diseases (Gergerich and Dolja, 2006; Purcell, 1982; Weintraub and Beanland, 2006). While only certain bacterial pathogens of plants require a vector for transmission, most plant viruses are spread from infected to uninfected plants via a plant-feeding arthropod, or nematode. Several important bacterial pathogens are delivered directly into the plantsâ vasculatureâeither the sugar- transporting phloem or water-transporting xylem networksâby insects that feed on plant vascular fluids (Fletcher and Wayadande, 2002). Workshop participants reflected upon the breadth and diversity of vector- borne diseases of humans, animals, and plants, but also sought to identify com- monalities within and among them and to highlight the unique challenges these diseases present to science, agriculture, public health, and domestic animal and wildlife health. These discussions focused on the vectorâs paramount importance to the ecology and epidemiology of vector-borne diseases, a role which compli- cates transmission patterns, but which also provides opportunities for disease control. Dynamics of Disease Transmission A standard graphic representation of the ecology of infectious disease fea- tures host, pathogen, and environment as circles intersecting in a common zone that defines permissive conditions for disease transmission (see Figure SA-3). The ecology and epidemiology of vector-borne diseases are particularly complex and often involve multiple disease cycles through alternate vectors and hosts, noted presenter Rodrigo Almeida of the University of California, Berkeley (see Chapter 1). His octagonal model, shown in Figure SA-4, depicts key influ- ences on vector-borne plant disease; a similar diagram could illustrate the web of relationships governing animal and human vector-borne diseases. The inherently complex ecologies of individual vector-borne diseases are discussed in several case studies collected in Chapter 2. A confluence of risk factors for a vector-borne disease may result in an outbreak, according to speaker Ned Hayes of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). An outbreak is a condition defined by an increase over background of disease incidence within a subpopulation of potential hosts. Epide- miologists investigating infectious disease outbreaks seek to determine the route of transmission; in the case of vector-borne diseases, their efforts necessarily focus on the presence, abundance, and ecology of the vector, which in turn may frequently be influenced by environmental conditions and human behavior. To illustrate these connections, Hayes described his experiences investigating three different vector-borne diseases in diverse settings: pneumonic plague in Ecuador, 1998; dengue at the Mexico-Texas border, 1999; and tularemia in Marthaâs Vine- yard, Massachusetts, 2000 (see Chapter 2 Overview). Approximately 80 percent of vector-borne disease transmission typically occurs among 20 percent of the host population (Smith et al., 2005; Woolhouse
12 VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES Host Pathogen Disease Environment Figure SA-3â The epidemiological triad. The familiar âepidemiological triadâ concept (host-pathogen-environment), as illustrated in the famous diagram of Snieszko (1974), neatly illustrates the complex interplay of factors that result in disease at the individual and population levels. The presence of a pathogen is a necessary but not sufficient cause of a particular disease. SA-3 SOURCE: Reprinted with the permission of Blackwell Publishing Ltd. from Snieszko (1974). Copyright 1974. Redrawn et al., 1997). The distribution of the incidence of vector-borne diseases is grossly disproportionate, with the overwhelming impact in developing countries located in tropical and subtropical areas (CIESIN, 2007). Using his work on dengue as an example, presenter Thomas Scott of the University of California, Davis, described the challengesâas well as the potential rewardsâof investigating the dynamic relationships between vector population density and risk for disease transmission. His findings, which are discussed in detail in Chapter 2 (see Scott and Morrison), as well as in a subsequent section of this summary, âLessons Learned: Case Stud- ies of Vector-Borne Diseases,â support the notion that heterogeneity in exposure to infection can be exploited to optimize vector control. He cautioned, however, that such efforts cannot succeed unless they are tailored to the local epidemiologi- cal and ecological conditions that influence disease transmission.
SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT 13 Disease Prevention Strategies Vector control is the primary means of preventing vector-borne disease. In the case of dengue, the goal of current public health policy is to prevent explosive epidemics by managing mosquito populationsâa difficult proposition, given the intricacies of mosquito ecology and population biology, Scott said (see Scott and Morrison in Chapter 2). Seeking a more efficient alternative, he and colleagues used a simulation model to identify two important sources of heterogeneity in dengue transmissionâage of infection and locationâin their study area, the impoverished city of Iquitos, Peru. Based on these findings, they developed a cost-efficient spray plan that targeted those areas of the city that would have the largest impact; the timely implementation of this plan by local authorities appears to have averted an epidemic. This result, and those of similar studies, imply that careful modeling of transmission patterns and vector life cycles may suggest FIGURE SA-4â Factors affecting plant disease outbreaks. SOURCE: Almeida (2007).
14 VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES targeted interventions directed toward specific host subpopulations and locations associated with high rates of vector-borne infections. Such an approach may be far more effective than broad-spectrum, non-specific, vector control efforts (Getis et al., 2003; Morrison et al., 2004; Vanwambeke et al., 2006). Recognition of shared features among vector-borne diseasesâsome broad, such as their ecological and epidemiological complexity; some narrow, such as a common vectorâis prompting the development of guidelines for outbreak prevention and management. The purpose of these guidelines, as envisioned by Scott, would not be to prescribe universal solutions, but rather to help public health officials choose, apply, monitor, and evaluate pathogen detection and disease prevention methods that fit their particular circumstances. This is the underlying premise of decision support systems (DSSs) that have recently been launched for malaria and dengue and which could potentially be extrapolated to other vector-borne diseases, according to speaker Barry Beaty of Colorado State University. The development of both DSSs is supported by the Innovative Vector Control Consortium (IVCC), a private-public partnership funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (see Eisen and Beaty in Chapter 2, and Beaty and Eisen in Chapter 3).10 Beaty, who has participated in efforts to establish the DSS for dengue, described it as a rationally designed, computer-based information system that serves three distinct purposes: to assist local and regional authorities in design- ing evidence-based vector control programs; to collect information on pesticide and insecticide resistance; and to provide proactive surveillance and modeling of dengue transmission. The malaria DSS, which is the predecessor and model for the dengue DSS, evolved from an interactive geographical information system (GIS) for insecticide resistance data that was developed to support malaria con- trol in Africa (Coleman et al., 2006). The malaria DSS currently encompasses information on health and intervention management, entomology, geography, and surveillance. Michael Coleman, a developer of the malaria DSS from the Medical Research Council of South Africa, focused on the crucial role of information on insecticide resistance in addressing malaria in his workshop presentation (see Coleman and Hemingway in Chapter 2 and the subsequent section, âLessons Learned: Case Studies of Vector-Borne Diseasesâ). By way of introduction, he offered a con- cise rationale for the development of DSSs: vector control is difficult, but it can be made easier by providing resources for quality control, informed decisions, and evidence-based policy. In addition, workshop participants discussed the importance of predictive epidemiological models and the critical need for quality information that emphasizes strong surveillance, diagnostics, and evidence-based conclusions that are needed to support accurate modeling and/or DSS. 10â See http://www.ivcc.com.
SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT 15 Factors in Vector-Borne Disease Emergence11 Disease vectors and their associated pathogens have coevolved in discrete geographic locations with climates, hosts, and habitats that favor transmission. The once limited geographic and host ranges of many vector-borne diseases are expanding, spurred largely by anthropogenic factors. Epidemics of malaria, dengue, and other formerly âcontainedâ vector-borne diseases are on the rise, as are outbreaks of previously unknown infections, such as Lyme disease. Work- shop presentations and discussions described the effects on various vector-borne diseases of a range of local, regional, and global phenomena and considered the potential use of this information to construct predictive epidemiological models. A Pandemic of Epidemics Gubler described a âdramatic increaseâ in vector-borne disease epidemics over the past 30 years and identified several factors that underlie this trend (see Chapter 1). Some recent epidemics have been associated with local surges in vector (particularly mosquito) density, but increased vector competenceâa measure of a given vectorâs intrinsic capacity to be infected by a pathogen, to replicate it, and to transmit itâhas also fueled outbreaks. Epidemics have arisen in naÃ¯ve host populations, whose opportunity for exposure to vector-borne diseases has increased with the globalization of travel and trade, as well as with declin- ing vector control. For viruses such as WNV and dengue that have recently expanded their geographic range, increased transmission has driven selection for strains with increased epidemic potential (see also Petersen in Chapter 2), while increased gene flow among vector populations has been associated with higher viral transmission rates. Climate change may also have contributed to the emer- gence of some vector-borne diseases, Gubler said, but it has not played a central role in the reemergence of malaria or dengue. Adopting a broader frame of reference, Gubler traced the origins of emerging infections to human population growth, social organization, and technology. He identified demographic changes such as urbanization, along with human impacts on the environment and modern transportation, as principal drivers of the reemer- gence of vector-borne disease (see Figure SA-5). In his contribution to Chapter 1, Gubler presents case studies of three reemergent arboviral diseasesâWest Nile viral fever, dengue and DHF, and yellow feverâthat illustrate the epidemio- logical effects of pristine populations and environmental change, which include animal and wildlife hosts. 11â Emerging infectious diseases are caused by pathogens that (1) have increased in incidence, geo- graphical or host range; (2) have altered capabilities for pathogenesis; (3) have newly evolved; or (4) have been discovered or newly recognized (Anderson et al., 2004; Daszak et al., 2000; IOM, 1992).
16 VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES Demographic Changes Global Technology climate change Socio-cultural organization Urbanization Agricultural, land use Habitat N H and animal husbandry alteration changes/practices A U T M U A REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE R N A L Speciesâ Ecological-evolutionary Dynamics E Opportunistic habitat expansion/ecological release C Vector (domestication) Feral vector/reservoir species E Wildlife/reservoir transport/encroachment Human encroachment O C S O Y Host-Pathogen Dynamics S Emergence Processes of âHost-Parasite Biologyâ Y S Host switching (host novelty) â¢ Breaching of pathogen persistence thresholds T Transmission amplification and genetic change (pathogen novelty) S E T M E Disease Emergence M ecosystem continuum FIGURE SA-5â The epidemiological effects of urbanization and environmental change. SOURCE: Adapted from Wilcox and Gubler (2005) with permission from Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine. SA-5 Trade and transportation have greatly contributed to the global spread of plant disease vectors, as described below, but as Almeida observes in his contri- bution to Chapter 1, many emerging infectious diseases of plantsâand indeed of humans and animals as wellâcan also be viewed as a byproduct of agriculture. âThe expansion of agricultural land and increased pesticide, irrigation, and fertil- izer use have been the major controllable inputs to increase crop yield,â he states, but these gains have come at a price. âAn increased human-natural vegetation interface may also result in new human and plant diseases, as pathogens may spill over from natural environments into new host organisms.â Reversing this trend through sustainable agricultural practices âmay reduce the impact of human pathogens from individual to population levels,â Almeida concludes.
SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT 17 Follow the Vector Where vectors go, diseases of both plants and animals follow. Norwegian rats, bearing plague-infected fleas from Asia, escaped from ships to deliver the Black Death to 14th century Europe.12 In California, the emergence of Pierceâs disease in grapes followed the introduction of a highly competent vector for an endemic pathogen (see Almeida in Chapter 1). The pathogen in this case, Xylella fastidiosa, is a bacterium with a wide host range; it had caused low lev- els of disease in California grapevines for over a century, where until recently it was transmitted by the blue-green sharpshooter (Graphocephala atropuntata) (Fletcher and Wayadande, 2002). After a new vector species, the glassy-winged sharpshooter (Homalodisca coagulata), was introduced to California from the southeastern United States in the late 1980s, Pierceâs disease emerged as a major threat to the stateâs viticultural industries. In his contribution to Chapter 1, Almeida describes a suite of characteristics that make the glassy-winged sharp- shooter a highly efficient vector for X. fastidiosa. Similarly, the introduction of an efficient Asian aphid vector to the Americas prompted the regional emergence of citrus tristeza virus, decades after the pathogen was known to be present in South America (Anderson et al., 2004). âThe jet airplane provides the ideal mechanism by which pathogens of all kinds move around the world in infected humans, host animals, and vectors,â Gubler writes (see Chapter 1). For example, he noted, until recently, the African and American tropics had long been populated with single dengue viral serotypes, and multiple serotypes had only been present in Southeast Asia since the arrival of Allied and Japanese forces in World War II. Today, multiple dengue serotypes circulate throughout the tropics, where their ease of recombination, as well as the continued evolution, selection, and introduction of new serotypes and strains (Rico-Hesse, 2007), drives the evolution of viral strains with increased epidemic potential. In addition, the vectors themselves can also be transported. The used tire trade has recently been linked to the appearance of chikungunya in Italy, infecting almost 270 people in Ravenna province (Gale, 2007). Land Use As F. A. Murphy (1998) has observed, when ecosystems are altered, disease problems arise (Murphy, 1998). The usual vertebrate hosts for most vector-borne pathogens that infect humans are wild or domestic animals; people may also become infected when they intrude on habitats where pathogens exist (Marin/ Sonoma Mosquito and Vector Control District, 2005). Similarly, many vector- borne diseases of wildlife have now spread to domestic animals. Bluetongue, for 12â Of course there are other exposure routes, including localized dynamicsâhuman fleas transmit- ting without rats and also human to human transmission via aerosolization leading to the pneumonic form of plague.
18 VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES example, was first described after it devastated Merino sheep from Europe that were introduced to South Africa in the late 18th century (FAO, 2007b; Verwoerd and Erasmus, 1994). It is therefore not surprising that the initial human occupa- tion of remote ecosystems has resulted in the emergence of vector-borne diseases, given the potential for such circumstances to introduce vector-borne pathogens to immunologically naÃ¯ve hosts and vectors. Moreover, this is a two-way street: as vector-borne diseases emerge from formerly isolated locations, vector-borne pathogens enter new territories along with their human and animal hosts (Murphy, 1998). Deforestation and Risk for Malaria As presenter Jonathan Patz, of the University of Wisconsin, Madison, has observed, land use changes such as deforestation, road construction, and dam building can trigger a cascade of secondary factors known to exacerbate infec- tious disease emergence, such as forest fragmentation, pathogen introduction, pollution, and human migration (see Patz and Olson in Chapter 1) (Patz et al., 2004).13 In a study they conducted along a road under construction in the Peru- vian Amazon, Patz and colleagues determined that as forest density increased, the mosquito biting rate declined, regardless of human population density (Vittor et al., 2006). The change in biting rate, in turn was linked to the species distribution of mosquitoes, such that in deforested sites, the biting rate of Anopheles darlingi, the primary local vector of the malarial parasite Plasmodium falciparum, was more than 278 times higher than for forested areas. Thus, Patz concluded, the change in land use in this area appeared to reduce mosquito biodiversity, increas- ing the numbers of the malaria vectors and thereby raising the risk of infection. His group is currently investigating possible ecological explanations for the shift in mosquito biodiversity they observed. Reforestation and Tick-Borne Disease According to Durland Fish of Yale University, the reversal of deforestation led to the emergence of Lyme disease in the northeastern United States (Barbour and Fish, 1993). Black-legged deer ticks (Ixodes scapularis) carry the bacte- rial pathogen Borrelia burgdorferi that causes Lyme disease. The adults of this tick species feed exclusively on white-tailed deer; only the nymphs feed on and transmit disease to humans. As long as the deer population of the eastern United States was limited by farming and hunting to a few small, isolated bands, Lyme diseaseâthough probably presentâwas unrecognized. The decline of agriculture 13â Human-induced land use changes are the primary drivers of a range of infectious disease out- breaks and emergence events and also modifiers of the transmission of endemic infections (Patz et al., 2000).
SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT 19 in this region and its subsequent reforestation over the last several decades, how- ever, provided an ideal habitat for increasing numbers of white-tailed deer and their attendant ticks. Thus Lyme disease, unknown in the United States before 1975, had by 1991 become the countryâs most common vector-borne disease (Barbour and Fish, 1993).14 In order to anticipate whether and where Lyme dis- ease might spread, Fish and colleagues developed a model based on climate and vegetation to predict the spatial distribution of I. scapularis in the United States (Brownstein et al., 2003). Their findings suggest that I. scapularis, and therefore Lyme disease, will continue to expand its range. In a survey study conducted on Block Island, Rhode Islandâwhere Lyme disease is endemicâ27 percent of residents reported receiving at least one tick bite per year (Burke et al., 2005). Fish noted that black-legged ticks serve as vectors for human pathogens other than B. burgdorferi; these include Anaplasma phagocytophilumâa bacterium that causes a flu-like illness called human granu- locytic anaplasmosisâand the protozoan Babesia microti, which causes babesio- sis, resembling malaria in its symptoms as well as its ability to contaminate blood that is used for transfusions. He added that this list of pathogens could potentially expand to include the Powassan arbovirus, which now is transmitted by an Ixo- des species that feeds almost exclusively on members of the mammalian family Mustelidae15 (e.g., skunks and fisher martins). Fish also observed that various non-native tick-borne arboviruses could potentially infect any of several hundred human-feeding species of ticks present in the United States. Weather, Climate, and Prediction Weather refers to short-term fluctuations in the atmosphere, whereas climate describes average weather over long periods of time (IOM, 2003: 64; NRC, 2001: 20). Climate tends to affect the geographic distribution of vector-borne diseases, while variations in weather such as temperature, rainfall, and humidity influence disease transmission dynamics, and thereby the timing and intensity of outbreaks (CIESIN Thematic Guide, 2007; Epstein et al., 1998; Gubler, 1998). Workshop participants considered both weather and climate effects on vector-borne dis- eases; they also discussed the development of models for outbreak prediction based on weather patterns and debated the usefulness of modeling the potential effects of climate change on disease transmission and spatial distribution. 14â Popular music provides an indicator of the impact of Lyme disease and its vector on the American public. Around the time this workshop was held, Brad Paisleyâs song, âTicks,â topped the Country and Western charts and monopolized airwaves with its (dare we say infectious?) chorus: âIâd like to see you out in the moonlight/ Iâd like to kiss you way back in the sticks/ Iâd like to walk you through a field of wildflowers/ And Iâd like to check you for ticks.â Source: http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/ bradpaisley/ticks.html. 15â Since naming conventions for family (class) names are inconsistent, we have chosen to italicize them throughout this report.
20 VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES TABLE SA-2 Studies Suggesting Links Between ENSO-Driven Variations in Temperature and Precipitation and Arthropod-Borne Infectious Diseases Disease Vector Murray Valley encephalitisa mosquito Bluetongueb midge Rift Valley feverc mosquito African horse sicknessd midges and mosquitoes Ross River fevere mosquito Denguef mosquito Malariag* mosquito Chikungunyah mosquito aNicholls(1986); bBaylis et al. (1999); cLinthicum et al. ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ dBaylis et al. (1999); (1999); eWoodruff et al. ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ fLinthicum et al. (2008); gBouma et al. ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ hChretien et al. (2007). (2002); (1996); *For malaria, links with ENSO may be noted only in certain locations. SOURCE: Linthicum (2007). Ocean Temperatures and Outbreaks Other than the seasons, the El NiÃ±o/Southern Oscillation (ENSO)16 is the primary source of global variation in temperature and rainfall (Patz et al., 2005; Ropelewski and Halpert, 1987). Decades of observation indicate that ENSO- associated weather anomalies influence outbreaks of a variety of vector-borne diseases (see Table SA-2, and also Linthicum et al. in Chapter 1) (Anyamba et al., 2006). Upon recognizing, some 25 years ago, that RVF outbreaks were associ- ated with periods of heavy rainfall, speaker Kenneth Linthicum and colleagues discovered through a series of field and laboratory studies that Aedes mosquito vectors of RVF lay virus-infected eggs in moist soil after heavy rains and flood- ing. These eggs can remain viable and infected in dry soil for extended periods of time, allowing the virus to persist for years in an area during dry years. When the next heavy rainfall event produces flooding of egg habitats infected Aedes mosquito populations are produced and can infect domestic animals. If imma- ture mosquito habitats remain flooded for a month or more secondary Culex mosquito vector populations will surge and become infected after feeding on viremic domestic animals, and potentially cause an epizootic and/or epidemic. With this information, the researchers developed an operational model capable of predicting RVF outbreaks based on ocean temperatures, rainfall anomalies, and vegetation characteristics. 16â El NiÃ±o refers to the large-scale ocean-atmosphere phenomenon linked to a periodic warming in sea surface temperatures across the central and east-central equatorial Pacific Ocean. ENSO also includes a cooling phase, known as La NiÃ±a. Changes in sea surface temperature patterns across the large area of the Pacific influence atmospheric circulation, and thereby precipitation and temperature patterns, throughout the global tropics (Anyamba et al., 2006).
SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT 21 After the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) issued an unscheduled El NiÃ±o advisory in September 2006, Linthicumâs team monitored the developing temperature and rainfall anomalies and soon issued alerts for a variety of diseases, including RVF in East Africa, based on its opera- tional model. When RVF activity was detected in Kenya in December 2006, a broad range of governmental, nongovernmental, and international agencies responded to the imminent epidemic that included a ban on animal slaughter, distribution of mosquito nets, insecticidal spraying of vector habitats, and domes- tic animal vaccination (CDC, 2007b). While the application of these measures limited the spread and severity of RVF in Kenyaâcompared to the 1997-1998 outbreakâthey did not prevent the recurrence of this disease. Speaker C. J. Peters of the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston observed, however, that had the many organizations responding to the 2006-2007 outbreak been better coordinated, their efforts would have been more effective. These events illustrate the potential uses of vector-borne disease forecast- ing in reducing the impact and limiting the spread of disease. Environmental models may one day be used to identify imminent outbreaks of specific vector- borne diseases by tracking and integrating factors critical to disease transmission, Linthicum said. âItâs important for prevention and preparation to know that we can forecast,â he concluded, âand then when we do forecast, itâs important that we mobilize.â Climate and the European Emergence of Bluetongue That many infectious diseases are strongly influenced by seasonal or anoma- lous changes in weather suggests that they would also be influenced by longer- term climatic changes (Patz et al., 2000). Climate can affect disease transmission through its influence on the replication and movement (and perhaps, the evolu- tion) of disease microbes and vectors; less directly, climate shapes ecology and human behavior, which in turn control pathogen behavior. Climatic warming appears to have precipitated the emergence of bluetongue in northern Europe, where it was identified for the first time in 2006 (see Osburn in Chapter 2) (Institute for Animal Health, 2007a). There it caused a series of localized outbreaks, infecting more than 2,000 sheep and cattle, of which 30 per- cent and 10 percent of cases, respectively, proved fatal. While the source of blue- tongue introduction into Europe remains unknown, recent increases in regional temperatures appear to favor its establishment and transmission (European Food Safety Authority, 2007). The summer of 2006 was the warmest on record in northern Europe, where temperatures have been logged since the late 17th cen- tury. As speaker Bennie Osburn of the University of California, Davis, pointed out, temperatures in northern Europe remained warm into early November in 2006, rendering the season not only unusually hot, but abnormally long as well. On June 13, 2007, a sentinel animal in Germany was announced to have
22 VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES displayed evidence of bluetongue infection during April. This was the first indi- cation that the virus strain responsible for the outbreak in northern Europe last year might have successfully overwintered in the region. As of late August 2007, clinical and subclinical cases of bluetongue have been reported in sheep and cattle on hundreds of farms in Germany, Belgium, France, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg (Institute for Animal Health, 2007b). According to the European Commission (2007), bluetongue has now been found in the United Kingdom, where hundreds of thousands of sheep and tens of thousands of cattleâall immunologically naÃ¯ve to the virusâwill present a vulnerable target for arriving midges (Institute for Animal Health, 2007a). Since April 2007, bluetongue has made its way across the English Channel to threaten livestock in the UK and most of northern Europe (see Figure SA-6). Because the few species of the midge Culicoides known to transmit blue- tongue lived in habitats with narrow temperature ranges, Osburn noted that the disease was long thought to be restricted to a band between 40Âº north and 35Âº south of the equator; any Culicoides blown north of this zone by the wind were not expected to reproduce, or perhaps even to survive. However, with the onset of a span of warm years stretching from 1998 to the present, the bluetongue vec- tor Culicoides imicola staged a surprising incursion into Greece (1999) and Italy (2002) and continued to move north; it became established as far north as 45Âº by 2005, and found at 52Âº in 2006. âBluetongue is emerging only . . . where expan- sion of the virusâs range appears to be the consequence of spread of competent insect vectors as the result of climate change,â conclude Osburn and co-author N. James MacLachlan (MacLachlan and Osburn, 2006). Global Climate Change and Vector-Borne Disease Emergence In their April 2007 report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) states that âobservational evidence from all continents and most oceans shows that many natural systems are being affected by regional climate changes, particularly temperature increasesâ (IPCC, 2007). The rate of warming of the earthâs surface over the past 50 years is nearly twice that over the past 100 years, and global average temperatures are projected to increase between 1.4 and 5.5Â°C by the end of this century (Solomon et al., 2007). Temperature increases are in turn associated with rising sea levels and increased extremes of the hydro- logic cycle (e.g., floods and droughts). The future effects of climate change and extreme weather events on disease emergence and resurgence, a subject of debate among researchers, was raised by workshop participants in a discussion that anticipated a detailed exploration of this topic at a December 2007 Forum public workshop entitled Global Climate Change and Extreme Weather Events: Understanding the Potential Contributions to the Emergence, Reemergence, and Spread of Infectious Disease. Because transmission patterns of arthropod-borne diseases are strongly influ-
FIGURE SA-6 Map of the distribution of bluetongue throughout Europe as of November 28, 2007. SOURCE: Copyright European Communities (2007). 23
24 VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES enced by changes in ambient temperature, some researchers predict that certain vector-borne diseases, including malaria, yellow fever, and dengue, will expand their range to higher elevations and latitudes in response to global warming (Harrus and Baneth, 2005). Brownstein et al. (2003) state that, based on their observations of the importance of climatic factors in the distribution of the black-legged tick, âclimate change may be involved in controlling the future distribution of the Lyme disease vectorâ (Brownstein et al., 2003). Of course, it is also possible for hot weather to have a detrimental effect on vector populations and pathogen survival, which could result in a reduction of certain vector-borne diseases in some regions (Sutherst, 2004). Patz remarked that biological systems can amplify the effects of small changes in temperature to dramatic effect, a relationship that has inspired the creation of climate-based models to predict disease range such as those described by Patz and Olson in Chapter 1. However, as several workshop participants argued, these models are severely limited by the fact that climate is not always the most important factor in defining the range of a vector-borne disease. In many cases, anthropogenic impacts on local ecology, such as deforestation and water use and storage, represent far more significant influences on the prevalence and range of vector-borne diseases (Reiter, 2001); in addition, human behavior can significantly limit disease prevalence (Reiter et al., 2003). âWe need to avoid the knee-jerk reaction that because bugs like warm tem- peratures, as temperatures go up, weâll have more bugs,â Hayes contended. He instead advocated the careful examination of the complex ecological relation- ships involved in vector-borne disease transmission dynamics (including those discussed by Patz and Uejio in Chapter 1). Toward that goal, Patz and coworkers are developing models that incorporate climate, geography, land use, and socio- economic factors to predict malaria risk. Lessons Learned: Case Studies of Vector-Borne Diseases Presentations of case studies of vector-borne diseases enabled workshop participants to explore the diverse and unique epidemiological challenges offered by dengue, WNV encephalitis, RVF, HPS, malaria, SOD, and bluetongue; these narratives are collected in Chapter 2. The following summary highlights examples of lessons learned from these cases that may be applicable to the surveillance, detection, prediction, control, and management of other vector-borne diseases. Surveillance and Detection As is true for all infectious diseases, the early detection of vector-borne dis- ease outbreaks is essential to their control. In Mexico, for example, the detection
SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT 25 of initial cases of dengue fever by syndromic surveillance17 alerts health workers to impose vector control measures immediately in order to mitigate an outbreak that will arrive within days, Beaty reported. Surveillance of pesticide resistance in vector populations informs the choice of control strategies; this is particularly true for malaria-carrying mosquitoes, which are rapidly developing resistance to exist- ing insecticides (see Coleman and Hemingway in Chapter 2). In order to improve surveillance for insecticide resistance and pathogen infection, and thereby malaria and dengue control, the IVCC is developing survey kits for vector testing in the field (see Eisen and Beaty in Chapter 2). Results from field surveys should greatly enhance the IVCCâs aforementioned DSSs for malaria and dengue. Even as field surveillance methods become faster, more accurate, and less costly, âlaboratory-based surveillance must be improved and maintained, not only in the United States but especially in developing countries where a lot of vector- borne diseases will reemerge,â Gubler observed. Ultimately, surveillance systems will enable global tracking of vector-borne and other infectious diseases. An example of such a surveillance system, called ArboNET, was created in response to the introduction of WNV to the United States in 1999 (see Petersen in Chapter 2 and Nasci in Chapter 3). It was the first national integrated human- animal disease surveillance system (there are now similar national [HHS, 2007] and international [WHO, 2007b] systems for influenza surveillance in birds and humans), according to speaker Lyle Petersen of the CDC, which administers the network. ArboNET is a real-time electronic reporting system that captures data on WNV in humans, dead birds, mosquitoes, horses, and live captive sentinel animals (chickens) (Gubler et al., 2000). ArboNET analyses of dataâwhich are collected and reported to CDC by health departments across the countryâhave revealed a number of significant trends; among them, that WNV activity moved across the country with migrating birds, a finding that anticipated an enzootic18 WNV outbreak that occurred in the southeastern United States in 2001 (CDC, 2001). Because human WNV epidem- ics have arisen rapidly under such conditions, a key goal of ArboNET is to better predict when human outbreaks will occur, Petersen said. Ecological surveillance offers some promise in this regard, he added, since outbreaks in birds and some- times other species (e.g., horses) tend to precede those in humansâbut only by a few weeks, so response must be rapid to prevent or mitigate human disease. An important, and under-recognized, impact of the emergence of WNV in the United States is the threat it poses to the nationâs blood supply. Within 3 years of its arrival, Petersen said, WNV had become the most common transfusion- 17â For a discussion of the strengths and challenges of infectious disease detection and surveillance, see the summary report of the Forumâs recent workshop, Global Infectious Disease Surveillance and Detection: Assessing the ChallengesâFinding Solutions (2007). 18â An enzootic disease is endemic (constantly present) in an animal population but usually affects only a small number of animals at a given time (MedicineNet.com, 2007).
26 VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES transmissible viral agent19 due to its high incidence of infection in donor popula- tions (Biggerstaff and Petersen, 2002; Pealer et al., 2003; Petersen, 2008). The cost of screening donated blood for WNV is approximately three times the current CDC budget for surveillance, prevention, and control of the virus (Custer et al., 2005; Korves et al., 2006; Petersen, 2008). By late July 2007âweeks away from the annual disease peak, in which 90 percent of cases typically occurânearly four times as many WNV cases had been reported as compared with the previous year (Grady, 2007), suggesting a need for increased vigilance on the part of the health care community. Outbreak Prediction Weather patterns and anomalies, and ENSO events in particular, are associ- ated with outbreaks of several arthropod-borne diseases, as previously noted (see âFactors in Emergence,â as well as Linthicum et al. in Chapter 1). Speaker Charles Calisher of Colorado State University discussed findings that suggest ENSO influences outbreaks of HPS, a rodent-borne viral disease of which the first human epidemic was reported in the spring of 1993 (see Calisher in Chapter 2). This outbreak, and a subsequent one in 1998, occurred in the Four Corners region of the continental United States, where the borders of Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona meet. Prior to each HPS outbreak, ENSO had brought a warm, wet winter to the region, which in turn prompted an abrupt rise in local populations of the deer mouse Peromyscus maniculatus, the vertebrate host of the Sin Nombre virus (SNV) that causes HPS (Calisher et al., 2005). Humans can always become infected with hantavirus, but risk of human exposure increases (and human cases increase) with the expansion of the deer mouse population, Calisher explained; thus, in order to understand the dynamics of SNV and thereby predict HPS out- breaks, he and colleagues monitored populations of deer miceâas well as of other rodents that share their environment, and which also carry other types of hantavirusesâat three ecologically diverse locations in the Four Corners region over nearly 6 years. The researchers identified both seasonal and interannual meteorological influences on the population dynamics of these diverse rodent species, but these factors did not entirely explain variations in rodent populations (Calisher et al., 2005). âMuch longer-term studies will be required to discern the effects of truly rare phenomena or to identify trends or cycles that have a multiyear periodicity, 19â The ranking of WNV as the most common transfusion-transmissible virus is not universally accepted. Hepatitis B and C, for example, are chronic infections, and thus pose an ongoing risk for transmission by all infected persons. WNVâalthough contracted by more people than hepatitis on an annual basisâis an acute infection, and thus poses only a relatively short-term transmission risk in a given individual.
SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT 27 such as the El NiÃ±o southern oscillation,â Calisher and colleagues wrote. The results of these studies, they observed, âhave important implications for those attempting to model population dynamics of rodent populations for purposes of predicting disease risk.â Vector Control The control of disease vector populations by habitat modification, a mainstay of early 20th century public health, was replaced by chemical methods when they became relatively inexpensive and widely available. Pesticides remain the pri- mary means to prevent or mitigate most vector-borne diseases, but resistance has increasingly limited the effectiveness of this strategy. Because insecticide resis- tance poses an especially significant barrier to controlling malaria and dengue, and because vector control measures could potentially reduce the incidence of additional vector-borne diseases, IVCC supports the development of novel insecticides and deployment methods as one of its foremost goals (see Eisen and Beaty in Chapter 2). Profits drive manufacturers to produce more innovative insecticides for golf courses than to protect people from vector-borne diseases, just as they encourage pharmaceutical companies to develop more drugs to combat aging and obesity than malaria. Thus, Beaty explained, IVCC attempts to help for-profit companies market insecticides that they have already discovered that show promise for pub- lic health applications, but which may have been dropped from development due to their unsuitability for commercial purposes. An insecticide that breaks down in ultraviolet light would not be effective for spraying fields, for example, but if incorporated into bed-nets and curtains, it might control mosquitoes inside houses and other buildings. Several such novel products in IVCCâs pipeline will be made available to developing countries upon their approval, Beaty said. âOur focus [at IVCC] is the control of vectors in and around the house,â he explained, because most dengue virus mosquito-borne human disease transmis- sions occur indoors. In addition to supporting the development of inexpensive domestic products such as pyrethroid-impregnated bamboo curtains and mats, IVCC encourages their combined use in an approach known as casa segura (âsafe houseâ). Scott also advocated the casa segura strategy for vector control and advised that market analyses of both households and ministries of health be conducted in order to guide product development. Emphasis on controlling mosquitoes indoors was one of several targeted vector control strategies discussed by workshop participants. As previously men- tioned, Scott and coworkers took advantage of spatial and temporal heterogene- ities in dengue-carrying mosquito populations in order to increase the efficiency of control efforts (see âHallmarks of Vector-Borne Disease,â as well as Chapter 2). Based on a simulation model designed to predict the effect of dengue vaccine in various outbreak scenarios, he suggested that combining immunization (should
28 VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES an effective vaccine be developed) with vector control would be advantageous. By contrast, controlling dengue solely through immunization could cause signifi- cant problems, such as more severe disease following infection with heterotypic strains of dengue, or perhaps greater rates of morbidity among older persons with waning immunity. âVector control, in essence, slows the force of infection and makes the delivery of vaccine more effective,â Scott concluded. âTherefore an integrated program with vector reduction and immunization will more effectively prevent epidemic dengue and is more sustainable than either strategy alone.â However, he noted, implementing such programs will take âa change in mind set to start to get people who are working on vaccines to think about working together with people who are working on vector control.â Multidisciplinary Research and Management Research on infectious diseases must often be conducted in the midst of epidemics and in concert with management efforts. This challenging process was described by speaker David Rizzo of the University of California, Davis, who has worked to understand and mitigate the effects of SOD in California since shortly after its emergence there in the mid-1990s (see also Chapter 2 Overview). Caused by the fungus-like water mold Phytopthora ramorum, SOD kills several oak species and causes nonfatal leaf disease in many other plants, including rhododendrons and California bay laurel (California Oak Mortality Task Force, 2004; Faden, 2004). P. ramorum thrives in the cool, wet climate of California coastal forestsâwhere it has caused substantial mortality in tanoak and several oak speciesâand has also been detected in the United Kingdom and a number of other European countries. SOD is not, strictly speaking, a vector-borne disease because it is not transmitted by arthropods; instead, humans (in the form of hik- ers, mountain bikers, and equestrians, who unknowingly carry P. ramorum spores on their clothes, shoes, equipment, and companion animals) appear to be the main vehicle for spreading this pathogen over long distances. Because the SOD pathogen was only identified in 2000, researchers are still learning about its disease cycle and transmission dynamics. As they probe the ecological context of SOD and refine epidemiological models, Rizzo and col- leagues are also working to manage the disease in natural ecosystems as well as in the nursery trade. To target monitoring efforts, they developed risk models based on findings from laboratory studies of the pathogenâs sporulation behavior, combined with data on the distribution of host species and climate. Areas identi- fied by the models are investigated by various methods, including aerial imaging, plot-based monitoring, and sampling streams to determine whether the pathogen is present within a watershed. If the pathogen is detected at a sufficiently early stage, the affected vegetation may be clear-cut and burned in hopes of eradicating the disease. While this approach has not yet proven completely successful, Rizzo
SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT 29 observed, it has significantly limited the spread of SOD. For areas where the pathogen is established, the researchers attempt to develop management schemes that avoid deleterious ecological consequences. In all of their efforts, Rizzo and colleagues collaborate with a multidis- ciplinary team, the California Oak Mortality Task Force.20 This group brings together plant biologists, anthropologists, entomologists, and ecologists from research and educational institutions, as well as representatives from interested public agencies, nonprofit organizations, and private interests (e.g., the nursery trade). The task force coordinates research, management, monitoring, and public policy efforts with regard to oak mortality and, as Rizzo noted, educates its broad constituency on developments in the understanding and management of SOD. Needs and Opportunities Insofar as vector-borne diseases represent the more general class of emerging infectious diseases, they entail a host of needs and opportunities all too familiar to workshop participants, and well characterized in numerous reviews and reports (Karesh and Cook, 2005; NRC, 2005), including the founding documents of the Forum on Microbial Threats, Emerging Infections: Microbial Threats to Health in the United States (1992) and Microbial Threats to Health: Emergence, Detection, and Response (2003). Briefly, these challenges include the following: â¢ Integration of research efforts and findings on infectious diseases in humans, livestock, and wild animals, as well as in crop and wild plants â¢ Training, research, and laboratory- and field-based surveillance in coun- tries where diseases are likely to emerge (and especially in Asia, the source of many recently emerged zoonoses) â¢ More and better trained personnel, capacity, and tools for disease detec- tion, diagnosis, and response â¢ Need for improved vaccines, drugs, and diagnostics â¢ Outbreak response plans that feature well-defined triggers for implementation â¢ Containment of outbreaks as local public health events â¢ Measures to limit the movement of pathogens and vectors via global transportation â¢ Risk communication that provides timely, reliable information to the public in the event of an outbreak, thereby preventing panic â¢ Political will sufficient to deliver economic support for these measures Vector-borne diseases cast a singular emphasis on some of the aforemen- tioned issues and present unique considerations for research and control (see Beaty and Eisen in Chapter 3). The following summary of a very wide-ranging 20â See http://nature.berkeley.edu/comtf.
30 VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES discussion therefore highlights specific challenges that originate in the definitive role of the vector in the ecology and epidemiology of this important class of human, animal, and plant infectious diseases. Integrating Disciplines and Systems In the course of a panel discussion on integrating strategies for surveillance, diagnosis, and response, the four discussantsâwho represented the CDC, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease of the National Institutes of Health (NIAID/NIH), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)â emphasized the importance of multidisciplinary efforts toward understanding and addressing individual vector-borne diseases, as well as groups of diseases that share a common vector (see Chapter 3). Roger Nasci, chief of the Arbo- viral Diseases Branch at CDCâs Division of Vector-Borne Infectious Diseases, described multidisciplinary teams as âessentialâ to addressing international health problems, but also noted the difficulties in coordinating such teams (e.g., the previously discussed response to RVF in Kenya). Panelists described existing multidisciplinary programs of limited scope, such as CDC field teams that respond to vector-borne outbreaks and research groups that address West Nile encephalitis and plague (see Nasci in Chapter 3), and advocated a wider adoption of this approach. âWe have to provide an environ- ment to foster [multidisciplinarity] in training, as well as in research,â said David Morens of NIAID; for example, by changing the current paradigm of highly com- partmentalized Ph.D. programs and instead emphasizing interdisciplinary studies in global health (see Chapter 3) (Hotez, 2004). Similarly, Forum member Lonnie King observed that working at the interface of different scientific cultures is a learned skill that needs to be taught. Panelist Sherrilyn Wainwright (see Chapter 3), a veterinary epidemiologist with the USDA currently working at Colorado State University, suggested that involvement in multidisciplinary research trains scientists to better integrate their distinct cultures in other circumstances, such as outbreak response. Participants in the ensuing open discussion urged the expansion of multidis- ciplinary research and response and encouraged the development of âtransdisci- plinaryâ programs that integrate diverse disciplines in a meaningful fashion, rather than simply involving representatives of different fields. Some also advocated expanding the range of disciplines brought to bear on vector-borne diseases beyond public health, ecology, and the biomedical sciences, to include professionals such as urban planners, hydrologists, ecologists, and engineers. ArboNET, a pioneer among integration disease surveillance systems, pro- vides a model for the collection and organization of information on zoonotic diseases, according to Nasci (see Chapter 3, Petersen in Chapter 2, and previous discussion in âLessons Learned: Case Studies of Vector-Borne Diseasesâ). This environmental surveillance program could be harnessed for broader use, as is
SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT 31 currently being explored in an experimental ArboNET/plague surveillance system designed to test models that could provide early warning of plague outbreaks. In addition to gathering surveillance on vector-borne diseases, it would be use- ful to integrate and disseminate data that have already been accumulated, King observed, because to a large extent, âwe donât know what we know.â For example, as Nasci pointed out, data from the USDAâs equine arbovirus monitoring program could be integrated into ArboNET. Knowledge Gaps The need to understand better the ecology of vector-borne diseases, a central theme of workshop discussions (see Fish in Chapter 1), was identified as critical to a host of purposes: â¢ Targeting surveillance and control efforts â¢ Minimizing surveillance costs over large areas â¢ Forecasting risk and anticipating expansion of disease range (including globalization) â¢ Designing containment or exclusion strategies In addition, basic questions remain to be answered about most important vector-borne diseases (see Chapter 2 and Fish in Chapter 1). The following infor- mation was deemed essential by workshop presenters: â¢ Quantitative descriptions of endemic and epidemic disease cycles in all hosts â¢ Measurements of disease transmission potential by known and potential vectors â¢ Timing, distribution, and abundance of disease-competent vectors â¢ Mechanisms of host infection â¢ Mechanisms of pathogenesis â¢ Mechanisms of transovarial transmission â¢ Spatial and temporal distributions of vectors and environmental condi- tions in settings at risk for disease emergence Field studies of vectors are crucial to answering many of these questions; however, as several participants who engage in such research attested, this work is not well funded. For example, Fish has written, âSome research is being done on methods for reducing the risk of Lyme disease through tick population sup- pression and other field intervention strategies, but this effort has been meager compared to that already invested in vaccines [that were withdrawn from the mar- ket]. One can only imagine what impact [the money invested in developing the discontinued Lyme vaccine, conservatively estimated at $200 million] would have
32 VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES [had] upon research to answer some basic questions about tick ecology, such as what limits the geographic distribution of Lyme disease vectorsâ (Fish, 2001a). Obstacles to Scientific Education and Training The introduction of WNV into the United States resulted in an unprecedented demand for expertise in mosquito surveillance and control operations throughout most of the country, Fish observed in a 2001 editorial (Fish, 2001b). However, there is a strong perception among those in the field thatâafter three decades of decline in mosquito-borne disease in the United States, the dismantling of train- ing programs, and a loss of employment opportunities for vector biologists and medical entomologistsâpositions went unfilled, and few academic institutions were capable of providing such training. The CDC briefly financed training in medical entomology at four institutions with the new funds provided to it for WNV, but that funding has since been cut, and the programs are slated for ter- mination (Fish, 2007). Panelist Adriana Costero, Vector Biology Program Officer at NIAID/NIH, described the Instituteâs programs, which fund basic and translational research and training in the United States and in disease-endemic countries (see Chap- ter 3). However, several participants expressed discouragement at the lack of research funding targeted specifically for vector ecology and the resulting dearth of expertiseâas well as the persistence of knowledge gapsâin this field. Various causes were postulated for this deficit, from the broad (funding trends that favor solutions to well-defined problems, preferably posed by the âdisease du jour,â over descriptive studies of infectious diseases) to the specific (the organization of NIH study sections [Spielman, 2003]). However, as Forum member Stephen Morse observed, every scientific specialty complains of insufficient funding, a symptom of a scientific establishment focused on specialized research programs that compete for limited funds. Multidisciplinary approaches offer a solution to this dilemma by creating unified communities, synergies of expertise, and economies of scale commensu- rate with problems as complex and wide-ranging as the prevention and mitigation of vector-borne disease. Such efforts, it was suggested, might be most expedi- ently funded if they capitalized on the âdisease du jour,â and also if they offered near-term benefits for public health (e.g., how best to use existing pesticides in disease control and prevention). Barriers to Implementation There is a general lack of infrastructure for implementing vector-borne disease interventions in most settings, Morens observed, whether they are cit- ies in the United Statesâas revealed by the introduction of Lyme diseaseâor impoverished countries where vector-borne diseases cause major morbidity and
SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT 33 mortality. âMany folks were shocked to discover [upon the arrival of WNV] that there were state health departments in the United States that had no vector people anymore,â he said. The domestic situation has improved somewhat, he added, but the same cannot be said for developing countries, where infrastructures for infec- tious disease control lack far more than vector biologists. Moreover, legal and bureaucratic barriers increasingly impede international research on and response to vector-borne disease. Because many vector-borne infectious agents have been classified as âSelect Agents,â they are subject to rules associated with the USA Patriot Act21 that substantially limit the ability of foreign scientists to work on U.S.-funded research efforts even within their own countries. In addition, U.S. air transportation regulations and bans on the international transport of biological specimens by nations experiencing disease outbreaks slow and sometimes stop the vital exchange of biological materials (see Morens in Chapter 3). Meanwhile, 8 years after the introduction of WNV, the U.S. response to the threat of vector-borne disease is fading, as illustrated by recent funding reductions that will shrink the CDCâs WNV program by nearly 50 percent over the next 2 years (Fish, 2007). âThese cuts will force big reductions in federal support for the surveillance and control of WNV in 57 state and local jurisdictions,â Fish noted in an editorial in the May 27, 2007, New York Times: âWhile federal financing for biosecurity and public health preparedness has . . . become a priority, in fact little has been learned from the WNV experience,â he continued. WNV is certainly not the last mosquito-borne virus that will invade the United States, Fish predicted, but without sustained federal support for surveillance and control of such dis- eases, âwe will again be vulnerable to threats, accidental or not, and incapable of prompt action that could curb or prevent epidemics.â Reflecting on this situation, Forum member George Korch wondered aloud how governments and industry might be convinced to invest in addressing vector- borne diseases. âWhat is the product that medical entomology and infectious disease studies provide?â he inquired. A major common goal for countries, or cultures, is to have a productive and healthy workforce that translates into the well-being of the entire community, he suggested. Thus, in order to convince the pharmaceutical industry, as well as governments, that vector-borne diseases are worth solving, researchers will need to provide evidence of economic benefit and opportunities for strategic investment. Even training is a short-term solution unless it fits into a grand matrix of vector-borne disease control, Korch said. 21â âUniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001.â The USA PATRIOT Act (Patriot Act), Public Law 107-56, enacted by Congress and signed by the President on October 26, 2001, provides expanded law enforcement authorities to enhance the federal governmentâs efforts to detect and deter acts of terrorism in the United States or against United Statesâ interests abroad (DoJ/OIG, 2003).
34 VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES Conclusions While acknowledging the global burden of vector-borne diseases, as well as the daunting obstacles to much-needed research on their control, prevention, and treatment, Forum chairman Fred Sparling also expressed optimism and excite- ment in the pursuit of solutions. Recalling that the final recommendation in the 2003 report Microbial Threats to Health advocated the creation of interdisciplin- ary centers for infectious disease research, he applauded the development of such a centerâalbeit a âvirtualâ oneâat Colorado State University, in close associa- tion with the nearby CDC Division of Vector-Borne Infectious Diseases. 22 Other universities (e.g., Vanderbilt, Duke, Johns Hopkins, and the University of Washington, Seattle23) are creating centers for global health. These initiatives are driven, in large part, by the promise of funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and other public and private sources, Sparling said. In such a climate, and in such interdisciplinary venues, he encouraged vector biologists to look for opportunities and synergies and, thereby, support for their field. Like vector-borne diseases themselves, he concluded, research in this area is rife with thorny problems, but also abundant with opportunity. REFERENCES Almeida, R. 2007. Vector-borne plant diseases: factors driving the emergence and spread of patho- gens. Presentation at the Forum on Microbial Threats workshop entitled âVector-borne diseases: Understanding the environmental, human health, and ecological connections,â June 19-20, 2007, Ft. Collins, CO. Anderson, P. K., A. A. Cunningham, N. G. Patel, F. J. Morales, P. R. Epstein, and P. Daszak. 2004. Emerging infectious diseases of plants: pathogen pollution, climate change and agrotechnology drivers. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 19(10):535-544. Anyamba, A., J.-P. Chretien, J. Small, C. J. Tucker, and K. J. Linthicum. 2006. Developing global climate anomalies suggest potential disease risks for 2006-2007. International Journal of Health Geographics 5:60. Barbour, A. G., and D. Fish. 1993. The biological and social phenomenon of Lyme disease. Science 260(5114):1610-1616. Bar-Joseph, M., R. Marcus, and R. F. Lee. 1989. The continuous challenge of citrus tristeza virus control. Annual Review of Phytopathology 27(1):291-316. Baylis, M., P. Mellor, and R. Meiswinkel. 1999. Horse sickness and ENSO in South Africa. Nature ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ 397(6720):574. Biggerstaff, B. J., and L. R. Petersen. 2002. Estimated risk of West Nile virus transmission through blood transfusion during an epidemic in Queens, New York City. Transfusion 42(8):1019-1026. 22â Included in this consortium are U.S. Department of Agriculture/Agriculture Research Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, and the National Wildlife Research Center, all of which are co-located in and around Ft. Collins, Colorado, for the study of vector-borne diseases. 23â Although only a few are listed, there are many universities with, or in the process of creating, such centers.
SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT 35 Bouma, M., C. Dye, and J. van der Kaay. 1996. ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ Falciparum malaria and climate change in the Northwest Frontier Province of Pakistan. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 55(2):131-137. Bowers, J. H., B. A. Bailey, P. K. Hebbar, S. Sanogo, and R. D. Lumsden. 2001. The impact of plant diseases on world chocolate production. Plant Health Progress, http://www.apsnet.org/online/ feature/cacao/ (accessed October 19, 2007). Breman, J. G. 2001. The ears of the hippopotamus: manifestations, determinants, and estimates of the malaria burden. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 64(Suppl 1-2):1-11. Brownstein, J. S., T. R. Holford, and D. Fish. 2003. A climate-based model predicts the spatial distri- bution of the Lyme disease vector Ixodes scapularis in the United States. Environmental Health Perspectives 111(9):1152-1157. Burke, G. S., S. K. Wikel, A. Spielman, S. R. Telford, K. McKay, P. J. Krause, and the Tick-borne Infection Study Group. 2005. Hypersensitivity to ticks and Lyme disease risk. Emerging Infec- tious Diseases 11(1):36-41. California Oak Mortality Task Force. 2004. History and background, http://nature.berkeley.edu/comtf/ html/history___background.html (accessed October 19, 2007). Calisher, C. H., J. N. Mills, W. P. Sweeney, J. J. Root, S. A. Reeder, E. S. Jentes, K. Wagoner, and B. J. Beaty. 2005. Population dynamics of a diverse rodent assemblage in mixed grass-shrub habitat, southeastern Colorado, 1995-2005. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 41(1):12-28. CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). 2001. West Nile virus activityâeastern United States, 2001. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 50(29):617-619. CDC. 2005a. CDC plague home page, http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/plague/ (accessed October 18, 2007). CDC. 2005b. Information on arboviral encephalides, http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/arbor/arbdet. ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ htm (accessed October 19, 2007). CDC. 2007a. Questions and answers about Rift Valley fever, http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvrd/spb/ mnpages/dispages/rvf/rvf_qa.htm (accessed October 19, 2007). CDC. 2007b. Rift Valley fever outbreakâKenya, November 2006âJanuary 2007. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 56(4):73-76. Center for Science and Environment. 1999. CSE draft dossier: health and environment, http://www. cseindia.org/programme/health/pdf/conf2006/amalaria.pdf (accessed November 28, 2007). Chretien, J. P., A. Anyamba, S. A. Bedno, R. F. Breiman, R. Sang, K. Sergon, A. M. Powers, C. O. Onyango, J. Small, C. J. Tucker, and K. J. Linthicum. 2007. Drought-associated chi- kungunya emergence along coastal East Africa. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 76(3):405-407. Chung, K. R., and R. H. Brlansky. 2006. Citrus diseases exotic to Florida: citrus tristeza virus stem ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ pitting (CTV-SP). ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ Fact Sheet PP-227, Plant Pathology Department, Florida Cooperative Exten- sion Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, http://edis.ifas. ufl.edu/PP149 (accessed October 18, 2007). CIESIN (Center for International Earth Science Information Network). 2007. Changes in the in- cidence of vector-borne diseases attributable to climate change, http://www.ciesin.columbia. edu/TG/HH/veclev2.html (accessed October 18, 2007). Coleman, M., B. Sharp, I. Seocharan, and J. Hemingway. 2006. Developing an evidence-based deci- sion support system for rational insecticide choice in the control of African malaria vectors. Journal of Medical Entomology 43(4):663-668. Current Results. 2007. Effects of bark beetles still evident after 65 years, http://www.currentresults. com/Forests/Mountain-Pine-Beetle/effects.php (accessed October 19, 2007). Curtis, C. F. 2000. Appropriate technology and why it is needed. In Appropriate technology in vector control, edited by C. F. Curtis. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. Pp. 1-3. Custer, B., M. P. Busch, A. A. Marfin, and L. R. Petersen. 2005. The cost-effectiveness of screening the U.S. blood supply for West Nile virus. Annals of Internal Medicine 143(7):486-492.
36 VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES Daszak, P., A. A. Cunningham, and A. D. Hyatt. 2000. Emerging infectious diseases of wildlifeâ threats to biodiversity and human health. Science 287(5452):443-449. DoJ/OIG (Department of Justice/Office of the Inspector General). 2003. Report to Congress on implementation of Section 1001 of the USA PATRIOT Act, http://fl1.findlaw.com/news.findlaw. com/hdocs/docs/doj/oig71703patactrpt.pdf (accessed October 19, 2007). Dykstra, P. R., and T. Braumandl. 2006. Historic influence of the mountain pine beetle on stand dy- namics in Canadaâs Rocky Mountain parks. Mountain Pine Beetle Initiative Working Paper 15. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Pacific Forestry Centre, Victoria, BC. Epstein, P. R., H. F. Diaz, S. Elias, G. Grabherr, N. E. Graham, W. J. M. Martens, E. Mosley- Thompson, and J. Susskind. 1998. Biological and physical signs of climate change: focus on mosquito-borne diseases. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 79(3):409-417. European Communities. 2007. Bluetongue: restriction zones established by the member states, http:// ec.europa.eu/food/animal/diseases/controlmeasures/bluetongue_en.htm (accessed November 29, 2007). European Food Safety Authority. 2007. Report on the epidemiological analysis of the 2006 bluetongue virus serotype 8 epidemic in north-western Europe, http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/in_focus/ bluetongue/bluetongue_report_s8.html (accessed October 19, 2007). Faden, M. 2004 (August 10). Hikers help spread sudden oak death. New Scientist, http://www. newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6257 (accessed October 19, 2007). FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). 2007a. PAAT the disease, http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/ programmes/en/paat/disease.html (accessed October 19, 2007). FAO. 2007b. Animal health disease cards: bluetongue, http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/subjects/en/ health/diseases-cards/bluetongue.html (accessed October 19, 2007). Fish, D. 2001a. Vaccines versus vectors. Vector Borne and Zoonotic Diseases 1(4):249-250. Fish, D. 2001b. Wanted: medical entomologist. Vector Borne and Zoonotic Diseases 1(2):89. Fish, D. 2007 (May 27). Back to bite us. New York Times. Fletcher, J., and A. Wayadande. 2002. Fastidious vascular-colonizing bacteria. The Plant Health In- structor, http://www.apsnet.org/education/IntroPlantPath/PathogenGroups/fastidious/ (accessed October 19, 2007). Gale, J. 2007. Africa germ, Asian insect, meet in Italy, spur disease (update 1), http://www.bloomberg. com/apps/news?pid=email_en&refer=exclusive&sid=aOphGY2cIOhQ (accessed November 27, 2007). Gergerich, R. C., and V. V. Dolja. 2006. Introduction to plant viruses, the invisible foe. The Plant Health Instructor, http://www.apsnet.org/education/IntroPlantPath/PathogenGroups/ plantViruses/default.htm#top (accessed October 19, 2007). Getis, A., A. C. Morrison, K. Gray, and T. W. Scott. 2003. Characteristics of the spatial pattern of the dengue vector, Aedes aegypti, in Iquitos, Peru. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 69(5):494-505. Grady, D. 2007 (July 26). Rise in cases of West Nile may portend an epidemic. New York Times. Gray, S. M., and N. Banerjee. 1999. Mechanisms of arthropod transmission of plant and animal viruses. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews 63(1):128-148. Gubler, D. J. 1998. Resurgent vector-borne diseases as a global health problem. Emerging Infectious Diseases 4(3):442-450. Gubler, D. J. 2001. Human arbovirus infections worldwide. Annals of the New York Academy of Sci- ences 951:13-24. Gubler, D. J. 2007. The continuing spread of West Nile virus in the western hemisphere. Clinical Infectious Diseases 45(8):1039-1046. Gubler, D. J., G. L. Campbell, R. Nasci, N. Komar, L. Petersen, and J. T. Roehrig. 2000. ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ West Nile virus in the United States: guidelines for detection, prevention, and control. Viral Immunology 13(4):469-475.
SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT 37 Hardy Diagnostics. 2007. Microglossary: a lexicon of microbiology terms and abbreviations, http:// www.hardydiagnostics.com/Glossary-F.html (accessed November 20, 2007). Harrus, S., and G. Baneth. 2005. Drivers for the emergence and reemergence of vector-borne proto- zoal and bacterial diseases. International Journal of Parasitology 35(11-12):1309-1318. HHS (Department of Health and Human Services). 2006. Principles of epidemiology in public health practice, 3rd ed., Atlanta, GA, http://www.cdc.gov/training/products/ss1000/ss1000-ol.pdf (ac- cessed September 7, 2007). HHS. 2007. Monitoring outbreaks, http://www.pandemicflu.gov/outbreaks/index.html#ussurv (ac- cessed October 19, 2007). Hotez, P. J. 2004. Should we establish a North American school of global health sciences? American Journal of the Medical Sciences 328(2):71-77. Hull, R. 2002. Matthewâs plant virology, 4th ed. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Institute for Animal Health. 2007a. Bluetongue disease: meteorological aspects for its potential spread from continental Europe to the UK this year, http://www.iah.bbsrc.ac.uk/John_Gloster_3apr07. htm (accessed October 19, 2007). Institute for Animal Health. 2007b. 2007 introduction of bluetongue to the UK, http://www.iah.bbsrc. ac.uk/bluetongue/ (accessed October 19, 2007). IOM (Institute of Medicine). 1992. Emerging infections: microbial threats to health in the United States. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. IOM. 2003. Microbial threats to health: emergence, detection, and response. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. P. 209. IOM. 2007. Global infectious disease surveillance and detection: assessing the challengesâfinding solutions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2007. Summary for policymakers. In Climate change 2007: climate change impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by M. L. Parry, O. F. Canziani, J. P. Palutikof, P. J. van der Linden, and C. E. Hanson. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 7-22, http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM6avr07.pdf (accessed October 19, 2007). Jacobson, A. 2007. Emerging and re-emerging viruses: an essay, http://www.tulane.edu/~dmsander/ WWW/335/Emerging1.html#ARBO (accessed October 19, 2007). Karesh, W. B., and R. A. Cook. 2005. The human-animal link. Foreign Affairs 84(4):38-50. Kay, B., and V. S. Nam. 2005. New strategy against Aedes aegypti in Vietnam. Lancet 365(9459): 613-617. Korves, C. T., S. J. Goldie, and M. B. Murray. 2006. Blood screening for West Nile virus: the cost-effectiveness of a real-time, trigger-based strategy. Clinical Infectious Diseases 43(4): 490-493. Linthicum, K. 2007. Ecology of diseaseâthe intersection of human and animal health. Presentation at the Forum on Microbial Threats workshop entitled âVector-borne diseases: understanding the environmental, human health, and ecological connections,â June 19-20, 2007, Ft. Collins, CO. Linthicum, K. J., A. Anyamba, C. J. Tucker, P. W. Kelley, M. F. Myers, and C. J. Peters. 1999. Climate and satellite indicators to forecast Rift Valley fever epidemics in Kenya. Science 285(5426):397-400. Linthicum, K. J., S. C. Britch, A. Anyamba, J. Small, C. J. Tucker, J.-P. Chretien, and R. Sithiprasasna. 2008. Ecology of disease: the intersection of human and animal health. In Institute of Medicine, Vector-borne diseases: understanding the environmental, human health, and ecological connec- tions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. MacLachlan, N. J., and B. I. Osburn. 2006. Impact of bluetongue virus infection on the international movement and trade of ruminants. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 228(9):1346-1349.
38 VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES Marin/Sonoma Mosquito and Vector Control District. 2005. Arthropods as carriers of disease, http:// www.msmosquito.com/diseases.html (accessed October 19, 2007). Mason, M. 2007 (July 30). Dengue fever rages across Asia. Associated Press, http://abcnews.go.com/ Health/wireStory?id=3427823 (accessed October 18, 2007). MedicineNet.com. 2007. Definition of enzootic, http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp? articlekey=26698 (accessed October 19, 2007). Monath, T. P. 2001. Yellow fever: an update. Lancet Infectious Disease 1(1):11-20. Montana State University Entomology Group. 2007. Glossary, http://entomology.montana.edu/ historybug/glossary.htm#sectS (accessed November 21, 2007). Morrison, A. C., K. Gray, A. Getis, H. Astete, M. Sihuincha, D. Focks, D. Watts, J. D. Stancil, J. G. Olson, P. Blair, and T. W. Scott. 2004. Temporal and geographic patterns of Aedes aegypti (Dip- tera: Culicidae) production in Iquitos, Peru. Journal of Medical Entomology 41(6):1123-1142. Murphy, F. A. 1998. Emerging zoonoses. Emerging Infectious Diseases 4(3):429-435. Nchinda, T. C. 1998. Malaria: a reemerging disease in Africa. Emerging Infectious Diseases 4(3):398-403. Nicholls, N. 1986. A method for predicting Murray Valley encephalitis in southeast Australia using the southern oscillation. Australian Journal of Experimental Biology and Medical Science 64(Pt. 6):587-594. NRC (National Research Council). 2001. Under the weather: climate, ecosystems, and infectious disease. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. NRC. 2004. California agricultural research priorities: Pierceâs disease. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. NRC. 2005. Animal health at the crossroads: preventing, detecting, and diagnosing animal diseases. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Ooi, E. E., K. T. Goh, and D. J. Gubler. 2006. Dengue prevention and 35 years of vector control in Singapore. Emerging Infectious Diseases 12(6):887-893. Osburn, B. 2007. Vector-borne zoonotic diseases and their ecological and economic implicationsâ bluetongue disease in Europe. Presentation at the Forum on Microbial Threats workshop entitled âVector-borne diseases: Understanding the environmental, human health, and ecological con- nections,â June 19-20, 2007, Ft. Collins, CO. Patz, J. A., T. K. Graczyk, N. Geller, and A. Y. Vittor. 2000. Effects of environmental change on emerging parasitic diseases. International Journal for Parasitology 30(12-13):1395-1405. Patz, J. A., P. Daszak, G. M. Tabor, A. A. Aguirre, M. Pearl, J. Epstein, N. D. Wolfe, A. M. Kilpatrick, J. Foufopoulos, D. Molyneux, D. J. Bradley, and Working Group on Land Use Change and Dis- ease Emergence. 2004. Unhealthy landscapes: policy recommendations on land use change and infectious disease emergence. Environmental Health Perspectives 112(10):1029-1098. Patz, J. A., D. Campbell-Lendrum, T. Holloway, and J. A. Foley. 2005. Impact of regional climate change on human health. Nature 438(7066):310-317. Pealer, L. N., A. A. Marfin, L. R. Petersen, R. S. Lanciotti, P. L. Page, S. L. Stramer, M. G. Stobierski, K. Signs, B. Newman, H. Kapoor, J. L. Goodman, M. E. Chamberland, and the West Nile Virus Transmission Investigation Team. 2003. Transmission of West Nile virus through blood transfu- sion in the United States in 2002. New England Journal of Medicine 349(13):1236-1245. Petersen, L. R. 2008. West Nile virus. In Institute of Medicine, Vector-borne diseases: understanding the environmental, human health, and ecological connections. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Plant Disease Diagnostic Clinic, Cornell University. 2005. Dutch elm disease factsheet, http:// plantclinic.cornell.edu/FactSheets/dutchelmdisease/DED.htm (accessed October 19, 2007). ProMed-Mail. 2007 (July 19). Dengue/DHF update 2007 (30), http://www.promedmail.org/pls/promed/ f?p=2400:1202:6702555144121238206::NO::F2400_P1202_CHECK_DISPLAY,F2400_ P1202_PUB_MAIL_ID:X,38567 (accessed October 19, 2007).
SUMMARY AND ASSESSMENT 39 Purcell, A. H. 1982. Insect vector relationships with procaryotic plant pathogens. Annual Review of Phytopathology 20:397-417. Reiter, P. 2001. Climate change and mosquito-borne disease. Environmental Health Perspectives 109(Suppl 1):141-161. Reiter, P., S. Lathrop, M. Bunning, B. Biggerstaff, D. Singer, T. Tiwari, L. Baber, M. Amador, J. Thirion, J. Hayes, C. Seca, J. Mendez, B. Ramirez, J. Robinson, J. Rawlings, V. Vorndam, S. Waterman, D. Gubler, G. Clark, and E. Hayes. 2003. Texas lifestyle limits transmission of dengue virus. Emerging Infectious Diseases 9(1):86-89. Rico-Hesse, R. 2007. Dengue virus evolution and virulence models. Clinical Infectious Diseases 44(11):1462-1466. Riveredge Farms. 2004. A brief history of the âPrincetonâ American elm, http://www.americanelm. com/elm_history.html (accessed October 19, 2007). Rizzo, D. M., and M. Garboletto. 2003. Sudden oak death: endangering California and Oregon forest ecosystems. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 1(4):197-204. Roos, R. 2007. Chikungunya fever gains foothold in Europe, http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/ content/other/news/sep1007chik.html (accessed November 26, 2007). Ropelewski, C. F., and M. S. Halpert. 1987. Global and regional scale precipitation patterns associated with the El NiÃ±o/Southern Oscillation. Monthly Weather Review 115(8):1606-1626. Rugemalila, J. B., C. L. Wanga, and W. L. Kilama. 2006. Sixth Africa malaria day in 2006: how far have we come after the Abuja Declaration? Malaria Journal 5:102. Sedgwick Museum of Earth Sciences. 2007. Glossary of useful words and terms, http://www. sedgwickmuseum.org/education/glossary.html (accessed November 20, 2007). Sherwood, J. L., T. L. German, J. W. Moyer, and D. E. Ullman. 2003. Tomato spotted wilt. The Plant Health Instructor, http://www.apsnet.org/education/LessonsPlantPath/TomatoSpottedWilt/ default.htm (accessed October 19, 2007). Smith, D. L., J. Dushoff, R. W. Snow, and S. I. Hay. 2005. The entomological inoculation rate and Plasmodium falciparum infection in African children. Nature 438(7067):492-495. Snieszko, S. F. 1974. The effects of environmental stress on outbreaks of infectious diseases of fishes. Journal of Fish Biology 6(2):197-208. Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, R. B. Alley, T. Berntsen, N. L. Bindoff, Z. Chen, A. Chidthaisong, J. M. Gregory, G. C. Hegerl, M. Heimann, B. Hewitson, B. J. Hoskins, F. Joos, J. Jouzel, V. Kattsov, U. Lohmann, T. Matsuno, M. Molina, N. Nicholls, J. Overpeck, G. Raga, V. Ramaswamy, J. Ren, M. Rusticucci, R. Somerville, T. F. Stocker, P. Whetton, R. A. Wood, and D. Wratt. 2007. Technical summary. In Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, edited by S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K. B. Averyt, M. Tignor, and H. L. Miller. Cambridge, UK, and New York: Cambridge University Press, http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_TS.pdf (accessed October 22, 2007). Soper, F. L. 1967. Aedes aegypti and yellow fever. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 36(4):521-527. Spielman, A. 2003. Research approaches in the development of interventions against vector-borne infection. Journal of Experimental Biology 206(21):3727-3734. Sutherst, R. W. 2004. Global change and human vulnerability to vector-borne diseases. Clinical Microbiology Reviews 17(1):136-173. Townson, H., M. B. Nathan, M. Zaim, P. Guillet, L. Manga, R. Bos, and M. Kindhauser. 2005. Exploiting the potential of vector control for disease prevention. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 83(12):942-947. Vanwambeke, S. O., B. H. van Benthem, N. Khantikul, C. Burghoorn-Maas, K. Panart, L. Oskam, ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ E. F. Lambin, and P. Somboon. ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ 2006. Multi-level analyses of spatial and temporal determinants for dengue infection. International Journal of Health Geographics 5:5.
40 VECTOR-BORNE DISEASES Verwoerd, D. W., and B. J. Erasmus. 1994. Bluetongue. In Infectious diseases of livestock with special reference to Southern Africa, edited by J. A. W. Coetzer, G. R. Thomson, and R. C. Tustin. Cape Town, South Africa: Oxford University Press. Pp. 443-459. Vittor, A. Y., R. H. Gilman, J. Tielsch, G. Glass, T. Shields, W. S. Lozano, V. Pinedo-Cancino, and J. A. Patz. 2006. The effect of deforestation on the human-biting rate of Anopheles darlingi, the primary vector of falciparum malaria in the Peruvian Amazon. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 74(1):3-11. Weintraub, P. G., and L. Beanland. 2006. Insect vectors of phytoplasmas. Annual Review of Entomology 51(1):91-111. WHO (World Health Organization). 2004a. Global strategic framework for integrated vector management. Geneva: World Health Organization, http://www.emro.who.int/rbm/PDF/ GlobalStratFrameIVM.pdf (accessed October 18, 2007). WHO. 2004b. The world health reportâchanging history. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Orga- nization, http://www.who.int/whr/2004/en/report04_en.pdf (accessed October 18, 2007). WHO. 2004c. Deaths from vector-borne disease. http://www.who.int/heli/risks/vectors/en/vbdmap. pdf (accessed December 12, 2007). WHO. 2005. Vector-borne viral infections. In State of the art vaccine research and development. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, http://www.who.int/vaccine_research/ documents/Vector_Borne_Viral_Infections.pdf (accessed October 19, 2007). WHO. 2007a. Vector-borne disease. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, http://www. who.int/heli/risks/vectors/vector/en/index.html (accessed October 18, 2007). WHO. 2007b. WHO global influenza surveillance network. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, http://www.who.int/csr/disease/influenza/surveillance/en/index.html (accessed October 19, 2007). Wilcox, B., and D. J. Gubler. 2005. Disease ecology and the global emergence of zoonotic pathogens. Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine 10:263-72. Woodall, J. 2007. Goodbye to oranges? The Scientist 21(8):63. Woodruff, R., C. Guest, M. G. Garner, N. Becker, J. Lindesay, T. Carvan, and K. Ebi. 2002. Predicting Ross River virus epidemics from regional weather data. Epidemiology 13(4):384-393. Woolhouse, M. E. J., C. Dye, J. F. Etard, T. Smith, J. D. Charlwood, G. P. Garnett, P. Hagan, J. L. Hii, P. D. Ndhlovu, R. J. Quinnell, C. H. Watts, S. K. Chandiwana, and R. M. Anderson. 1997. Heterogeneities in the transmission of infectious agents: implications for the design of control programs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 94(1):338-342. Yergolkar, P. N., B. V. Tandale, V. A. Arankalle, P. S. Sathe, A. B. Sudeep, S. S. Gandhe, M. D. Gokhle, G. P. Jacob, S. L. Hundekar, and A. C. Mishra. 2006. Chikungunya outbreaks caused by African genotype, India. Emerging Infectious Diseases 12(10):1580-1583.