Search

Death is a common outcome of infection, but most disease models do not track hosts after death. Instead, these hosts disappear into a void. This assumption lacks critical realism, because dead hosts can alter host–pathogen dynamics. Here, we develop a theoretical framework of carbon‐based models combining disease and ecosystem perspectives to investigate the consequences of feedbacks between living and dead hosts on disease dynamics and carbon cycling. Because autotrophs (i.e. plants and phytoplankton) are critical regulators of carbon cycling, we developed general model structures and parameter combinations to broadly reflect disease of autotrophic hosts across ecosystems. Analytical model solutions highlight the importance of disease–ecosystem coupling. For example, decomposition rates of dead hosts mediate pathogen spread, and carbon flux between live and dead biomass pools are sensitive to pathogen effects on host growth and death rates. Variation in dynamics arising from biologically realistic parameter combinations largely fell along a single gradient from slow to fast carbon turnover rates, and models predicted higher disease impacts in fast turnover systems (e.g. lakes and oceans) than slow turnover systems (e.g. boreal forests). Our results demonstrate that a unified framework, including the effects of pathogens on carbon cycling, provides novel hypotheses and insights at the nexus of disease and ecosystem ecology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Individual differences in contact rate can arise from host, group and landscape heterogeneity and can result in different patterns of spatial spread for diseases in wildlife populations with concomitant implications for disease control in wildlife of conservation concern, livestock and humans. While dynamic disease models can provide a better understanding of the drivers of spatial spread, the effects of landscape heterogeneity have only been modelled in a few well‐studied wildlife systems such as rabies and bovine tuberculosis. Such spatial models tend to be either purely theoretical with intrinsic limiting assumptions or individual‐based models that are often highly species‐ and system‐specific, limiting the breadth of their utility. Our goal was to review studies that have utilized dynamic, spatial models to answer questions about pathogen transmission in wildlife and identify key gaps in the literature. We begin by providing an overview of the main types of dynamic, spatial models (e.g., metapopulation, network, lattice, cellular automata, individual‐based and continuous‐space) and their relation to each other. We investigate different types of ecological questions that these models have been used to explore: pathogen invasion dynamics and range expansion, spatial heterogeneity and pathogen persistence, the implications of management and intervention strategies and the role of evolution in host–pathogen dynamics. We reviewed 168 studies that consider pathogen transmission in free‐ranging wildlife and classify them by the model type employed, the focal host–pathogen system, and their overall research themes and motivation. We observed a significant focus on mammalian hosts, a few well‐studied or purely theoretical pathogen systems, and a lack of studies occurring at the wildlife‐public health or wildlife–livestock interfaces. Finally, we discuss challenges and future directions in the context of unprecedented human‐mediated environmental change. Spatial models may provide new insights into understanding, for example, how global warming and habitat disturbance contribute to disease maintenance and emergence. Moving forward, better integration of dynamic, spatial disease models with approaches from movement ecology, landscape genetics/genomics and ecoimmunology may provide new avenues for investigation and aid in the control of zoonotic and emerging infectious diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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