Cargando…

Optimizing noninvasive sampling of a zoonotic bat virus

Outbreaks of infectious viruses resulting from spillover events from bats have brought much attention to bat‐borne zoonoses, which has motivated increased ecological and epidemiological studies on bat populations. Field sampling methods often collect pooled samples of bat excreta from plastic sheets...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Giles, John R., Peel, Alison J., Wells, Konstans, Plowright, Raina K., McCallum, Hamish, Restif, Olivier
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8462156/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34594501
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.7830
_version_ 1784572141278068736
author Giles, John R.
Peel, Alison J.
Wells, Konstans
Plowright, Raina K.
McCallum, Hamish
Restif, Olivier
author_facet Giles, John R.
Peel, Alison J.
Wells, Konstans
Plowright, Raina K.
McCallum, Hamish
Restif, Olivier
author_sort Giles, John R.
collection PubMed
description Outbreaks of infectious viruses resulting from spillover events from bats have brought much attention to bat‐borne zoonoses, which has motivated increased ecological and epidemiological studies on bat populations. Field sampling methods often collect pooled samples of bat excreta from plastic sheets placed under‐roosts. However, positive bias is introduced because multiple individuals may contribute to pooled samples, making studies of viral dynamics difficult. Here, we explore the general issue of bias in spatial sample pooling using Hendra virus in Australian bats as a case study. We assessed the accuracy of different under‐roost sampling designs using generalized additive models and field data from individually captured bats and pooled urine samples. We then used theoretical simulation models of bat density and under‐roost sampling to understand the mechanistic drivers of bias. The most commonly used sampling design estimated viral prevalence 3.2 times higher than individual‐level data, with positive bias 5–7 times higher than other designs due to spatial autocorrelation among sampling sheets and clustering of bats in roosts. Simulation results indicate using a stratified random design to collect 30–40 pooled urine samples from 80 to 100 sheets, each with an area of 0.75–1 m(2), and would allow estimation of true prevalence with minimum sampling bias and false negatives. These results show that widely used under‐roost sampling techniques are highly sensitive to viral presence, but lack specificity, providing limited information regarding viral dynamics. Improved estimation of true prevalence can be attained with minor changes to existing designs such as reducing sheet size, increasing sheet number, and spreading sheets out within the roost area. Our findings provide insight into how spatial sample pooling is vulnerable to bias for a wide range of systems in disease ecology, where optimal sampling design is influenced by pathogen prevalence, host population density, and patterns of aggregation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8462156
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84621562021-09-29 Optimizing noninvasive sampling of a zoonotic bat virus Giles, John R. Peel, Alison J. Wells, Konstans Plowright, Raina K. McCallum, Hamish Restif, Olivier Ecol Evol Original Research Outbreaks of infectious viruses resulting from spillover events from bats have brought much attention to bat‐borne zoonoses, which has motivated increased ecological and epidemiological studies on bat populations. Field sampling methods often collect pooled samples of bat excreta from plastic sheets placed under‐roosts. However, positive bias is introduced because multiple individuals may contribute to pooled samples, making studies of viral dynamics difficult. Here, we explore the general issue of bias in spatial sample pooling using Hendra virus in Australian bats as a case study. We assessed the accuracy of different under‐roost sampling designs using generalized additive models and field data from individually captured bats and pooled urine samples. We then used theoretical simulation models of bat density and under‐roost sampling to understand the mechanistic drivers of bias. The most commonly used sampling design estimated viral prevalence 3.2 times higher than individual‐level data, with positive bias 5–7 times higher than other designs due to spatial autocorrelation among sampling sheets and clustering of bats in roosts. Simulation results indicate using a stratified random design to collect 30–40 pooled urine samples from 80 to 100 sheets, each with an area of 0.75–1 m(2), and would allow estimation of true prevalence with minimum sampling bias and false negatives. These results show that widely used under‐roost sampling techniques are highly sensitive to viral presence, but lack specificity, providing limited information regarding viral dynamics. Improved estimation of true prevalence can be attained with minor changes to existing designs such as reducing sheet size, increasing sheet number, and spreading sheets out within the roost area. Our findings provide insight into how spatial sample pooling is vulnerable to bias for a wide range of systems in disease ecology, where optimal sampling design is influenced by pathogen prevalence, host population density, and patterns of aggregation. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-08-27 /pmc/articles/PMC8462156/ /pubmed/34594501 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.7830 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Giles, John R.
Peel, Alison J.
Wells, Konstans
Plowright, Raina K.
McCallum, Hamish
Restif, Olivier
Optimizing noninvasive sampling of a zoonotic bat virus
title Optimizing noninvasive sampling of a zoonotic bat virus
title_full Optimizing noninvasive sampling of a zoonotic bat virus
title_fullStr Optimizing noninvasive sampling of a zoonotic bat virus
title_full_unstemmed Optimizing noninvasive sampling of a zoonotic bat virus
title_short Optimizing noninvasive sampling of a zoonotic bat virus
title_sort optimizing noninvasive sampling of a zoonotic bat virus
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8462156/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34594501
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.7830
work_keys_str_mv AT gilesjohnr optimizingnoninvasivesamplingofazoonoticbatvirus
AT peelalisonj optimizingnoninvasivesamplingofazoonoticbatvirus
AT wellskonstans optimizingnoninvasivesamplingofazoonoticbatvirus
AT plowrightrainak optimizingnoninvasivesamplingofazoonoticbatvirus
AT mccallumhamish optimizingnoninvasivesamplingofazoonoticbatvirus
AT restifolivier optimizingnoninvasivesamplingofazoonoticbatvirus