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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |