VIRUS STRUCTURE VARIATION ON CHANGE IN GLOBAL TEMPERATURE

PRO. ANDREW DONALD; PRO.  MICHALE JORDAN

(Department of biotechnology and informatics, University of Toronto, Canada)

VOL.03 Issue 11

ABSTRACT

The impact of anticipated changes in global climate on the arboviruses and also the diseases they cause poses a major challenge for public health. The past evolution of the dengue and yellow jack viruses provides clues about the influence of changes in climate on their future evolution. The evolution of both viruses has been influenced by virus interactions involving the mosquito species and therefore the primate hosts involved in virus transmission, and by their domestic and sylvatic cycles. Information is required on how viral genes generally influence phenotypic variance for important viral functions. Changes in global climate will alter the interactions of mosquito species with their primate hosts and with the viruses in domestic cycles, and greater attention should be paid to the sylvatic cycles. There’s great danger for the evolution of novel viruses, like new serotypes, that would compromise vaccination programs and jeopardize public health. it’s essential to know (a) both sylvatic and domestic cycles and (b) the role of virus genetic and environmental variances in shaping virus phenotypic variance to more fully assess the impact of world temperature change.

 

INTRODUCTION

Arthropod-borne viruses (arboviruses) cause variant human disease cases annually. the bulk of the ? 500 known arboviruses belong to 1 of 5 families: Bunyaviridae, Flaviviridae, Reoviridae, Rhabdoviridae, and Togaviridae (1). The arboviruses share two major features: (a) various arthropod species, primarily dipterans and acarine, transmit them to a range of animal hosts, and (b) they’re RNA viruses with very high mutation rates.

The consequences of anticipated climate changes on arbovirus disease epidemiology and therefore the emergence of recent vector-borne disease cycles and new arboviruses in several regions of the globe constitute a crucial issue. Two conclusions is drawn about this issue from the extensive literature: (a) Vector-borne disease systems or ecosystems are very complex, with an outsized suite of controlling factors that interact with each other in largely nonlinear and unpredictable ways, and (b) this complexity produces substantial uncertainty within the prediction of future consequences thanks to changes in anyone or some subset of the controlling factors (2). Predictions about the impact of world global climate change, particularly warming, vary widely. Some investigators foresee dire consequences because of projected increases in vector-borne disease (3–7); others emphasize the uncertainty in such predictions because of our limited knowledge about the complex ecology of vector-borne disease systems (2, 8–18). Several studies that address the complexity of vector-borne disease systems have predicted increases in vector-borne diseases thanks to global climate change (19–25). The effects of weather on arthropodarbo virus interactions are well-known and include the effect of temperature on arbovirus replication in arthropods, the influences of temperature and rainfall on vector behavior, and also the impact of weather on vector population size and density. Such effects are discussed for dengue virus (DENV) (21, 26–34) and infectious disease virus (YFV) (35, 36). Though the consequences of weather on arbovirus episystems are interrelated with the consequences of climate, less information is offered about the influence of long-term climatic changes. Weather, or the day-to-day, hour-to-hour changes in atmospheric conditions, differs from climate, defined because of the average of weather (e.g., temperature and rainfall) over time (37). Despite assessments of the consequences of worldwide temperature change on vector-pathogen episystems, little attention has been paid to the consequences of global climate change on the arboviruses themselves.

This review explores such effects for 2 important arboviruses, YFV and DENV, to the exclusion of other important arboviruses. A comparison of things that have influenced the past evolution of both viruses can provide insight into how global temperature change might influence their future evolution. Though predictions of the long-run evolution of RNA viruses are uncertain, the main features in their evolution provide a framework to assess the results (and their likelihood) of potential climatic changes (38). Several reviews concerning the evolution of DENV and YFV are available (39–50). The goals of this text are to (a) explore features of RNA arbovirus evolution as illustrated by DENV and YFV, (b) explore the potential impacts of global climate change on DENV and YFV epidemiology and evolution, and (c) suggest approaches to improving our ability to know the impact of global climate change on arbovirus evolution.

 

RNA VIRUSES, MUTATION RATES, QUASISPECIES, AND ARBOVIRUSES

 A fundamental characteristic of all RNA viruses, including RNA arboviruses like DENV and YFV, is their high rate of mutation. This feature results from the proofreading inefficiency of their RNA polymerases, which produces mutation rates approximately six orders of magnitude greater than the mutation rate in eukaryotes. The high mutation rates of RNA viruses and their large population sizes within infected hosts end in high levels of genetic variation. Eigen’s (51) quasispecies concept has been wont to understand the dynamics and genetic diversity in RNA viral populations (38, 52–59). A quasispecies is defined broadly as any virus population with great genetic diversity, or more narrowly, because the term is employed in quasispecies theory, as a set of related viral genomes subject to continued generation of genetic variation, competition among genetic variants, and selection of the fittest viral genome distribution within the environment (52). Quasispecies theory within the narrow sense ends up in predictions about the evolution of RNA viruses that are discussed elsewhere (38, 58, 60, 61). as an example, due to their high mutation rates and enormous population sizes, RNA viruses have small genomes (3–20 kb); large genomes would accumulate the next number of deleterious mutations. Because individual viruses in quasispecies don’t seem to be genetically independent of each other thanks to mutational coupling, the natural process acts on the quasispecies as an entity, not on the only vision.

              Several studies have supported the hypothesis of group selection quasispecies , Does quasispecies differ between different host animals, between different species of hosts, and within individual hosts? High mutation rates, large populations, and tiny genome sizes have likely enabled DENV and YFV to infect very different host environments. Do different tissues within the identical organism harbor different quasispecies with variable properties?

The great genetic diversity within a quasispecies (in the broad sense of the term) is a necessary characteristic contributing to virus evolution which will influence the results of world global climate change on virus evolution. The quasispecies concept is simply starting to be incorporated into the characterizations of DENV (66). Throughout the remainder of this review, the plural forms—that is, DENVs and IFVs, rather than DENV and YFV—are accustomed emphasize the good diversity of those viruses. This target variation, or the populational view, is in contrast to a typological perspective, which emphasizes the norm of the species and should shift attention removed from the importance of within-population variation in understanding evolution (67,68). Despite the nice genetic diversity of those viruses, there are likely some common features within the typology of the DENVs and YFVs, that have shaped their evolution.

EPIDEMIOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES

summarizes the differences between the sylvatic mosquito vectors and nonhuman primate hosts of the 2 viruses.

    There’s no evidence for a DENV sylvatic cycle in South America. There are sylvatic DENV cycles in Asia and Africa; in both regions, these cycles involve Aedes species that differ from those involved in sylvatic YFV transmission, and also the DENVs and YFVs infect different nonhuman primates in their sylvatic cycles (78, 79) .aegypti and in selected regions by A. albopictus. The urban transmission cycles involving A. aegypti and A. albopictus for the DENVs and primarily A. aegypti for the YFVs have received the foremost attention because of their effects on human. aegypti and A. albopictus for the DENVs and YFVs, the roles of those vectors in producing epidemics, the transmission of the DENVs and YFVs in several regions of the planet, the influence of weather, and other environmental factors on transmission, and also the pathogenesis of the viruses in humans (80). there’s far less information concerning the sylvatic cycles (i.e., transmission cycles involving nonhuman primate hosts), the sylvatic vectors, and their role in maintaining the sylvatic cycles of both viruses, and spillover of sylvatic viruses to urban cycles. A albopictus, although a capable vector of the DENVs, isn’t a primary vector of the YFVs. the precise virus and mosquito genetic factors that control mosquito competence for a selected virus are largely unknown (81). as an example, though there’s evidence that the envelope protein produced by the YFV E (envelope) gene influences A. aegypti vector competence for YFV, there’s also evidence that other viral proteins influence this trait in complex ways (82–85). The distributions of both vectors (86) and their interactions with the DENVs and YFVs have received considerable attention (87–89).

 

GENETIC VARIATION within the DENGUE VIRUSES

More sequence and genetic diversity information, obtained using more isolates, is accessible for the DENVs than for other arboviruses (44, 45, 47, 50, 76, 90), likely because of their greater recent impact on human health. The DENVs comprise four primary serotypes. Though a fifth serotype was recently reported (91), it’s not discussed further during this review because it’s not yet been confirmed and there’s little available information about it that’s relevant to the evolution of the DENVs. A DENV serotype comprises different genotypes, with no greater than 6% nucleotide sequence divergence between viruses in a very given genotype (92). Mixed infections within individual Dengue virus (DENV) serotypes and genotypes with time to a most up-to-date common ancestor. Figure supported References 44, 45, and 50. Humans of genetically distinct DENV lineages with low sequence diversity are observed (93, 94). Much of the available sequence information is for the DENV E gene, which encodes the envelope protein involved in virus binding, host semi-permeable membrane fusion, protective immunity, and serotype diversity (95).

 

Figure 1 summarizes genetic relationships among the DENVs. There are sylvatic DENVs. Both DENV 1 and DENV 2 carries with it five genotypes; both DENV 3 and DENV 4 have four major genotypes. Three of the DENV serotypes (DENV 1, 2, and 4) are isolated from sylvatic cycles. Information about the biological properties of the sylvatic DENVs, like how they differ biologically from urban DENVs, is totally lacking. Sylvatic DENVs were isolated within the forests of Malaysia (96, 97) and from sylvatic cycles in geographic area (98) that were 7–19% different in sequence from endemic isolates of the identical serotype (92).

 

 

. aegypti, sylvatic A. a. formosus in Africa isn’t an efficient vector of the DENVs, and every one four DENV serotypes are present in geographical region. The observation that there are sylvatic isolates in each serotype that cluster phylogenetically with the human isolates for that serotype is powerful evidence that the sylvatic DENVs are likely ancestral which a sylvatic virus for every serotype gave rise independently to the serotype epidemic lineages that are found in humans and A. aegypti (48, 111). Though a sylvatic DENV 3 has yet to be isolated, the sero-conversion of sentinel monkeys to DENV 3 in Malaysia showed it absolutely was present (97). . If the serotypes evolved before human exposure within the sylvatic cycle, as seems likely, then immunological selection in numerous nonprimate sylvatic hosts, other adaptive qualities within the sylvatic cycle, or perhaps different species of arboreal mosquitoes may have played a task within the origins of the DENV serotypes. The DENVs likely arrived within the New World from the geographical area during the African slave traffic via seaports throughout the Caribbean, probably 300–400 years ago. The close genetic relationships between sylvatic African DENV 2 and sylvatic Asian DENV 2 support the hypothesis that sylvatic DENVs may have entered a geographic area from Asia many years ago (46, 48).

                           The rate of nucleotide change in sylvatic DENV 2 and therefore the pattern of survival of the fittest are kind of like those for endemic urban DENVs (105), illness thanks to sylvatic DENVs is essentially in- distinguishable from illness thanks to DENVs from the human transmission cycle (46), and sylvatic DENVs can cause severe cases of dengue (112, 113) in some instances and will have the identical pathogenic potential as urban DENVs (114). In some regions, humans are often infected with a sylvatic DENV that’s unrecognized due to the absence of disease (115).  years of research (116, 117). Increased surveillance and ecological and epidemiological research are required to assess the potential for the incursion of sylvatic DENVs into the human transmission cycle, likewise because of the potential for urban DENVs to enter a sylvatic cycle. The DENVs likely originated in sylvatic cycles in Asia (98, 110), because each of three of the DENV serotypes has multiple sylvatic Asian isolates, the agricultural Asian vector A. albopictus has greater competence for DENV compared with A. aegypti, sylvatic A.formosus in Africa isn’t an efficient vector of the DENVs, and every one four DENV serotypes are present in geographical region. The observation that there are sylvatic isolates in each serotype that cluster phylogenetically with the human isolates for that serotype is powerful evidence that the sylvatic DENVs are likely ancestral which a sylvatic virus for every serotype gave rise independently to the serotype epidemic lineages that are found in humans and A. aegypti (48, 111). Though a sylvatic DENV 3 has yet to be isolated, the seroconversion of sentinel monkeys to DENV 3 in Malaysia showed it had been present (97). The presence of sylvatic DENV serotypes raises questions about how these serotypes evolved. If the serotypes evolved before human exposure within the sylvatic cycle, as seems likely, then immunological selection in several nonprimate sylvatic hosts, other adaptive qualities within the sylvatic cycle, or perhaps different species of arboreal mosquitoes may have played a job within the origins of the DENV serotypes. The DENVs likely arrived within the New World from the geographical areas during the African slave traffic via seaports throughout the Caribbean, probably 300–400 years ago. The close genetic relationships between sylvatic African DENV 2 and sylvatic Asian DENV 2 support the hypothesis that sylvatic DENVs may have entered the geographic regions from Asia many years ago (46, 48). The rate of nucleotide change in sylvatic DENV 2 and therefore the pattern of action are kind of like those for endemic urban DENVs (105), illness thanks to sylvatic DENVs is basically in- distinguishable from illness thanks to DENVs from the human transmission cycle (46), and sylvatic DENVs can cause severe cases of dengue (112, 113) in some instances and should have the identical pathogenic potential as urban DENVs (114). In some regions, humans are often infected with a sylvatic DENV that’s unrecognized due to the absence of disease (115).

                      The role of sylvatic DENVs in causing human illness remains controversial because the evidence for substantial spillover of sylvatic DENVs into the human transmission cycle is scant despite almost 40 years of research (116, 117). Increased surveillance and ecological and epidemiological research are required to assess the potential for the incursion of sylvatic DENVs into the human transmission cycle, likewise because of the potential for urban DENVs to enter a sylvatic cycle.

 

DENGUE VIRUS EVOLUTION

The gene of the DENVs changes at a rate of? 7.6 × 10? 4 substitutions per site each year. . The DENV mutation rates are substantially slower than those of non-vector-borne RNA viruses and certain results from the existence of two different host cycles, in mosquitoes and invertebrates, which constrains DENV evolution (44, 99, 100). The mosquito vector constrains the evolution of the DENVs quite the vertebrate host does. for instance, the presence of a DENV within the mosquito host slowed the buildup of mutations within the virus (100), and also the genetic diversity among DENVs is bigger in humans than in naturally infected A. aegypti (99). Sequence data have provided estimates of the host cells within the YFVs. The potential for the emergence of the latest YFV or DENV serotypes can not be discounted (43, 48, 114, 126) and will have dire consequences for public health. New serotypes would jeopardize current disease epidemiology, create new interactions with human and mosquito populations, potentiate new disease symptoms, and compromise the event of a DENV vaccine. it’s vital to own information about the factors influencing serotype diversity. there’s a great need for

improved and increased surveillance, especially in sylvatic cycles, to assess the potential danger from new serotypes. 3. What Are the Factors to blame for the Distributions of the Dengue and black vomit Viruses Why could be a DENV sylvatic cycle absent in South America? Why have the YFVs did not establish in Asia?

Understanding why either the DENVs or the YFVs are absent from regions that appear to possess permissive conditions for his or their transmission is crucial to be ready to assess the potential for brand spanking new invasions. Several factors likely contribute to differences within the presence of the DENVs and YFVs in numerous regions. Failure of the YFVs to invade Asia may be because of the dearth of direct trade between West Africa and Asia until the fashionable era, unlike the long history of trade between geographic regions and also the Americas (129). Multiple introductions of the YFVs to terra firma in infected humans and in infected A. aegypti adults, immatures, or eggs brought YFV genotypes that were ready to establish a South American YFV sylvatic cycle that didn’t become established in North America thanks to the absence of nonhuman primate host populations and sylvatic mosquito vectors. The factors accountable for the absence of a sylvatic DENV cycle in South America are less clear because nonhuman primate hosts and competent sylvatic vectors appear to possess been present. it’s going to be that there’s of course a South American sylvatic DENV cycle, which its apparent absence reflects a failure to carefully examine places where one might occur.  if a South American urban DENV spills over into a sylvatic cycle (48). Low vector competence of Asian A.  aegypti previously infected with a DENV, and vaccination against YFVs are unlikely factors in models of their distribution (39). Two hypotheses have significant effects on these models. Cross protection against the YFVs because of the previous infection with a DENV would end in the exclusion of the YFVs from Asia if the cross-protection were greater than 78%; this can be referred to as the Asian hypothesis. Though DENV infection provides cross-protection against other Southeast Asian flaviviruses, cross-protection against the YFVs is also more practical because the YFVs have a comparatively low basic reproductive number compared with other flaviviruses (39). Asians are thought to possess higher resistance to the YFVs (130). Though black Africans’ resistance to the YFVs is disputed (131), the lower-case letter morbidity in Africans compared with South Americans indicates some resistance may occur (132). The absence of an Asian sylvatic YFV cycle because of cross-protection from DENV infection is unlikely because the DENVs and therefore the YFVs have different nonhuman primate hosts. The presence of A. albopictus, a competent vector of the DENVs but not of the YFVs, influences A. present in high numbers, as in Asia; this can be called the African hypothesis (39). In Africa, these low densities of A. albopictus allow YFV transmission from A. aegypti to humans because the absence of A. albopictus reduces cross-immunity from DENV infection that may otherwise exclude the YFVs. the assorted YFV genotypes originated at different times over the

past 1,000 years more or less. The ancestral origin of the YFVs was likely in the East or Central African Republic (123), and human- or mosquito-borne YFVs likely spread on multiple occasions to ground from a geographical region, in line with the split of West African YFVs from South American YFVs (42). like the DENVs, dN/dS values for the YFVs, at? 0.043, are much but 1 (103); this demonstrates that the YFVs undergo strong purifying selection, likely for similar reasons as discussed above for the DENVs. For a summary of similarities and differences between the DENVs and therefore the YFVs in terms of evolution moreover, as epidemiology and immunology, see the sidebar titled Comparing the Dengue and black vomit Viruses.

MAJOR FACTORS within the EVOLUTION OF THE DENGUE AND yellow jack

VIRUSES In this section, three questions are discussed to specialize in the foremost factors that likely contribute to the evolution of the DENVs and YFVs. 1. Why Do the infectious disease Viruses Evolve More Slowly and Show Less Divergence than the Dengue Viruses? This issue is discussed well elsewhere (122). The RNA polymerase of the YFVs is also less error-prone than that of the DENVs; therefore, the mutation frequency within the YFVs is lower (103). Another hypothesis relates to the observation that transovarial transmission in an exceedingly. aegypti and other species of Aedes are substantially higher for YFVs than for DENVs; this ends up in the YFVs remaining within

the mosquito host in quiescent eggs, which decreases the number of replication cycles over time and slows their evolution (103). Because urban A. aegypti–borne YFV epidemics became rare in recent decades, the impact of upper rates of A. aegypti transovarial transmission on YFV evolution may lessen important. 2. Why Are There Four Dengue Virus Serotypes but one Antigenically Conserved black vomit Virus Serotype? The lack of antigenic diversity among YFVs maybe thanks to the slower evolution of YFVs compared with DENVs and to the upper rate of transovarial transmission for the YFVs, as discussed above. With less time and thus fewer replication cycles within the vertebrate host because of transovarial transmission, the YFVs could also be under less selection than DENVs in their primate hosts.

 

COMPARING THE DENGUE AND black vomit VIRUSES Evolution?

The DENVs and YFVs have high mutation rates and occur as in quasispecies. ? Most nucleotide substitutions are under strong purifying selection. ? The DENVs and YFVs evolve more slowly than other non-arthropod-borne RNA viruses. ? The YFVs have a slower evolutionary rate than the DENVs. ? The DENVs are more diverse than the YFVs. ? YFVs originated in Central African sylvatic cycles; the DENVs originated in Asian sylvatic cycles. Epidemiology? The DENVs occur in African and Asian sylvatic cycles but not within the Americas. ? The YFVs occur in sylvatic cycles in Africa and South America. ? The YFVs hasn’t been observed in Asia. ? Humans show higher case fatality because of the YFVs than the DENVs. ? Nonhuman primate hosts vary in symptoms reckoning on the sylvatic cycle. ? Nonhuman primates show little disease for the YFVs and DENVs in Africa. ? Nonhuman primates show little disease for the DENVs in Asia. ? Nonhuman primates show severe mortality for the YFVs in South America. Immunology? There are four (perhaps five) DENV serotypes and one YFV serotype. ? Human infection with a YFV protects against infection with all YFVs. ? Human infection with a DENV protects against infection by the identical serotype. ? Subsequent infection by a unique DENV serotype can produce antibody-dependent enhancement with more severe disease. ? ADENVs. YFV epitopes are also under different and greater constraints than those of the DENVs. That the DENVs and YFVs have different arthropod vectors and different nonhuman primate hosts.

                                                                             Their respective sylvatic cycles likely influences serotype diversity, as hypothesized to clarify YFV diversity (78, 118). there’s little information

concerning the possible influences of the varied nonhuman primate hosts on DENV or YFV diversity. The DENVs are also exposed to more immunologically diverse nonhuman primates in Asian sylvatic cycles than the YFVs in African sylvatic cycles. E gene diversity maybe thanks to other functions for the E protein; as an example, its role in cell fusion could lead to selection thanks to them there’s great diversity and complexity in DENV E protein structures, and these structures change in numerous environments and at different temperatures, which successively influences antibody responses (124).                                                                     The types of selection on genomes may be inferred using dN/dS (nonsynonymous/synonymous substitutions) values from sequence data.

                                                Synonymous mutations are assumed selectively neutral because they are doing not cause a change within the organic compound for the codon within which the mutation occurs. a median dN/dS value of 1 indicates that synonymous mutations are as selectively neutral as nonsynonymous mutations. A dN/dS value >1.0 is according to positive selection on most mutations. A dN/dS value.

REFERENCE

  1. Tabachnick 2003. Reflections on the Anopheles gambiae genome sequence, transgenic mosquitoes, and the prospect for controlling malaria and other vector-borne diseases. J. Med. Entomol. 40:597–606
  2. Lee E, Lobigs M. 2008. E protein domain III determinants of yellow fever virus 17D vaccine strain enhance binding to glycosaminoglycans, impede virus spread, and attenuate J. Virol. 82:6024– 33
  3. Muller DA, Young 2013. The flavivirus NS1 protein: molecular and structural biology, immunology, role in pathogenesis and application as a diagnostic biomarker. Antivir. Res. 98:192–208
  4. Paranjape SM, Harris 2010. Control of dengue virus translation and replication. Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol. 336:15–34
  5. Roehrig JT. 1997. Immunochemistry of dengue viruses. In Dengue and Dengue Hemorrhagic Fever, ed. DJ Gubler, G Kuno, 199–219. London: CAB Int.
  6. Urcuqui-Inchima S, Patino C, Torres, S, Haenni AL, Diaz FJ. 2010. Recent developments in under-standing dengue virus Adv. Virus Res. 77:1–39
  7. Villordo SM, Filomatori CV, Sanchesz-Vargas JC, Blair, CD, Gamarnik AV. 2015. Dengue virus RNA structure specialization facilitates host PLOS Pathog. 11:e1004604
  8. Katzelnick LC, Fonville JM, Gromowski GD, Arriaga JB, Green A, et al. 2015. Dengue viruses cluster antigenically but not as discrete Science 349:13338–43
  9. Khan AM, Miotto O, Nascimento EJM, Srinivasan KN, Heiny AT, et al. 2008. Conservation and variability of dengue virus proteins: implications for vaccine PLOS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2:e272
  10. Hecksel C, Rico-Hesse 2016. Arbovirus evolution, vector competence, and virulence models— changing patterns of infection. In The Influence of Global Environmental Change on Infectious Disease Dynamics. Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press. In press
  11. Quiner CA, Parameswaran P, Ciota AT, Ehrbar DJ, Dodson BL, et al. 2014. Increased replicative fitness of a dengue 2 virus clade in native mosquitoes: potential contribution to a clade replacement event in J. Virol. 88:13125–34
  12. Allonso D, Andrade IS, Conde JN, Coelho DR, Daniele CP, et al. 2015. Dengue virus NS1 protein modulates cellular energy metabolism by increasing glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase activity. Virol. 89:11871–83
  13. Lin HH, Lee HC, Li XF, Tsai MJ, Hsiao HJ, et al. 2014. Dengue type four viruses with E-Glu345Lys adaptive mutation from MRC-5 cells induce low viremia but elicit potent neutralizing antibodies in rhesus PLOS ONE 9:e1001030
  14. Cong L, Ran FA, Cox D, Lin S, Barretto R, et al. 2013. Multiplex genome engineering using CRISPR/Cas Science 339:819–23
  15. Falconer DS, Mackay 1996. Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. Harlow, UK: Longman
  16. Sutherst RW. 2004. Global change and human vulnerability to vector-borne diseases. Microbiol. Rev. 17:136–73
  17. Tabachnick WJ, Day JF. 2014. Impact of climate change on vector-borne arboviral episystems. In Viral Infections and Global Change, SK Singh, pp. 57–75. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley
  18. Thai KT, Anders 2011. The role of climate variability and change in the transmission dynamics and geographic distribution of dengue. Exp. Biol. Med. 236:944–54
  19. Brault AC, Reisen WK. 2014. Environmental perturbations that influence arboviral host range: insight into emergence mechanisms. In Viral Infections and Global Change, ed. SK Singh, pp. 21–34. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley
  20. Guis H, Caminade C, Calvete C, Morse AP, Tran A, Baylis 2012. Modeling the effects of past and future climate on the risk of bluetongue emergence in Europe. J. R. Soc. Interface 9:339–50
  21. Messina JP, Brady OJ, Pigott DM, Golding N, Kraemer MUG, et 2015. The many projected futures of dengue. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 13:230–39
  22. Negev M, Paz S, Clermont A, Pri-Or NG, Shalom U, et 2015. Impacts of climate change on vector borne diseases in the Mediterranean Basin—implications for preparedness and adaptation policy. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 12:6745–70
  23. Niash S, Dale P, MacKenzie JS, McBride J, Mengersen K, Tong 2014. Climate change and dengue: a critical and systematic review of quantitative modelling approaches. BMC Infect. Dis. 14:167–80
  24. Walton WW, Reisen WK. 2014. Influence of climate change on mosquito development and blood- feeding In Viral Infections and Global Change, ed. SK Singh, pp. 35–56. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley
  25. Zhang Y, Hansen A, Bi P. 2014. Climate change and vector-borne viral diseases. In Viral Infections and Global Change, SK Singh, pp. 3–20. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley
  26. Althouse BM, Hanley KA. 2015. The tortoise or the hare? Impacts of within-host dynamics on trans- mission success of arthropod-borne Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 370:20140299
  27. Astrom C, Rocklov J, Hales S, Beguin A, Louis V, Sauerborn 2012. Potential distribution of dengue fever under scenarios of climate change and economic development. EcoHealth 9:448–54
  28. Bouzid M, Colon-Gonzalez FJ, Lung T, Lake IR, Hunter 2014. Climate change and the emergence of vector-borne diseases in Europe: case study of dengue fever. BMC Public Health 14:781
  29. Brady OJ, Golding N, Pigott DM, Kraemer MU, Messina JP, et al. 2014. Global temperature constraints on Aedes aegypti and albopictus persistence and competence for dengue virus transmission. Parasites Vectors 7:338
  30. Campbell KM, Haldeman K, Lehnig C, Munayco CV, Halsey ES, et al. 2015. Weather regulates location, timing, and intensity of dengue virus transmission between humans and PLOS Negl. Trop. Dis. 9:e0003957
  31. Campbell LP, Luther C, Moo-Llanes D, Ramsey JM, Danis-Lozano R, Peterson AT. 2015. Climate change influences on global distributions of dengue and chikungunya virus Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 370:20140135
  32. Gubler DJ, Reiter P, Kristie LE, Yap W, Nasci R, Patz 2001. Climate variability and change in the United States: potential impacts on vector- and rodent-borne diseases. Environ. Health Perspect. 109(Suppl. 2):223–33
  33. Morin CW, Comrie AC, Ernst 2013. Climate and dengue transmission: evidence and implications.Environ. Health Perspect. 121:1264–72. Rogers DJ. 2015. Dengue: recent, past, and future threats. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 370:20130562
  34. Rogers DJ, Wilson AJ, Hay SI, Graham 2006. The global distribution of yellow fever and dengue. Adv. Parasitol. 62:181–220
  1. Shope 1991. Global climate change and infectious diseases. Environ. Health Perspect. 96:171–74
  2. Henson 2007. The Rough Guide to Weather. London: Rough Guides
  3. Holmes 2009. The evolutionary genetics of emerging viruses. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 40:353–72

 

Scroll to Top