Publication:
Domesticated animals and human infectious diseases of zoonotic origins: Domestication time matters

dc.contributor.authorSerge Moranden_US
dc.contributor.authorK. Marie McIntyreen_US
dc.contributor.authorMatthew Baylisen_US
dc.contributor.otherInstitut des Sciences de l'Evolution UMR 5554en_US
dc.contributor.otherCIRADen_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherUniversity of Liverpoolen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-11-09T01:48:30Z
dc.date.available2018-11-09T01:48:30Z
dc.date.issued2014-01-01en_US
dc.description.abstractThe rate of emergence for emerging infectious diseases has increased dramatically over the last century, and research findings have implicated wildlife as an importance source of novel pathogens. However, the role played by domestic animals as amplifiers of pathogens emerging from the wild could also be significant, influencing the human infectious disease transmission cycle. The impact of domestic hosts on human disease emergence should therefore be ascertained. Here, using three independent datasets we showed positive relationships between the time since domestication of the major domesticated mammals and the total number of parasites or infectious diseases they shared with humans. We used network analysis, to better visualize the overall interactions between humans and domestic animals (and amongst animals) and estimate which hosts are potential sources of parasites/pathogens for humans (and for all other hosts) by investigating the network architecture. We used centrality, a measure of the connection amongst each host species (humans and domestic animals) in the network, through the sharing of parasites/pathogens, where a central host (i.e. high value of centrality) is the one that is infected by many parasites/pathogens that infect many other hosts in the network. We showed that domesticated hosts that were associated a long time ago with humans are also the central ones in the network and those that favor parasites/pathogens transmission not only to humans but also to all other domesticated animals. These results urge further investigation of the diversity and origin of the infectious diseases of domesticated animals in their domestication centres and the dispersal routes associated with human activities. Such work may help us to better understand how domesticated animals have bridged the epidemiological gap between humans and wildlife. © 2014 Elsevier B.V.en_US
dc.identifier.citationInfection, Genetics and Evolution. Vol.24, (2014), 76-81en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.meegid.2014.02.013en_US
dc.identifier.issn15677257en_US
dc.identifier.issn15671348en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-84897390296en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/33166
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84897390296&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectAgricultural and Biological Sciencesen_US
dc.subjectBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biologyen_US
dc.subjectImmunology and Microbiologyen_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleDomesticated animals and human infectious diseases of zoonotic origins: Domestication time mattersen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84897390296&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections