The effects of dispersal gradient and pathogen life cycle components on epidemic velocity in computer simulations.

The effects of dispersal gradient and pathogen life cycle components on epidemic velocity in computer simulations.
复制标题

计算机模拟中传播梯度和病原体生命周期成分对流行速度的影响。

DOI:
10.1094/phyto-95-0992
复制
发表时间:
2005
期刊:
影响因子:
3.2
通讯作者:
C. Mundt
C. Mundt
中科院分区:
农林科学2区
文献类型:
--
作者:
K. E. Sackett;C. Mundt

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

摘要利用更新后的模拟模型EPIMUL,结合与小麦条锈病相关的模型参数,研究了小麦条锈病疫源地的扩展速度。修改后的幂律,指数模型,和兰伯特的一般模型拟合的主要疾病梯度数据,从人工引发的现场流行的条锈病和描述扩散模拟。指数模型与现场数据拟合较差(R(2)= 0.728至0.776),产生了一种以行波形式扩展的流行病(即,以恒定速度)。修正的幂律和Lambert模型都能很好地拟合现场数据(R(2)= 0.962至0.988),并导致分散的流行波(在整个流行过程中,速度随时间增加)。田间疫情也呈扩散波状扩散。使用参数的基础上,现场流行和修改的幂律扩散作为基线,病原体的生命周期组成部分(病变生长速率,潜伏期,感染期,增殖率)和扩散梯度陡度在生物合理的范围内变化,这种疾病分散波流行测试其效果。除传染期外,所有因素对流行速度都有很强的影响,但都没有改变速度随时间增加的一般模式。
ABSTRACT The velocity of expansion of focal epidemics was studied using an updated version of the simulation model EPIMUL, with model parameters relevant to wheat stripe rust. The modified power law, the exponential model, and Lambert's general model were fit to primary disease gradient data from an artificially initiated field epidemic of stripe rust and employed to describe dispersal in simulations. The exponential model, which fit the field data poorly (R (2) = 0.728 to 0.776), yielded an epidemic that expanded as a traveling wave (i.e., at a constant velocity), after an initial buildup period. Both the modified power law and the Lambert model fit the field data well (R(2) = 0.962 to 0.988) and resulted in dispersive epidemic waves (velocities increased over time for the entire course of the epidemic). The field epidemic also expanded as a dispersive wave. Using parameters based on the field epidemic and modified power law dispersal as a baseline, life cycle components of the pathogen (lesion growth rate, latent period, infectious period, and multiplication rate) and dispersal gradient steepness were varied within biologically reasonable ranges for this disease to test their effect on dispersive wave epidemics. All components but the infectious period had a strong influence on epidemic velocity, but none changed the general pattern of velocity increasing over time.