16
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Implications of Tourist–Macaque Interactions for Disease Transmission

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          During wildlife tourism, proximity or actual contact between people and animals may lead to a significant risk of anthropozoonotic disease transmission. In this paper, we use social network analysis, disease simulation modelling and data on animal health and behaviour to investigate such risks at a site in Morocco, where tourists come to see wild Barbary macaques ( Macaca sylvanus). Measures of individual macaques’ network centrality—an index of the strength and distribution of their social relationships and thus potentially their ability to spread disease—did not show clear and consistent relationships with their time spent in close proximity to, or rate of interacting with, tourists. Disease simulation modelling indicated that while higher-ranked animals had a significantly greater ability to spread disease within the group, in absolute terms there was little difference in the size of outbreaks that different individuals were predicted to cause. We observed a high rate of physical contact and close proximity between humans and macaques, including during three periods when the macaques were coughing and sneezing heavily, highlighting the potential risk of disease transmission. We recommend that general disease prevention strategies, such as those aimed at reducing opportunities for contact between tourists and macaques, should be adopted.

          Related collections

          Most cited references46

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Violent expiratory events: on coughing and sneezing

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            From “one medicine” to “one health” and systemic approaches to health and well-being☆

            Faced with complex patterns of global change, the inextricable interconnection of humans, pet animals, livestock and wildlife and their social and ecological environment is evident and requires integrated approaches to human and animal health and their respective social and environmental contexts. The history of integrative thinking of human and animal health is briefly reviewed from early historical times, to the foundation of universities in Europe, up to the beginning of comparative medicine at the end of the 19th century. In the 20th century, Calvin Schwabe coined the concept of “one medicine”. It recognises that there is no difference of paradigm between human and veterinary medicine and both disciplines can contribute to the development of each other. Considering a broader approach to health and well-being of societies, the original concept of “one medicine” was extended to “one health” through practical implementations and careful validations in different settings. Given the global health thinking in recent decades, ecosystem approaches to health have emerged. Based on complex ecological thinking that goes beyond humans and animals, these approaches consider inextricable linkages between ecosystems and health, known as “ecosystem health”. Despite these integrative conceptual and methodological developments, large portions of human and animal health thinking and actions still remain in separate disciplinary silos. Evidence for added value of a coherent application of “one health” compared to separated sectorial thinking is, however, now growing. Integrative thinking is increasingly being considered in academic curricula, clinical practice, ministries of health and livestock/agriculture and international organizations. Challenges remain, focusing around key questions such as how does “one health” evolve and what are the elements of a modern theory of health? The close interdependence of humans and animals in their social and ecological context relates to the concept of “human-environmental systems”, also called “social-ecological systems”. The theory and practice of understanding and managing human activities in the context of social-ecological systems has been well-developed by members of The Resilience Alliance and was used extensively in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, including its work on human well-being outcomes. This in turn entails systems theory applied to human and animal health. Examples of successful systems approaches to public health show unexpected results. Analogous to “systems biology” which focuses mostly on the interplay of proteins and molecules at a sub-cellular level, a systemic approach to health in social-ecological systems (HSES) is an inter- and trans-disciplinary study of complex interactions in all health-related fields. HSES moves beyond “one health” and “eco-health”, expecting to identify emerging properties and determinants of health that may arise from a systemic view ranging across scales from molecules to the ecological and socio-cultural context, as well from the comparison with different disease endemicities and health systems structures.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              A comparison of association indices

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                + 44 (0) 1522 837409 , lmarechal@lincoln.ac.uk
                Journal
                Ecohealth
                Ecohealth
                Ecohealth
                Springer US (New York )
                1612-9202
                1612-9210
                17 November 2017
                17 November 2017
                2017
                : 14
                : 4
                : 704-717
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0468 7274, GRID grid.35349.38, Department of Life Sciences, , University of Roehampton, ; London, UK
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0420 4262, GRID grid.36511.30, School of Psychology, , University of Lincoln, ; Sarah Swift Building, Brayford Wharf East, Lincoln, LN5 7AY UK
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0235-3040
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3499-9134
                Article
                1284
                10.1007/s10393-017-1284-3
                5725503
                29150827
                156bde5b-695c-4490-861a-49ebbcbb8428
                © The Author(s) 2017

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

                History
                : 18 July 2016
                : 20 September 2017
                : 28 September 2017
                Funding
                Funded by: International Primatological Society
                Funded by: FundRef 10.13039/100008049, Fundación Banco Santander;
                Funded by: University of Roehampton
                Categories
                Original Contribution
                Custom metadata
                © EcoHealth Alliance 2017

                Public health
                disease transmission risks,macaca sylvanus,modelling,primates,tourist–wildlife interactions,wildlife tourism

                Comments

                Comment on this article