Figures and data in Ecological multiplex interactions determine the role of species for parasite spread amplification

Figures
Tables
Additional files

11 figures, 4 tables and 1 additional file

Figures

Figure 1

Download asset Open asset

Visual representation of our ecological multiplex network model.

The background colouring on the right panels indicates that elements such as bushes, trees, grass and water areas are not present in the spatial embedding of the ecomultiplex model, where only the spatial network structure among close animal groups is considered.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32814.003

Figure 2

Download asset Open asset

Single layer interactions and multiplex cartographies of Canastra and Pantanal biomes.

(a) and (b) Food web layer and vectorial layer in Canastra (left) and Pantanal (right) biomes. Predators are highlighted in blue, preys in orange and the vectors in green. Interactions involving the insect are highlighted in red. Interactions involving other species are reported for completeness in blue. (**c–f**): Multiplex cartography of the Canastra ecomultiplex network with 10% (c) and 25% (e) of total groups as vectors. Multiplex cartography of the Pantanal ecomultiplex network with 10% (d) and 25% (f) of total groups as vectors. The red line separates hub nodes, i.e. the most connected nodes within the 95th percentile of the total degree distribution. The cartography highlights the average trends of species: blue for predators, orange for preys, and green for vectors. As evident from (**a–e**), vectors have higher total degree in the ecosystem and tend to distribute more equally their links across both the multiplex layers than all other species. Vectors are therefore pivotal in the ecosystem.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32814.004

Figure 3

Download asset Open asset

Immunisation strategies for the Canastra (top) and Pantanal (bottom) ecosystems when the vector frequency is 0.1 (left) and 0.25 (right).

The infection time increase plotted on the y-axis is defined in Immunisation Strategies (Methods and Materials). An increase of +0.3 indicates that the infection time in a given immunisation scenario was 30% higher than in the reference case of random immunisation.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32814.005

Figure 4

Download asset Open asset

Difference in performances of the best immunisation strategy (hemoculture - Highest 3) when another top predator in the ecosystem (not interacting with the vector in the vectorial layer) is immunised instead of *Leopardus pardalis* (hemoculture - H 3 No Leopardus).

The other top predator is the maned wolf (*Chrysocyon brachiurus*).

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32814.006

Appendix 1—figure 1

Download asset Open asset

Interaction matrix includes trophic (predator-prey, blue squares) and vectorial (vector-host, green squares) interactions in Canastra area.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32814.010

Appendix 1—figure 2

Download asset Open asset

Interaction matrix includes trophic (predator-prey, blue squares) and vectorial (vector-host, green squares) interactions in Pantanal area.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32814.011

Appendix 3—figure 1

Download asset Open asset

In general home ranges $H_{i}$ for different animal groups of the same species can overlap (e.g.

see the red overlapping area $Ω$ on the left). Hence, not all the energy available in the home range can sustain the biomass of the animal groups as some resources must be shared and competition can occur. We therefore approximate the total energy effectively available from the overlapping home ranges with the energy coming from non-overlapping effective home ranges $H_{i}^{*}$ , which allow to approximate the total biomass for species $i$ . Effective home ranges $H_{i}^{*}$ have radius $r^{*}$ equal to half the distance between animal groups. .

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32814.016

Appendix 5—figure 1

Download asset Open asset

Scheme on which species are immunised as animal groups in the ecomultiplex network in the different immunisation strategies presented in the main text.

The average frequency, serology and hematology of the animal groups immunised in each strategy are presented as well. Error margins indicate standard deviations.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32814.019

Appendix 7—figure 1

Download asset Open asset

Infection time increases in Canastra for immunisation strategies that are not reported in the main text.

Visual comparisons are made against the strategy Parasitised Mammals from the main text. For low vector frequency ( $f_{v} = 0.1$ ) all the reported strategies behave worse than Hemoculture (Highest 3) and were therefore not discussed in the main text.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32814.023

Appendix 8—figure 1

Download asset Open asset

The best and the worst performing strategies presented in the main text for the Canastra ecosystem are here presented relatively to the null model with equal abundances.

In this null model we consider an ecomultiplex network where all animal groups have equal abundance, that is, occur with equal frequency. The error margins in the plot are the same size of the dots and are based on 500 iterations. Even providing equal abundances to different species does not remove the gap in global infection time that was observed in the main text.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32814.025

Appendix 8—figure 2

Download asset Open asset

The best network-based and the worst performing strategies presented in the main text for the Canastra ecosystem are here presented relatively to the null model with equal abundances.

In this null model we consider an ecomultiplex network where all animal groups have equal abundance, that is, occur with equal frequency. The error margins in the plot are the same size of the dots and are based on 500 iterations. Even providing equal abundances to different species does not remove the gap in global infection time that was observed in the main text.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32814.026

Tables

Table 1

Immunisation types, names and targets of the strategies we tested (Appendix 1).

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32814.007

Immunisation type	Strategy name	Strategy targets
Ecomultiplex Topological Features	Insectivores	Species feeding on the vector in a food-web
	Parasitised Didelphidae	Didelphidae contaminated by the vector on a vectorial layer
	Parasitised Mammals	All species contaminated by the vector on a vectorial layer
Taxonomic/morphological features	All Cricetidae	All Cricetidae
	All Didelphidae	All Didelphidae
	Large Mammals	All species with a body mass > 1 kg
Epidemiological Features	Hemoculture N	The $N$ species with the highest likelihood of being found infected with the parasite in field work (see Appendix 1).
Epidemiological Features	Serology N	The $N$ species with the highest likelihood of having been infected with the parasite during their life time (see Appendix 1).

Appendix 1—table 1

Taxonomic and ecological data of different animal species in Canastra area (1- (Reis et al., 2006), 2- (Myers et al., 2008), 3- (Herrera et al., 2011), 4- (Bonvicino et al., 2008), 5- (Schofield, 1994)).

(Rocha et al., 2013) report prevalence measurements for some genera, indicating the species that were collected during the study. Because those species are ecologically similar we calculated the average body size of the genus considering species that were collected. $^{a}$ M. americana, M. domestica and M. sorex. $^{b}$ A. sp., A. lindberghi, A. cursor. $^{c}$ O. sp, O. nigripes, O. rupestris. $^{d}$ C. sp, C. tener.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32814.012

ID	Species	Common name	Family	Diet type	Biomass [gr]	References
CHR	Chrysocyon brachyurus	Maned wolf	Canidae	omnivorous	25000	[1, 2]
LEO	Leopardus pardalis	Ocelot	Felidae	carnivorous	9740	[1, 2, 3]
CER	Cerdocyon thous	Crab-eating fox	Canidae	omnivorous	6600	[1, 2, 3]
LYC	Lycalopex vetulus	Hoary fox	Canidae	omnivorous	3350	[1, 2]
CON	Conepatus semistriatus	Striped˙hog-nosed skunk	Mustelidae	omnivorous	2567	[1, 2]
DID	Didelphis albiventris	White-eared opossum	Didelphidae	omnivorous	1625	[1, 2]
LUT	Lutreolina crassicaudata	Thick-tailed opossum	Didelphidae	omnivorous	600	[1, 2]
CAP	Caluromys philander	Bare-tailed˙woolly opossum	Didelphidae	omnivorous	255	[1, 2]
NEC	Nectomys squamipes	South American water rat	Cricetidae	omnivorous	270	[1, 2]
MON	Monodelphis spp a	Short-tailed opossum	Didelphidae	omnivorous	72.8	[1, 2, 3]
MAR	Marmosops incanus	Gray slander opossum	Didelphidae	omnivorous	80	[1, 2]
OXY	Oxymycterus delator	Spy hocicudo	Cricetidae	omnivorous	78.3	[4]
CES	Cerradomys subflavus	Rice rat	Cricetidae	omnivorous	73	[4]
NEC	Necromys lasiurus	Hairy-tailed bolo mouse	Cricetidae	omnivorous	52	[1, 2, 4]
AKM	Akodon montensis	Montane grass mouse	Cricetidae	omnivorous	40.5	[1, 2, 4]
AKO	Akodon spp b	Grass mouse	Cricetidae	omnivorous	33.25	[1, 4]
GRA	Gracilinanus agilis	Agile gracile opossum	Didelphidae	omnivorous	27.25	[1, 2, 3]
OLI	Oligoryzomys spp c	Pygmy rice rats	Cricetidae	omnivorous	21.23	[1, 4]
CAL	Calomys spp d	Vesper mouse	Cricetidae	herbivorous	18.65	[1, 4]
TRI	Triatominae	Kissing bug	Reduviidae	blood	0.2	[5]

Appendix 1—table 2

Taxonomic and ecological data of different animal species in Pantanal area (1- (Reis et al., 2006), 2- (Myers et al., 2008), 3- (Herrera et al., 2011), 4- (Bonvicino et al., 2008), 5- (Schofield, 1994)).

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32814.013

ID	Species	Common name	Family	Diet type	Biomass [gr]	References
LEO	Leopardus pardalis	Ocelot	Felidae	carnivorous	9740	[1, 2, 3]
CET	Cerdocyon thous	Crab-eating fox	Canidae	omnivorous	6600	[1, 2, 3]
NAN	Nasua nasua	South American coati	Procyonidae	omnivorous	5140	[1, 2, 3]
SUS	Sus scrofa	Wild boar	Suidae	omnivorous	105750	[1, 2, 3]
PET	Pecari tajacu	Collared peccary	Tayassuidae	omnivorous	24000	[1, 2, 3]
HYH	Hydrochaeris hydrochaeris	Capybara	Caviidae	herbivorous	46200	[1, 2, 3]
TAP	Tayassu pecari	White-lipped peccary	Tayassuidae	omnivorous	30200	[1, 2, 3]
EUS	Euphractus sexcinctus	Six-banded armadillo	Chlamyphoridae	omnivorous	4450	[1, 2, 3]
PHF	Philander frenatus	Southeastern four-eyed opossum	Didelphidae	omnivorous	306.2	[1, 2, 3]
THP	Thrichomys pachyurus	Paraguayan punar	Echimyidae	herbivorous	291.25	[1, 3, 4]
CLL	Clyomys laticeps	Broad-headed spiny rat	Cricetidae	herbivorous	187.33	[1, 3, 4]
HOB	Holochilus brasiliensis	Web-footed marsh rat	Cricetidae	herbivorous	196	[1, 3, 4]
CES	Cerradomys scotti	Lindbergh’s rice rat	Cricetidae	omnivorous	92.34	[3, 4]
MOD	Monodelphis domestica	Gray short-tailed opossum	Didelphidae	omnivorous	111.2	[1, 2, 3]
OEM	Oecomys mamorae	Mamore arboreal rice rat	Cricetidae	herbivorous	83.75	[1, 3, 4]
THM	Thylamys macrurus	Long-tailed fat-tailed opossum	Didelphidae	omnivorous	46.6	[1, 2, 3]
CAC	Calomys callosus	Large vesper mouse	Cricetidae	herbivorous	37.45	[1, 3]
GRA	Gracilinanus agilis	Agile gracile opposum	Didelphidae	omnivorous	27.25	[1, 2, 3]
TRI	Triatominae	Kissing bug	Reduviidae	blood	0.2	[5]

Appendix 6—table 1

Scheme on which species are immunised as animal groups in the ecomultiplex network in the different immunisation strategies presented in the main text.

The average frequency, serology and hematology of the animal groups immunised in each strategy are presented as well. Error margins indicate standard deviations.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32814.021

CANASTRA	Immune ■ and Susceptible ■ Species in the Immunisation Strategies ↓
Species ↓	All Cricetidae	All Didelphidae	Large Mammals	Parasitised Mammals	Parasitised Didelphidae	Insectivores	Hemoculture 3
Chrysocyon brachyurus
Leopardus pardalis
Cerdocyon thous
Lycalopex vetulus
Conepatus semistriatus
Didelphis albiventris
Lutreolina crassicaudata
Caluromys philander
Nectomys squamipes
Monodelphis spp
Marmosops incanus
Oxymycterus delator
Cerradomys subflavus
Necromys lasiurus
Akodon montensis
Akodon spp
Gracilinanus agilis
Oligoryzomys spp
Calomysspp
Mean Frequency (fv = 0.1)	640 ± 50	480 ± 70	200 ± 20	560 ± 80	520 ± 50	510 ± 50	400 ± 100
Mean Frequency (fv = 0.25)	540 ± 40	400 ± 60	170 ± 20	470 ± 70	430 ± 40	430 ± 40	400 ± 100
Mean Serology	0.02 ± 0.02	0.2 ± 0.1	0.3 ± 0.2	0.3 ± 0.2	0.3 ± 0.3	0.12 ± 0.07	0.7 ± 0.3
Mean Hemoculture	0.07 ± 0.04	0.1 ± 0.1	0.2 ± 0.2	0.3 ± 0.1	0.3 ± 0.2	0.07 ± 0.04	0.6 ± 0.2

PANTANAL	Immune ■ and Susceptible ■ Species in the Immunisation Strategies ↓
Species ↓	All Cricetidae	All Didelphidae	Large Mammals	Parasitised Mammals	Parasitised Didelphidae	Insectivores	Hemoculture 3
Leopardus pardalis
Cerdocyon thous
Nasua nasua
Sus scrofa
Pecari tajacu
Hydrochaeris hydrochaeris
Tayas supecari
Euphractus sexcinctus
Philander frenatus
Thrichomys pachyurus
Clyomys laticeps
Holochilus brasiliensis
Cerradomys scotti
Monodelphis domestica
Oecomys mamorae
Thylamys macrurus
Calomys callosus
Gracilinanus agilis
Mean Frequency (fv = 0.1)	730 ± 60	800 ± 100	210 ± 20	540 ± 90	700 ± 100	530 ± 80	600 ± 200
Mean Frequency (fv = 0.1)	610 ± 50	650 ± 80	170 ± 20	450 ± 80	630 ± 100	440 ± 60	500 ± 200
Mean Serology	0.24 ± 0.02	0.5 ± 0.1	0.3 ± 0.1	0.37 ± 0.09	0.5 ± 0.1	0.35 ± 0.06	0.50 ± 0.09
Mean Hemoculture	0.02 ± 0.01	0.18 ± 0.06	0.04 ± 0.03	0.12 ± 0.3	0.23 ± 0.03	0.07 ± 0.02	0.25 ± 0.02

Additional files

Transparent reporting form: https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32814.008
Download elife-32814-transrepform-v2.docx

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Article PDF

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Mendeley

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Massimo Stella
Sanja Selakovic
Alberto Antonioni
Cecilia S Andreazzi

(2018)

Ecological multiplex interactions determine the role of species for parasite spread amplification

eLife 7:e32814.

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32814

Figures

Visual representation of our ecological multiplex network model.

Single layer interactions and multiplex cartographies of Canastra and Pantanal biomes.

Immunisation strategies for the Canastra (top) and Pantanal (bottom) ecosystems when the vector frequency is 0.1 (left) and 0.25 (right).

Difference in performances of the best immunisation strategy (hemoculture - Highest 3) when another top predator in the ecosystem (not interacting with the vector in the vectorial layer) is immunised instead of Leopardus pardalis (hemoculture - H 3 No Leopardus).

Interaction matrix includes trophic (predator-prey, blue squares) and vectorial (vector-host, green squares) interactions in Canastra area.

Interaction matrix includes trophic (predator-prey, blue squares) and vectorial (vector-host, green squares) interactions in Pantanal area.

In general home ranges $H_{i}$ for different animal groups of the same species can overlap (e.g.

Scheme on which species are immunised as animal groups in the ecomultiplex network in the different immunisation strategies presented in the main text.

Infection time increases in Canastra for immunisation strategies that are not reported in the main text.

The best and the worst performing strategies presented in the main text for the Canastra ecosystem are here presented relatively to the null model with equal abundances.

The best network-based and the worst performing strategies presented in the main text for the Canastra ecosystem are here presented relatively to the null model with equal abundances.

Tables

Immunisation types, names and targets of the strategies we tested (Appendix 1).

Taxonomic and ecological data of different animal species in Canastra area (1- (Reis et al., 2006), 2- (Myers et al., 2008), 3- (Herrera et al., 2011), 4- (Bonvicino et al., 2008), 5- (Schofield, 1994)).

Taxonomic and ecological data of different animal species in Pantanal area (1- (Reis et al., 2006), 2- (Myers et al., 2008), 3- (Herrera et al., 2011), 4- (Bonvicino et al., 2008), 5- (Schofield, 1994)).

Scheme on which species are immunised as animal groups in the ecomultiplex network in the different immunisation strategies presented in the main text.

Additional files

Transparent reporting form

Download links

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Be the first to read new articles from eLife

Share this article

Cite this article

Visual representation of our ecological multiplex network model.

Single layer interactions and multiplex cartographies of Canastra and Pantanal biomes.

Immunisation strategies for the Canastra (top) and Pantanal (bottom) ecosystems when the vector frequency is 0.1 (left) and 0.25 (right).

Difference in performances of the best immunisation strategy (hemoculture - Highest 3) when another top predator in the ecosystem (not interacting with the vector in the vectorial layer) is immunised instead of Leopardus pardalis (hemoculture - H 3 No Leopardus).

Interaction matrix includes trophic (predator-prey, blue squares) and vectorial (vector-host, green squares) interactions in Canastra area.

Interaction matrix includes trophic (predator-prey, blue squares) and vectorial (vector-host, green squares) interactions in Pantanal area.

In general home ranges Hi for different animal groups of the same species can overlap (e.g.

Scheme on which species are immunised as animal groups in the ecomultiplex network in the different immunisation strategies presented in the main text.

Infection time increases in Canastra for immunisation strategies that are not reported in the main text.

The best and the worst performing strategies presented in the main text for the Canastra ecosystem are here presented relatively to the null model with equal abundances.

The best network-based and the worst performing strategies presented in the main text for the Canastra ecosystem are here presented relatively to the null model with equal abundances.

Immunisation types, names and targets of the strategies we tested (Appendix 1).

Taxonomic and ecological data of different animal species in Canastra area (1- (Reis et al., 2006), 2- (Myers et al., 2008), 3- (Herrera et al., 2011), 4- (Bonvicino et al., 2008), 5- (Schofield, 1994)).

Taxonomic and ecological data of different animal species in Pantanal area (1- (Reis et al., 2006), 2- (Myers et al., 2008), 3- (Herrera et al., 2011), 4- (Bonvicino et al., 2008), 5- (Schofield, 1994)).

Scheme on which species are immunised as animal groups in the ecomultiplex network in the different immunisation strategies presented in the main text.

Transparent reporting form

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

In general home ranges $H_{i}$ for different animal groups of the same species can overlap (e.g.