1
|
Plowright RK, Ahmed AN, Coulson T, Crowther TW, Ejotre I, Faust CL, Frick WF, Hudson PJ, Kingston T, Nameer PO, O'Mara MT, Peel AJ, Possingham H, Razgour O, Reeder DM, Ruiz-Aravena M, Simmons NB, Srinivas PN, Tabor GM, Tanshi I, Thompson IG, Vanak AT, Vora NM, Willison CE, Keeley ATH. Ecological countermeasures to prevent pathogen spillover and subsequent pandemics. Nat Commun 2024; 15:2577. [PMID: 38531842 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-46151-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2024] [Accepted: 02/16/2024] [Indexed: 03/28/2024] Open
Abstract
Substantial global attention is focused on how to reduce the risk of future pandemics. Reducing this risk requires investment in prevention, preparedness, and response. Although preparedness and response have received significant focus, prevention, especially the prevention of zoonotic spillover, remains largely absent from global conversations. This oversight is due in part to the lack of a clear definition of prevention and lack of guidance on how to achieve it. To address this gap, we elucidate the mechanisms linking environmental change and zoonotic spillover using spillover of viruses from bats as a case study. We identify ecological interventions that can disrupt these spillover mechanisms and propose policy frameworks for their implementation. Recognizing that pandemics originate in ecological systems, we advocate for integrating ecological approaches alongside biomedical approaches in a comprehensive and balanced pandemic prevention strategy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Raina K Plowright
- Department of Public and Ecosystem Health, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA.
| | - Aliyu N Ahmed
- Medical Research Council Unit The Gambia, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, WC1E 7HT, UK
| | - Tim Coulson
- Department of Biology, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX1 3SZ, UK
| | - Thomas W Crowther
- Department of Environmental Systems Science, ETH Zürich, Zürich, 8092, Switzerland
| | - Imran Ejotre
- Department of Biology, Muni University, P.O. Box 725, Arua, Uganda
| | - Christina L Faust
- School of Biodiversity, One Health and Veterinary Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8QQ, UK
| | - Winifred F Frick
- Bat Conservation International, Austin, TX, 78746, USA
- Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Santa Cruz, CA, 95064, USA
| | - Peter J Hudson
- Centre for Infectious Disease Dynamics, Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA, 16801, USA
| | - Tigga Kingston
- Department of Biological Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, 79409-3131, USA
| | - P O Nameer
- College of Climate Change and Environmental Science, Kerala Agricultural University, Kerala, 680 656, India
| | | | - Alison J Peel
- Centre for Planetary Health and Food Security, Griffith University, Nathan, QLD, 4111, Australia
| | - Hugh Possingham
- School of Biological Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia
| | - Orly Razgour
- Biosciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, EX4 4PS, UK
| | - DeeAnn M Reeder
- Department of Biology, Bucknell University, Lewisburg, PA, 17937, USA
| | - Manuel Ruiz-Aravena
- Department of Public and Ecosystem Health, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA
- Centre for Planetary Health and Food Security, Griffith University, Nathan, QLD, 4111, Australia
- Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Aquaculture, Mississippi State University, Starkville, USA
| | - Nancy B Simmons
- Department of Mammalogy, Division of Vertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History, New York City, NY, 10024, USA
| | | | - Gary M Tabor
- Center for Large Landscape Conservation, Bozeman, MT, 59771, USA
| | - Iroro Tanshi
- Department of Biology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA
- Small Mammal Conservation Organization, Benin City, 300251, Nigeria
- Department of Animal and Environmental Biology, University of Benin, Benin City, 300000, Nigeria
| | | | - Abi T Vanak
- Centre for Policy Design, Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment, Bengaluru, Karnataka, 560064, India
- School of Life Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, 4041, South Africa
| | - Neil M Vora
- Conservation International, Arlington, VA, 22202, USA
| | - Charley E Willison
- Department of Public and Ecosystem Health, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Theobald DM, Keeley ATH, Laur A, Tabor G. A simple and practical measure of the connectivity of protected area networks: The
ProNet
metric. Conservat Sci and Prac 2022. [DOI: 10.1111/csp2.12823] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Aaron Laur
- Center for Large Landscape Conservation Bozeman Montana USA
| | - Gary Tabor
- Center for Large Landscape Conservation Bozeman Montana USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Merenlender AM, Keeley ATH, Hilty JA. Ecological corridors for which species? Therya 2022. [DOI: 10.12933/therya-22-1162] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Overwhelming evidence points to the importance of maintaining connectivity given rapidly fragmenting habitats and climate change. Many efforts to identify where ecological corridors should be placed are based on estimates of structural connectivity that take advantage of readily available land-cover data. We provide an overview of structural connectivity methodology and review the various limitations of these methods for functional connectivity -- the degree to which corridors facilitate the movement of organisms. These limitations include not accounting for dispersal complexities and specific habitat requirements of focal species, and invisible barriers to movement. Also, to what extent will the resulting corridors serve the most vulnerable species under a rapidly changing climate? We describe several connectivity-modeling approaches designed to be climate-wise. Assessing species for traits that may make them more susceptible to extinction is one way to prioritize which species warrant additional data collection and demographic analyses to improve the likelihood that corridors will function for them. There is substantial evidence that traits such as limited movement or dispersal ability as well as geographic range and habitat restrictions make species more vulnerable. Therefore, we suggest using these traits to guide focal-species selection. Finally, we discuss the importance of employing new technologies to monitor individual movement and species utilization of corridors varying in width and other characteristics to help plan and verify functional connectivity for these species.
Collapse
|
4
|
Keeley ATH, Fremier AK, Goertler PAL, Huber PR, Sturrock AM, Bashevkin SM, Barbaree BA, Grenier JL, Dilts TE, Gogol-Prokurat M, Colombano DD, Bush EE, Laws A, Gallo JA, Kondolf M, Stahl AT. Governing Ecological Connectivity in Cross-Scale Dependent Systems. Bioscience 2022; 72:372-386. [PMID: 35370478 PMCID: PMC8970826 DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biab140] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/19/2023] Open
Abstract
Ecosystem management and governance of cross-scale dependent systems require integrating knowledge about ecological connectivity in its multiple forms and scales. Although scientists, managers, and policymakers are increasingly recognizing the importance of connectivity, governmental organizations may not be currently equipped to manage ecosystems with strong cross-boundary dependencies. Managing the different aspects of connectivity requires building social connectivity to increase the flow of information, as well as the capacity to coordinate planning, funding, and actions among both formal and informal governance bodies. We use estuaries in particular the San Francisco Estuary, in California, in the United States, as examples of cross-scale dependent systems affected by many intertwined aspects of connectivity. We describe the different types of estuarine connectivity observed in both natural and human-affected states and discuss the human dimensions of restoring beneficial physical and ecological processes. Finally, we provide recommendations for policy, practice, and research on how to restore functional connectivity to estuaries.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Pascale A L Goertler
- Delta Stewardship Council, Delta Science Program, Sacramento, California, United States
| | - Patrick R Huber
- University of California, Davis, Davis, California, United States
| | | | | | - Blake A Barbaree
- Point Blue Conservation Science, based Petaluma, California, United States
| | - J Letitia Grenier
- San Francisco Estuary Institute, Richmond, California, United States
| | | | - Melanie Gogol-Prokurat
- California Department of Fish and Wildlife's Biogeographic Data Branch in Sacramento, California, United States
| | | | - Eva E Bush
- Delta Stewardship Council Delta Science Program, Sacramento, California, United States
| | - Angela Laws
- The Xerces Society, Portland, Oregon, United States
| | - John A Gallo
- Conservation Biology Institute, Corvallis, Oregon, United States
| | - Mathias Kondolf
- University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, United States
| | - Amanda T Stahl
- Washington State University, Pullman, Washington, United States
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Keeley BW, Keeley ATH. Acoustic wave response to groove arrays in model ears. PLoS One 2021; 16:e0260020. [PMID: 34843500 PMCID: PMC8629259 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0260020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2021] [Accepted: 11/01/2021] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Many mammals and some owls have parallel grooved structures associated with auditory structures that may be exploiting acoustic products generated by groove arrays. To test the hypothesis that morphological structures in the ear can manipulate acoustic information, we expose a series of similar-sized models with and without groove arrays to different sounds in identical conditions and compare their amplitude and frequency responses. We demonstrate how two different acoustic signals are uniquely influenced by the models. Depending on multiple factors (i.e., array characteristics, acoustic signal used, and distance from source) the presence of an array can increase the signal strength of select spectral components when compared to a model with no array. With few exceptions, the models with arrays increased the total amplitude of acoustic signals over that of the smooth model at all distances we tested up to 160 centimeters. We conclude that the ability to uniquely alter the signal based on an array’s characteristics is evolutionarily beneficial and supports the concept that different species have different array configurations associated with their biological needs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brian W. Keeley
- Miridae, Sacramento, California, United States of America
- * E-mail:
| | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Keeley ATH, Basson G, Cameron DR, Heller NE, Huber PR, Schloss CA, Thorne JH, Merenlender AM. Making habitat connectivity a reality. Conserv Biol 2018; 32:1221-1232. [PMID: 29920775 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.13158] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2017] [Revised: 06/12/2018] [Accepted: 06/13/2018] [Indexed: 05/21/2023]
Abstract
Although a plethora of habitat-connectivity plans exists, protecting and restoring connectivity through on-the-ground action has been slow. We identified challenges to and opportunities for connectivity conservation through a literature review of project implementation, a workshop with scientists and conservation practitioners, 3 case studies of connectivity projects, and interviews with conservation professionals. Connectivity challenges and solutions tended to be context specific, dependent on land-ownership patterns, socioeconomic factors, and the policy framework. Successful connectivity implementation tended to be associated with development and promotion of a common vision among diverse sets of stakeholders, including nontraditional conservation actors, such as water districts and recreation departments, and with communication with partners and the public. Other factors that lead to successful implementation included undertaking empirical studies to prioritize and validate corridors and the identification of related co-benefits of corridor projects. Engaging partners involved in land management and planning, such as nongovernmental conservation organizations, public agencies, and private landowners, is critical to effective strategy implementation. A clear regulatory framework, including unambiguous connectivity conservation mandates, would increase public resource allocation, and incentive programs are needed to promote private sector engagement. Connectivity conservation must move more rapidly from planning to implementation. We provide an evidence-based solution composed of key elements for successful on-the-ground connectivity implementation. We identified the social processes necessary to advance habitat connectivity for biodiversity conservation and resilient landscapes under climate change.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annika T H Keeley
- Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, 130 Mulford Hall #3114, Berkeley, CA, 94720, U.S.A
| | - Galli Basson
- Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority, 33 Las Colinas Lane, San Jose, CA, 95119, U.S.A
| | - D Richard Cameron
- The Nature Conservancy, 201 Mission Street 4th Floor, San Francisco, CA, 94105, U.S.A
| | - Nicole E Heller
- Peninsula Open Space Trust, 222 High Street, Palo Alto, CA, 94022, U.S.A
| | - Patrick R Huber
- Agricultural Sustainability Institute, University of California, Davis, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA, 95616, U.S.A
| | - Carrie A Schloss
- The Nature Conservancy, 201 Mission Street 4th Floor, San Francisco, CA, 94105, U.S.A
| | - James H Thorne
- Department of Environmental Science and Policy, University of California, Davis, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA, 95616, U.S.A
| | - Adina M Merenlender
- Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, 130 Mulford Hall #3114, Berkeley, CA, 94720, U.S.A
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Abstract
The ears of many mammals have a set of uniformly spaced horizontal ridges that form groove arrays. Contact of coherent waves (e.g. acoustic waves) with a series of slits or grooves causes diffraction, which produces constructive and destructive interference patterns. Increases in signal strength will occur but will depend on the frequencies involved, the groove number and their separations. Diffraction effects can happen for a wide range of frequencies and wavelengths, but no array can diffract wavelengths greater than twice the groove separation, and it is for those wavelengths comparable in size with the groove separation that the effects are greatest. For example, when ridges in bat ears are 1 mm apart, the strongest influence will occur for a 1 mm wavelength which corresponds to a frequency of 343 kHz. If bats could use these wavelengths, it would help them to resolve objects or surface textures of about 0.5 mm. Given how critical acoustics are for bat function, we asked whether bats may be taking advantage of diffraction effects generated by the grooves. We hypothesize that groove number varies with bat foraging strategy. Examining 120 species, we found that groove number is related to both guild and ear length. Bats in guilds that glean prey items from foliage or ground have on average more grooves than bats in other guilds. Harmonics generated by echolocation calls are the most likely source for the wavelengths that would correspond to the groove separations. We apply the physical principles of wave reflection, diffraction, and superposition to support the hypothesis that acoustic responses generated from grooves may be useful to bats. We offer an explanation why some bat species do not have grooves. We also discuss the presence of groove arrays in non-echolocating Chiropterans, and five additional mammalian orders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brian W. Keeley
- School of Forestry, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona, United States of America
- * E-mail:
| | - Annika T. H. Keeley
- Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Planning, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, United States of America
| | - Padraig Houlahan
- Department of Physics, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Prescott, Arizona, United States of America
- Coconino Community College, Flagstaff, Arizona, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Blair C, Weigel DE, Balazik M, Keeley ATH, Walker FM, Landguth E, Cushman S, Murphy M, Waits L, Balkenhol N. A simulation-based evaluation of methods for inferring linear barriers to gene flow. Mol Ecol Resour 2012; 12:822-33. [PMID: 22551194 DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2012.03151.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 116] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
Different analytical techniques used on the same data set may lead to different conclusions about the existence and strength of genetic structure. Therefore, reliable interpretation of the results from different methods depends on the efficacy and reliability of different statistical methods. In this paper, we evaluated the performance of multiple analytical methods to detect the presence of a linear barrier dividing populations. We were specifically interested in determining if simulation conditions, such as dispersal ability and genetic equilibrium, affect the power of different analytical methods for detecting barriers. We evaluated two boundary detection methods (Monmonier's algorithm and WOMBLING), two spatial Bayesian clustering methods (TESS and GENELAND), an aspatial clustering approach (STRUCTURE), and two recently developed, non-Bayesian clustering methods [PSMIX and discriminant analysis of principal components (DAPC)]. We found that clustering methods had higher success rates than boundary detection methods and also detected the barrier more quickly. All methods detected the barrier more quickly when dispersal was long distance in comparison to short-distance dispersal scenarios. Bayesian clustering methods performed best overall, both in terms of highest success rates and lowest time to barrier detection, with GENELAND showing the highest power. None of the methods suggested a continuous linear barrier when the data were generated under an isolation-by-distance (IBD) model. However, the clustering methods had higher potential for leading to incorrect barrier inferences under IBD unless strict criteria for successful barrier detection were implemented. Based on our findings and those of previous simulation studies, we discuss the utility of different methods for detecting linear barriers to gene flow.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher Blair
- Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Toronto, 25 Willcocks Street, Toronto, ON M5S 3B2, Canada.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
|
10
|
Wymore AS, Keeley ATH, Yturralde KM, Schroer ML, Propper CR, Whitham TG. Genes to ecosystems: exploring the frontiers of ecology with one of the smallest biological units. New Phytol 2011; 191:19-36. [PMID: 21631507 DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2011.03730.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/30/2023]
Abstract
Genes and their expression levels in individual species can structure whole communities and affect ecosystem processes. Although much has been written about community and ecosystem phenotypes with a few model systems, such as poplar and goldenrod, here we explore the potential application of a community genetics approach with systems involving invasive species, climate change and pollution. We argue that community genetics can reveal patterns and processes that otherwise might remain undetected. To further facilitate the community genetics or genes-to-ecosystem concept, we propose four community genetics postulates that allow for the conclusion of a causal relationship between the gene and its effect on the ecosystem. Although most current studies do not satisfy these criteria completely, several come close and, in so doing, begin to provide a genetic-based understanding of communities and ecosystems, as well as a sound basis for conservation and management practices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adam S Wymore
- Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011, USA
| | - Annika T H Keeley
- School of Forestry, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011, USA
| | - Kasey M Yturralde
- School of Forestry, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011, USA
| | - Melanie L Schroer
- Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011, USA
| | - Catherine R Propper
- Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011, USA
| | - Thomas G Whitham
- Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011, USA
- Merriam-Powell Center for Environmental Research, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Keeley ATH, Keeley BW. The Mating System of Tadarida brasiliensis (Chiroptera: Molossidae) in a Large Highway Bridge Colony. J Mammal 2004. [DOI: 10.1644/bme-004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
|