Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28289253›Full record

ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2017

What is a vector?

Anthony James Wilson, Eric René Morgan, Mark Booth, Rachel Norman, Sarah Elizabeth Perkins, Heidi Christine Hauffe, Nicole Mideo, Janis Antonovics, Hamish McCallum, Andy Fenton

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Adaptive immunity inApplied and environmental microbiology · 2024
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Reaching the World Health Organization elimination targets for schistosomiasis: the importance of a One Health perspective.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Anthony James WilsonVector-borne Viral Diseases Programme, The Pirbright Institute, Ash Road, Pirbright, Woking GU24 0NF, UK anthony.wilson@pirbright.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2000-2914
Eric René MorganSchool of Veterinary Sciences, University of Bristol, Life Sciences Building, 24 Tyndall Avenue, Bristol BS8 1TQ, UK.
Mark BoothSchool of Medicine, Pharmacy and Health, Durham University, Thornaby TS17 6BH, UK.
Rachel NormanSchool of Natural Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, UK.
Sarah Elizabeth PerkinsSchool of Biosciences, Cardiff University, Sir Martin Evans Building, Museum Avenue, Cardiff CF10 3AX, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7457-2699
Heidi Christine HauffeDepartment of Biodiversity and Molecular Ecology, Centre for Research and Innovation, Fondazione Edmund Mach, Via E. Mach 1, 38010 S Michele all'Adige (TN), Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3098-8964
Nicole MideoDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5S 3B2.
Janis AntonovicsDepartment of Biology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5189-1611
Hamish McCallumEnvironmental Futures Research Institute, Griffith University, Nathan 4111, Queensland, Australia.
Andy FentonInstitute of Integrative Biology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 7ZB, UK.

Funding

Ecology and evolution of multiple transmission modes: anther-smut diseaseR01GM122061 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA · PI ANTONOVICS, JANIS · 2016 to 2019
$1.6M
Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BBS/E/I/00007033Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BBS/E/I/00007036NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM122061
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many important and rapidly emerging pathogens of humans, livestock and wildlife are 'vector-borne'. However, the term 'vector' has been applied to diverse agents in a broad range of epidemiological systems. In this perspective, we briefly review some common definitions, identify the strengths and weaknesses of each and consider the functional differences between vectors and other hosts from a range of ecological, evolutionary and public health perspectives. We then consider how the use of designations can afford insights into our understanding of epidemiological and evolutionary processes that are not otherwise apparent. We conclude that from a medical and veterinary perspective, a combination of the 'haematophagous arthropod' and 'mobility' definitions is most useful because it offers important insights into contact structure and control and emphasizes the opportunities for pathogen shifts among taxonomically similar species with similar feeding modes and internal environments. From a population dynamics and evolutionary perspective, we suggest that a combination of the 'micropredator' and 'sequential' definition is most appropriate because it captures the key aspects of transmission biology and fitness consequences for the pathogen and vector itself. However, we explicitly recognize that the value of a definition always depends on the research question under study.This article is part of the themed issue 'Opening the black box: re-examining the ecology and evolution of parasite transmission'.

Indexed as

Animals, WildDisease VectorsAnimal DiseasesAnimalsPopulation Dynamicsarbovirusdisease ecologyhost–pathogen interactionspublic healthtransmissionvector

Identifiers

PMID28289253
PMCPMC5352812

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.