ArticleNature communications2024
Contrasting genomic epidemiology between sympatric Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax populations.
Article in Nature communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- PvGTSeq and PvCRiSP: Two amplicon-based targeted sequencing panels for Plasmodium vivax.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Article
- Malaria control and the unexpected spread of diagnostic-resistantbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- SIMPLseq: a high-sensitivity Plasmodium falciparum genotyping and PCR contamination tracking tool.Malaria journal · 2026Article
- Mixed malaria infections: A critical review and Detect-Characterise-Act surveillance framework.Current research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases · 2026Review
- High connectivity and low differentiation of Plasmodium falciparum parasite populations in a setting with high seasonal migration.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- High connectivity and low differentiation of Plasmodium falciparum parasite populations in a setting with high seasonal migration.Research square · 2025Article
- Temporal and spatial dynamics of Plasmodium falciparum clonal lineages in Guyana.PLoS pathogens · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The malaria parasites Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax differ in key biological processes and associated clinical effects, but consequences on population-level transmission dynamics are difficult to predict. This co-endemic malaria study from Guyana details important epidemiological contrasts between the species by coupling population genomics (1396 spatiotemporally matched parasite genomes, primarily from 2020-21) with sociodemographic analysis (nationwide patient census from 2019). We describe how P. falciparum forms large, interrelated subpopulations that sporadically expand but generally exhibit restrained dispersal, whereby spatial distance and patient travel statistics predict parasite identity-by-descent (IBD). Case bias towards working-age adults is also strongly pronounced. P. vivax exhibits 46% higher average nucleotide diversity (π) and 6.5x lower average IBD. It occupies a wider geographic range, without evidence for outbreak-like expansions, only microgeographic patterns of isolation-by-distance, and weaker case bias towards adults. Possible latency-relapse effects also manifest in various analyses. For example, 11.0% of patients diagnosed with P. vivax in Greater Georgetown report no recent travel to endemic zones, and P. vivax clones recur in 11 of 46 patients incidentally sampled twice during the study. Polyclonality rate is also 2.1x higher than in P. falciparum, does not trend positively with estimated incidence, and correlates uniquely to selected demographics. We discuss possible underlying mechanisms and implications for malaria control.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.