Abstract

More is not automatically better. Generation and accumulation of information reflecting the complexity of zoonotic diseases as ecological systems do not necessarily lead to improved interpretation of the obtained information and understanding of these complex systems. The traditional conceptual framework for analysis of diseases ecology is neither designed for, nor adaptable enough, to absorb the mass of diverse sources of relevant information. The multidirectional and multidimensional approaches to analyses form an inevitable part in defining a role of zoonotic pathogens and animal hosts considering the complexity of their inter‐relations. And the more data we have, the more involved the interpretation needs to be. The keyword for defining the roles of microbes as pathogens, animals as hosts, and environmental parameters as infection drivers is “functional importance.” Microbes can act as pathogens toward their host only if/when they recognize the animal organism as the target. The same is true when the host recognizes the microbe as a pathogen rather than harmless symbiont based on the context of its occurrence in that host. Here, we propose conceptual tools developed in the realm of the interdisciplinary sciences of complexity and biosemiotics for extending beyond the currently dominant mindset in ecology and evolution of infectious diseases. We also consider four distinct hierarchical levels of perception guiding how investigators can approach zoonotic agents, as a subject of their research, representing differences in emphasizing particular elements and their relations versus more unified systemic approaches.

Highlights

  • The need for an evolutionary basis in studying and interpreting ecology of infectious diseases, virulence trade-­offs, transmission mechanisms, spatial structuring, competition between microbial strains, and within-­host pathogen dynamics is well accepted

  • We propose conceptual tools developed in the realm of interdisciplinary sciences of complexity and biosemiotics for extending analyses beyond the currently dominant mindset in ecology and evolution of infectious diseases

  • Examples can include understanding how phenotypic variations of microbes determine the infectious process in hosts, how animals adapt to a long-­term exposure to pathogens, how new mutations or laterally transferred genetic material can lead to increasing virulence or antibiotic resistance in microbial populations, how the size and connectivity of animal populations contribute to pathogen persistence, how a human-­ driven transformation of environment can result in emergence of new

Read more

Summary

| INTRODUCTION

The need for an evolutionary basis in studying and interpreting ecology of infectious diseases, virulence trade-­offs, transmission mechanisms, spatial structuring, competition between microbial strains, and within-­host pathogen dynamics is well accepted. Examples can include understanding how phenotypic variations of microbes determine the infectious process in hosts, how animals adapt to a long-­term exposure to pathogens, how new mutations or laterally transferred genetic material can lead to increasing virulence or antibiotic resistance in microbial populations, how the size and connectivity of animal populations contribute to pathogen persistence, how a human-­ driven transformation of environment can result in emergence of new. Some limitations of these criteria became evident soon after their proposal, for example, inability of culturing some pathogens, the postulates still serve as a guiding light to define a relation between specific microbes and diseases in animals and people.

KOSOY and KOSOY
Findings
| CONCLUDING REMARKS
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call