Cited by 42Vector-borne infectious diseasesClimate Change and Health ImpactsMosquito-borne diseases and control

Fleatickrisk: a meteorological model developed to monitor and predict the activity and density of three tick species and the cat flea in Europe

Open access
Beugnet, Frédéric, Chalvet-Monfray, Karine, Loukos, Harilaos·2009·Geospatial health

Abstract

Mathematical modelling is quite a recent tool in epidemiology. Geographical information system (GIS) combined with remote sensing (data collection and analysis) provide valuable models, but the integration of climatologic models in parasitology and epidemiology is less common. The aim of our model, called "FleaTickRisk", was to use meteorological data and forecasts to monitor the activity and density of some arthropods. Our parasitological model uses the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) meteorological model integrating biological parameters. The WRF model provides a temperature and humidity picture four times a day (at 6:00, 12:00, 18:00 and 24:00 hours). Its geographical resolution is 27 x 27 km over Europe (area between longitudes 10.5 degrees W and 30 degrees E and latitudes 37.75 degrees N and 62 degrees N). The model also provides weekly forecasts. Past data were compared and revalidated using current meteorological data generated by ground stations and weather satellites. The WRF model also includes geographical information stemming from United States Geophysical Survey biotope maps with a 30'' spatial resolution (approximately 900 x 900 m). WRF takes into account specific climatic conditions due to valleys, altitudes, lakes and wind specificities. The biological parameters of Ixodes ricinus, Dermacentor reticulatus, Rhipicephalus sanguineus and Ctenocephalides felis felis were transformed into a matrix of activity. This activity matrix is expressed as a percentage, ranging from 0 to 100, for each interval of temperature x humidity. The activity of these arthropods is defined by their ability to infest hosts, take blood meals and reproduce. For each arthropod, the matrix was calculated using existing data collected under optimal temperature and humidity conditions, as well as the timing of the life cycle. The mathematical model integrating both the WRF model (meteorological data + geographical data) and the biological matrix provides two indexes: an activity index (ranging from 0 to 100), calculated for the previous week and predictive for the coming week, and a cumulative index (ranging from 0 to 1000) which takes into account the past 12 weeks. The indexes are calculated twice a day for each geographical point all over Europe and are corrected based on three types of defined biotopes: urban and sub-urban areas, rural areas, and wilderness and forests. To clarify the presentation, indexes are calculated within intervals and are presented as colour maps grouping index isoclines. We hypothesised that the populations of tick and flea hosts are not lacking and therefore do not affect the numbers of arthropods. However, microclimates and biotopes have a major impact, especially on tick populations, and the results provided by the model must therefore be adjusted to local conditions by specialists, such as local veterinarians. Where fleas are concerned, the model takes into account their outdoor activity and ignores their indoor life cycle. The accuracy of the data was verified throughout 2007 and 2008, using sentinel veterinary clinics and tick samples, as well as comparisons with published surveys. The maps constructed with the model are available to veterinary practitioners on www.FleaTickRisk.com.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4081/gh.2009.213

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Rhipicephalus sanguineus, endemic in Mediterranean regions, can now survive and develop in Southwest France up to Nantes and in Southeast France up to Lyon.

    “The use of a meteorological model [13] and biological data regarding the brown dog tick, Rhipicephalus sanguineus, applied to Europe since 1960, clearly indicates that this tick species, endemic in Mediterranean regions, can now survive and develop in the Southwest of France up to Nantes and in the Southeast of France up to Lyon [14] (Fig. 2).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 43 · Cited by 42

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Beugnet F, Kenny MJ, Day MJ, Shaw SE, 2003. A PCR-based comparative survey of arthropod-transmitted infections in dogs, cats and prevalence in ticks in southern France. Proceedings of the Congress of WAAVP 2003, New Orleans, USA.
  2. Beugnet F, Loukos H, Chalvet-Monfray K, Bicout D, 2008. FleaTickRisk: a climatic model developed to monitor and predict the activity and the density of 3 tick species and the cat flea in France. Proceedings the Congress EMOP X, Paris, France.
  3. Zwieflhofer W, Kreitz N (Eds). World Scientific, pp. 269- 276.
  4. Vayssier-Taussat M, Petit E, Franc M, Marotel M, Beugnet F, Boulouis HJ, 2005. Preliminary epidemiological study of the prevalence of Erhlichia spp., Anaplasma phagocy- tophilum, Babesia spp., Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato and Rickettsia spp DNA in ticks collected on domestic carni- vores in France. Proceedings, Tick Transmitted Pathogen 5th Congress, Neuchatel, Switzerland, September 2005.

Authors
Beugnet, F., Chalvet-Monfray, K., & Loukos, H.
Venue
Geospatial health
Published
2009-11-01
Volume
4
Issue
1
Pages
97
ISSN
  • 1827-1987 (ISSN-L)
  • 1970-7096
OpenAlex
W2123131325
Cited by
42
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Geospatial health (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Parasitology › Vector-borne infectious diseases
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Climate Change and Health Impacts
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Mosquito-borne diseases and control
Keywords
tick-borne disease risk, Ixodes ricinus, Dermacentor reticulatus, Rhipicephalus sanguineus, Ctenocephalides felis, WRF model, temperature and humidity, cumulative risk index, vector surveillance, Europe, mathematical modeling
MeSH terms
Animals, Cats, Europe, Siphonaptera, Forecasting, Ticks, Models, Statistical, Geographic Information Systems, Meteorology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review