4.4 Article

On the importance of negative controls in viral landscape phylogeography

Journal

VIRUS EVOLUTION
Volume 4, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/ve/vey023

Keywords

viral phylogeography; landscape phylogeography; molecular epidemiology; RYMV

Categories

Funding

  1. Fund for Scientific Research (FWO) Flanders (Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek, Flanders, Belgium)
  2. Fonds National de la Recherche Scientifique (FNRS, Belgium)
  3. European Research Council under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme [725422-ReservoirDOCS]
  4. Wellcome Trust [206298/Z/17/Z]
  5. Special Research Fund, KU Leuven (Bijzonder Onderzoeksfonds, KU Leuven) [OT/14/115]
  6. Research Foundation-Flanders (Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek-Vlaanderen) [G066215N, G0D5117N, G0B9317N]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Phylogeographic reconstructions are becoming an established procedure to evaluate the factors that could impact virus spread. While a discrete phylogeographic approach can be used to test predictors of transition rates among discrete locations, alternative continuous phylogeographic reconstructions can also be exploited to investigate the impact of underlying environmental layers on the dispersal velocity of a virus. The two approaches are complementary tools for studying pathogens' spread, but in both cases, care must be taken to avoid misinterpretations. Here, we analyse rice yellow mottle virus (RYMV) sequence data from West and East Africa to illustrate how both approaches can be used to study the impact of environmental factors on the virus' dispersal frequency and velocity. While it was previously reported that host connectivity was a major determinant of RYMV spread, we show that this was a false positive result due to the lack of appropriate negative controls. We also discuss and compare the phylodynamic tools currently available for investigating the impact of environmental factors on virus spread.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available