4.7 Article

Machine Learning Modeling of Aedes albopictus Habitat Suitability in the 21st Century

期刊

INSECTS
卷 14, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/insects14050447

关键词

machine learning; vector-borne diseases; habitat suitability

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Asian tiger mosquito is a significant vector of arboviruses, posing a risk for diseases such as dengue, chikungunya, and zika. It is highly adaptable and can thrive outside its native tropical range. Climate and socio-economic changes are expected to facilitate its global spread and increase the burden of vector-borne diseases.
The Asian tiger mosquito, Aedes albopictus, is an important vector of arboviruses that cause diseases such as dengue, chikungunya, and zika. The vector is highly invasive and adapted to survive in temperate northern territories outside its native tropical and sub-tropical range. Climate and socio-economic change are expected to facilitate its range expansion and exacerbate the global vector-borne disease burden. To project shifts in the global habitat suitability of the vector, we developed an ensemble machine learning model, incorporating a combination of a Random Forest and XGBoost binary classifiers, trained with a global collection of vector surveillance data and an extensive set of climate and environmental constraints. We demonstrate the reliable performance and wide applicability of the ensemble model in comparison to the known global presence of the vector, and project that suitable habitats will expand globally, most significantly in the northern hemisphere, putting at least an additional billion people at risk of vector-borne diseases by the middle of the 21st century. We project several highly populated areas of the world will be suitable for Ae. albopictus populations, such as the northern parts of the USA, Europe, and India by the end of the century, which highlights the need for coordinated preventive surveillance efforts of potential entry points by local authorities and stakeholders.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据