ABSTRACT
Reports of P. vivax infections among Duffy-negative hosts have accumulated throughout sub-Saharan Africa. Despite this growing body of evidence, no nationally representative epidemiological surveys of P. vivax in sub-Saharan Africa have been performed. To overcome this gap in knowledge, we screened over 17,000 adults in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) for P. vivax using samples from the 2013-2014 Demographic Health Survey. Overall, we found a 2.97% (95% CI: 2.28%, 3.65%) prevalence of P. vivax infections across the DRC. Infections were associated with few risk-factors and demonstrated a relatively flat distribution of prevalence across space with focal regions of relatively higher prevalence in the north and northeast. Mitochondrial genomes suggested that DRC P. vivax were distinct from circulating non-human ape strains and an ancestral European P. vivax strain, and instead may be part of a separate contemporary clade. Our findings suggest P. vivax is diffusely spread across the DRC at a low prevalence, which may be associated with long-term carriage of low parasitemia, frequent relapses, or a general pool of infections with limited forward propagation.
Subject(s)
Carrier State/epidemiology , Malaria, Vivax/epidemiology , Parasitemia/epidemiology , Plasmodium vivax/isolation & purification , Adolescent , Adult , Age Factors , Carrier State/diagnosis , Carrier State/parasitology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Democratic Republic of the Congo/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Malaria, Vivax/diagnosis , Malaria, Vivax/parasitology , Male , Mass Screening/statistics & numerical data , Parasitemia/parasitology , Prevalence , Risk Factors , Young AdultABSTRACT
Phylogenetic trees are a crucial backbone for a wide breadth of biological research spanning systematics, organismal biology, ecology, and medicine. In 2015, the Open Tree of Life project published a first draft of a comprehensive tree of life, summarizing digitally available taxonomic and phylogenetic knowledge. This paper reviews, investigates, and addresses the following questions as a follow-up to that paper, from the perspective of researchers involved in building this summary of the tree of life: Is there a tree of life and should we reconstruct it? Is available data sufficient to reconstruct the tree of life? Do we have access to phylogenetic inferences in usable form? Can we combine different phylogenetic estimates across the tree of life? And finally, what is the future of understanding the tree of life?
