Perspectives
James N. Mills and James E. Childs
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| Back to article Figure 1. Distribution of
recognized, autochthonous, New World hantaviruses. |
![]() |
| Back to article Figure 2. Geographic distribution of the deer mouse, Peromyscus maniculatus (shaded) (48). |
| Back to article Figure 3. Distribution of the corn mouse, Calomys musculinus (dots; 20), and disease-endemic area of Argentine hemorrhagic fever (AHF) (shaded). |
| Back to article Figure 4. Schematic of mark-release-recapture grid in central Argentina. The green shaded areas are roadside (rows 1 and 2) and fence-line (column 7) habitats. Unshaded areas are crop fields. Intersections of dotted lines represent the 144 trap stations of the 12 x 12 trapping grid. The height of the flagpoles shows the cumulative numbers of corn mouse captures at each trap station of the 30-month sampling period. Red boxes are the locations of antigen-positive captures. Reprinted with permission from (32). |
| Back to article Figure 5. Mean monthly trap success for Calomys musculinus (number of captures per 100 trap nights) and numbers of confirmed cases of Argentine hemorrhagic fever (AHF) in central Argentina, March 1988 to August 1990. Reprinted with permission from (33). |
| Back to article Figure 6. Simplified hypothetical model of interactions among ecosystem components within disease-endemic areas for rodent-borne zoonotic disease. Left-hand side of model demonstrates potential use of remote sensors (satellites) for predicting relative risk for human disease. |
![]()
Top of Page | Current
Issue | Upcoming Issue | Past Issue | Search
| Home