Skip to main content
Advertisement

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Map showing the provinces of South Africa and study areas.

< https://dataportal-mdb-sa.opendata.arcgis.com/>.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Spatial distributions of positively and negatively diagnosed animals between 1998 and 2017, and changes in land use over time.

< https://www.dffe.gov.za>.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 1.

Number of animal specimens submitted to the laboratory and confirmed as positive, and positivity rates for domestic and wildlife species.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 3.

Temporal dynamics of human, dog, and wildlife rabies cases in northern South Africa between 1998 and 2017.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Choropleth maps of the distributions between 1998 and 2017 of dog rabies cases indicated per square kilometer by local municipality as a color gradient, and locations of human rabies victims shown by different colors and symbols indicating the source animals.

< https://dataportal-mdb-sa.opendata.arcgis.com/>.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Spatio-temporal clusters of dog rabies in each time period and spatial distributions of wildlife rabies cases indicated on choropleth maps of dog rabies in four time periods between 1998 and 2017.

Red dots indicate local municipalities affected by spatio-temporal clusters. MC denotes a local municipality of Gauteng Province, and was excluded from this study. < https://dataportal-mdb-sa.opendata.arcgis.com/>.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Table 2.

Time period, province, number of dog rabies cases, and size of the spatio-temporal clusters in South Africa and their reproduction number (Rt).

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 6.

Phylogenetic tree of rabies viruses in dogs and wildlife in 10 spatio-temporal clusters of dog rabies between 1998 and 2017.

The X-axis shows the estimated years of rabies virus evolution prior to 2017. The first block of the virus designation indicates the animal species: Dog, black-backed jackal (Bbj), or civet cat (Civet). The second block is the cluster identification, the third the virus code, followed by the year of sample submission.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Table 3.

Univariable analysis results for dog rabies cases in South Africa between 1998 and 2002 including the Kruger National Park.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Univariable analysis results for dog rabies cases in South Africa between 1998 and 2002 excluding the Kruger National Park.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Fig 7.

Predicted ecological risk of dog rabies.

Panel a) the risk between 1998 and 2002 with the Kruger National Park (KNP); b) between 2008 and 2012 with the KNP; c) between 1998 and 2002 without the KNP; and d) between 2008 and 2012 without the KNP. Red municipalities had the highest rabies risk, whereas green areas had the lowest risk. < https://dataportal-mdb-sa.opendata.arcgis.com/>.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Table 5.

Multivariable analysis results for INLA using a zero-inflated convolution models with negative binomial errors for predicting dog rabies cases in South Africa between 1998 and 2002 using datasets with and without Kruger National Park.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Table 6.

Univariable analysis results for dog rabies cases in South Africa between 2008 and 2012 including the Kruger National Park.

More »

Table 6 Expand

Table 7.

Univariable analysis results for dog rabies cases in South Africa between 2008 and 2012 excluding the Kruger National Park.

More »

Table 7 Expand

Table 8.

Multivariable analysis results for INLA using a zero-inflated convolution models with negative binomial errors for predicting dog rabies cases in South Africa between 2008 and 2012 using datasets with and without Kruger National Park.

More »

Table 8 Expand