BMC Infectious Diseases
BioMed Central
Open Access
Research article
Transmission dynamics of rabies virus in Thailand: Implications for
disease control
Jessada Denduangboripant*1, Supaporn Wacharapluesadee2,
Boonlert Lumlertdacha3, Nipada Ruankaew4, Wirongrong Hoonsuwan5,
Apirom Puanghat 6 and Thiravat Hemachudha7
Address: 1Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand, 2Molecular Biology Laboratory for
Neurological Diseases, Chulalongkorn University Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand, 3Queen Saovabha Memorial Institute, Thai Red Cross Society,
Bangkok, Thailand, 4Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand, 5Department of Livestock
Development, Ministry of Agriculture, Bangkok, Thailand, 6Department of Disease Control, Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand and
7Molecular Biology Laboratory for Neurological Diseases, Chulalongkorn University Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand
Email: Jessada Denduangboripant* - jessada.d@chula.ac.th; Supaporn Wacharapluesadee - spwa02@yahoo.com;
Boonlert Lumlertdacha - qsmibl02@yahoo.com; Nipada Ruankaew - nipada.r@chula.ac.th;
Wirongrong Hoonsuwan - w_hoonsuwan@hotmail.com; Apirom Puanghat - apiromp@health.moph.go.th; Thiravat Hemachudha - thcu@usa.net
* Corresponding author
Published: 29 June 2005
BMC Infectious Diseases 2005, 5:52
doi:10.1186/1471-2334-5-52
Received: 02 May 2005
Accepted: 29 June 2005
This article is available from: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/5/52
© 2005 Denduangboripant et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
Background: In Thailand, rabies remains a neglected disease with authorities continuing to rely on human
death statistics while ignoring the financial burden resulting from an enormous increase in post-exposure
prophylaxis. Past attempts to conduct a mass dog vaccination and sterilization program have been limited
to Bangkok city and have not been successful. We have used molecular epidemiology to define geographic
localization of rabies virus phylogroups and their pattern of spread in Thailand.
Methods: We analyzed 239 nucleoprotein gene sequences from animal and human brain samples
collected from all over Thailand between 1998 and 2002. We then reconstructed a phylogenetic tree
correlating these data with geographical information.
Results: All sequences formed a monophyletic tree of 2 distinct phylogroups, TH1 and TH2. Three
subgroups were identified in the TH1 subgroup and were distributed in the middle region of the country.
Eight subgroups of TH2 viruses were identified widely distributed throughout the country overlapping the
TH1 territory. There was a correlation between human-dependent transportation routes and the
distribution of virus.
Conclusion: Inter-regional migration paths of the viruses might be correlated with translocation of dogs
associated with humans. Interconnecting factors between human socioeconomic and population density
might determine the transmission dynamics of virus in a rural-to-urban polarity. The presence of 2 or more
rabies virus groups in a location might be indicative of a gene flow, reflecting a translocation of dogs within
such region and adjacent areas. Different approaches may be required for rabies control based on the
homo- or heterogeneity of the virus. Areas containing homogeneous virus populations should be targeted
first. Control of dog movement associated with humans is essential.
Page 1 of 11
(page number not for citation purposes)
BMC Infectious Diseases 2005, 5:52
Background
Rabies is not high on the list of the World Heath Organization's list of important infectious diseases, and is also
often overlooked by regional, national, and local publichealth professionals. The dog is the primary reservoir and
vector of rabies transmission in Thailand and developing
countries [1].
To date, the evaluation of the importance of rabies has
been determined solely by estimating the number of
human deaths and statistics on dog rabies infectivity,
which may not be a reliable indicator in developing countries [2]. For example, an accurate assessment of the burden of rabies will never be complete without including the
financial burden incurred due to human rabies post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) and animal control.
In Thailand, the substantial decline in human rabies
deaths from almost 200 a decade ago to less than 20 in
2003, has occurred due to the huge and continuously
escalating financial obligation in the annual budget
required to supply rabies biologicals for human PEP.
More than 400,000 patients received PEP in 2003, as compared to approximately 90,000 in 1991 [Ministry of Public Health (MOPH) annual report]. Moreover, annual
human rabies deaths in Bangkok, where diagnostic facilities and neurologists are readily available, rose from less
than 5 in 1990–1994 to 5–10 in 1995–2001 (MOPH
annual report).
There are no reliable statistical analyses of dog populations that could be evaluated to determine the effectiveness of the current human rabies prevention
methodologies used in Thailand. One quoted figure of 6
million dogs in Thailand is undoubtedly an underestimate of the actual population present within the country.
The Division of Disease Control and Ministry of Agriculture reported that between 60 to 78% of the dog population was vaccinated (based on estimated total
population) in Thailand between 1995 and 2000. Experience in Latin America has shown that vaccination of a critical percentage of dogs, on the order of 40–70%, at least
in major urban areas, was sufficient to interrupt canine
rabies transmission and resulted in diminished human
rabies deaths [3]. However, this has not been the case in
Thailand. The percentage of rabies infectivity of samples
sent to diagnostic laboratories all over the country
remains high, within the range of 30–40% (MOPH
annual report).
A survey in 1999 by the Department of Livestock and the
Bangkok Metropolitan Administration revealed that stray
dog populations in Bangkok (an area of 1,565 sq km)
have tripled in size, (from 40,756 in 1992 to 110,584 in
1999). Additionally, a 2002 survey suggested that dog
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/5/52
populations were increasing, both in Bangkok and the
countrywide, implying that the specific carrying capacity
of canine habitats has not yet been saturated. Moreover, a
substantial number of dogs, especially stray and community dogs, are not vaccinated.
Due to budget limitation, an intensive dog vaccination
and sterilization program has been in place only in Bangkok City since June 2002. Seventy-two million baht
(approximately US$ 1,800,000) were spent during the
first 2 phases of the program (June 2002-September
2003), with the third phase (October 2003-September
2004) costing an additional 31 million baht (approximately US$ 775,000). Although there were no human
rabies deaths in Bangkok in 2002, 3 deaths were reported
in 2003. Preliminary assessment revealed that less than 20
percent of the estimated dog population was sterilized
and vaccinated.
Without reliable data on dog ecology and surveillance of
rabies infection in dogs and humans, it is not possible to
develop a strategic plan for rabies prevention and control
and to assess program success. Therefore, our objective
was to use molecular biological techniques to characterize
the presence and movement of rabies virus according to
geographical locations in Thailand and use this information as baseline data to design and implement rabies prevention programs in the country. Areas with evidence of
continuous gene flow, and presence of viruses of more
than one genetic group or subclade, were characterized.
The potential translocation of rabies virus from one area
to another was evaluated in relation to natural barriers,
transportation routes, human activity and socioeconomic
factors.
Methods
Samples
Two hundred and thirty nine brain samples (7 humans, 7
cats, 216 dogs, 6 cattle, 1 water buffalo, 2 squirrels) from
56 provinces were obtained from 25 diagnostic laboratories all over Thailand between 1998 and 2002. Samples
selected for analysis were chosen to be representative of
the geographical location in each province down to the
scale of small districts (subdivisions of a province). Samples were not available from 20 provinces. All samples
were prescreened for evidence of rabies virus using the
direct fluorescence antibody test and kept frozen at -80
degree C until genetic analysis was conducted.
Genetic analysis
Genetic typing was based on nucleotide sequence differences in cDNA obtained by direct one step RT-PCR amplification of the nucleocapsid (N) gene fragment from the
samples. The amplified products of 414 bp (nt 1101 –
1506) were characterized by sequencing. RT-PCR and
Page 2 of 11
(page number not for citation purposes)
BMC Infectious Diseases 2005, 5:52
sequencing procedures were conducted as previously
described [4]. One set of primers was used for RT-PCR
sequencing reaction. GenBank accession numbers of the
N sequences in this study were AY849022-AY849260 (see
Additional file 1).
Twelve additional N sequences were retrieved from Genbank database to be outgroups for this study: a non-rabies
lyssavirus Mokola Virus (S59448), 3 Australian Bat Lyssavirus
(ABLV)
isolates
(NC003243,
AF081020,
AF418014), a rabies strain Pasteur Virus (PV) (M13215),
6 rabies viruses from other Asian countries (AY138550
from Sri Lanka, AY138551 Sri Lanka, AY138549 Sri
Lanka, AF155039 China, AF374721 India, U22482 Iran)
and 1 rabies isolate from Thailand (U22653). The
sequences of all isolates were aligned together using program ClustalX [5]. Genetic relationships between these N
gene sequences were calculated and a tree diagram was
drawn using neighbor-joining (NJ) method, which was
suitable to illustrate below species-level genetic relationships. These phylogenetic analyses were performed with
program PAUP* version 4.0b10 [6]. Robustness of the
tree was accessed with branch supporting-values from
bootstrap (BS) statistic analyses (1,000 replicates). The
collecting provinces and districts of all virus samples were
mapped on the trees. Geographical locations of samples
were mapped (Arcview 3.2, ESRI) and compared among
the subgroups.
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/5/52
and the tree topology, the TH1 phylogroup was divided
into 3 minor subgroups (Fig. 2): TH1A isolates were identified in Bangkok and outskirts as well as some other provinces in the central region; TH1B isolates were identified
in the northern and central regions, and TH1C isolates
were identified in Bangkok, the central, and the upper
southern regions.
The TH2 rabies phylogroup was distributed in much
wider areas than the TH1 phylogroup (Fig. 1), from the
northern to the southern-most regions of the country. The
distribution areas of TH2 group covered almost every
province in the northeastern region, all main provinces in
the upper central and the central regions, Bangkok and 5
surrounding provinces, the eastern and western regions,
and nearly the entire area of southern Thailand. Using
similar criteria as in the TH1 group, TH2 was divided into
8 subgroups: TH2A (Fig. 3) with samples from the northeastern region, TH2B (Fig. 3) with samples from the south
and some northeastern provinces, TH2C (Fig. 4) from a
few provinces scattered in the east, upper central, and
northeast, TH2D (Fig. 4) from western provinces, TH2E
(Fig. 4) had a much wider distribution-range including
the far north, northeast, central including provinces
around Bangkok, to the upper south, TH2F (Fig. 4) and
TH2G (Fig. 5) were mainly located in the northeastern
regions, and TH2H (Fig. 5) was found in the lower north
to the upper central.
Results
Discussion
Phylogenetic analyses of the 239 N rabies sequences collected from all over Thailand clearly demonstrated that all
of the isolates formed a monophyletic group with 100%
boostrap supporting values, separate from Mokola Virus,
Australian Bat Lyssavirus (ABLV), Pasteur Virus (PV) and
other Asian rabies viruses (Fig. 1). The N sequences from
India and Sri Lanka were weakly grouped with those of
Thai rabies virus with 51% bootstrap support. Neither the
sequences of infected human nor non-canine animals
(cats and other wildlife) were specifically clustered as a
unique group, but rather paired with the dog rabies
viruses analyzed in the study. Two major viral groups were
clearly recognized from the tree and designated as TH1
and TH2 clusters, with 82% and 68% bootstrap supporting values, respectively.
The use of molecular biological techniques to evaluate the
epidemiology of viral diseases is being increasingly
employed to complement conventional methods [[7-11],
for examples of rabies epidemiology]. These techniques
can give a clearer understanding of the origination and
transmission patterns of viral epidemics. Eventually, data
produced from molecular epidemiological studies could
lead to a better understanding of and a more effective
strategy to control the spread of infectious diseases.
Considering sampling locations of viral isolates, both
Thai rabies phylogroups were confined to certain geographical areas, though overlapping did occur in some
areas (see the map of Thailand in Fig. 1). TH1 viruses were
found mainly in the middle part of the country, from the
lower northern region to the central region, Bangkok and
surrounding provinces, and the upper southern region of
Thailand. Based on BS supporting values on each branch,
branch lengths (equally to numbers of substitutions/site),
Our study revealed that all of the currently identified Thai
rabies viruses share a common origin that is genetically
distant from the PV, ABLV, and Mokola outgroups. Additionally, the monophyletic tree of the Thai rabies viruses
analyzed in this study was clearly distinguishable from
other rabies N sequences from India, Sri Lanka, China,
and Iran (Fig. 1). Thus, rabies viruses circulating in Thailand (or in Southeast Asia) could possibly have an exclusive evolutionary background that might be recognized as
being unique, an hypothesis previously suggested by Susetya et al. [12]. It will be necessary to analyze additional
sequences of rabies viruses circulating in neighboring
countries adjacent to Thailand to confirm this hypothesis.
Page 3 of 11
(page number not for citation purposes)
BMC Infectious Diseases 2005, 5:52
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/5/52
NJ
Mokola
100%
ABL NC 003243
ABL AF081020
AF374721 India
AY138551 Sri Lanka
Outline.shp
Province
Th1_2.shp
TH1
TH1&2
TH2
100%
AY138550 Sri Lanka
85%
AY138549 Sri Lanka
96%
99%
ABL AF418014
92%
51%
100%
100%
TH 1
u22653 Thailand
Thai
Rabies
Virus
AF155039 China
82%
68%
u22482 Iran
PV
TH 2
0.005 substitutions/site
Figure 1 between NJ tree of Thai rabies N genes and geographical distribution map
Comparison
Comparison between NJ tree of Thai rabies N genes and geographical distribution map. Neighbor-joining (NJ)
tree based on 414 bp nucleotide sequences of the N genes of all 239 Thai rabies virus isolates compared with other 11 lyssavirus outgroups. Numbers along tree branches are >50% bootstrap supporting-value (1,000 replicates). The map of Thailand
indicates geographical distributions of the 2 major phylogroups, TH1 and TH2, in a district-level (a subdivision of a province).
The NJ genetic distance tree also confirmed that the
sequences obtained from non-canine sources (human,
cats and other mammals) were very similar to those
obtained from rabid dogs. No specific grouping of
sequences from rabies virus isolated from non-canine species was identified. Instead, these rabies virus sequences
were scattered across the tree. This finding was in accord
to our expectation that the dog is a prime reservoir and
transmitting vector for rabies and causes spillover to
human and domestic animals and wildlife. Nevertheless,
we are also aware that there may be other vectors, such as
bats, and other lyssaviruses, besides genotype 1, circulating in Thailand. In fact, our recent survey in Thai bats indicated that as many as 7.5% of the bat population had
evidence of lyssavirus infection by an as yet unidentified
genotype(s) [13].
The 2 major groups found in our Thai rabies phylogeny
were judged to be significant with high bootstrap supporting values. Notably, these 2 major lineages resembled the
putative groups A and B found in our previous study [14]
in which fewer numbers of samples from Bangkok and its
surrounding provinces were analyzed. The 2 phylogroups
we identified had certain trends in their geographical distributions. The distribution areas of TH1 group were only
found in the central part of the country – from Nakhon
Sawan province, down along Choa Praya river to the capital city of Bangkok, ending at Ranong province in the
Page 4 of 11
(page number not for citation purposes)
BMC Infectious Diseases 2005, 5:52
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/5/52
NJ
82
83
57
78
TH1
90
TH2
125SSktb Samut Sakhon (Krathum Baen)
112PTtyb Pathum Thani (Thanyaburi)
89PTtb Pathum Thani (Thanyaburi)
HM65BK Bangkok (Huai Khwang)
176SSktb Samut Sakhon (Krathum Baen)
TH1C
191AYsn Ayutthaya (Sena)
C267BKbkn Bangkok (Bangkok Noi)
64 228NBtn Nonthaburi (Sai Noi)
95NBtn Nonthaburi (Sai Noi)
52
222NBbbt Nonthaburi (Bang Bua Thong)
65 187SSm Samut Sakhon (Mueng)
54
215NPncsNakhon Pathom (NakhonChaisi)
23SPppdSamut Prakan (Phra Pradaeng)
86
232NPsp Nakhon Pathom (Sam Phran)
61 501RNm Ranong (Mueng)
64
495RNm Ranong (Mueng)
494RNm Ranong (Mueng)
493RNm Ranong (Mueng)
157PJsry Prachuap Khiri Khan (Sam Roi Yot)
811SUkrm Sukhothai (Khiri Mat)
784SUm Sukhothai (Mueang)
802KPlkb Kamphaeng Phet (Lan Krabue)
796PNbrk Phisanulok (Bang Rakam)
63
785SUkkl Sukhothai (Kong Krailat)
66
801SUsk Sukhothai (Sawankhalok)
64
813PNbrk Phisanulok (Bang Rakam)
424PN Phisanulok (Bang Rakam)
66 426PN Phisanulok (Mueang)
72 788SUsk Sukhothai (Sawankhalok)
TH1B
808SUssn Sukhothai (Si Satchanalai)
94
793SUsn Sukhothai (Si Nakhon)
794SUssr Sukhothai (Si Samrong)
218NBbk Nonthaburi (Bang Kruai)
77 315NPm Nakhon Pathom (Mueng)
324NPm Nakhon Pathom (Mueng)
263NPm Nakhon Pathom (Mueng)
305RBbp Ratchaburi (Ban Pong)
334PJsry Prachuap Khiri Khan (Sam Roi Yot)
51BKds Bangkok (Dusit)
HM88BKjj Bangkok (Chatuchak)
66
48BKpyt Bangkok (Phaya Thai)
270ATvsc Ang Thong (Wiset Chai Chan)
HM208BKpv Bangkok (Prawet)
108PTllk Pathum Thani (Lum Lukka)
87BKsl Bangkok (Suang Luang)
C271BKrtv Bangkok (Ratchathewi)
80PTllk Pathum Thani (Lum Lukka)
HM75BK Bangkok (Ratchathewi)
250AYbt Ayutthaya (Bang Sai)
86
TH1A
81NBtn Nonthaburi (Sai Noi)
776NStk Nakhon Sawan (Takhli)
5NBm Nonthaburi (Mueng)
62 79PTm Pathum Thani (Mueng)
235NBpk Nonthaburi (Pak Kret)
156PTns Pathum Thani (Nong Suea)
C277BKkt Bangkok (Khlong Toei)
C274BKdd Bangkok (Din Daeng)
C269PTm Pathum Thani (Mueng)
217SSm Samut Sakhon (Mueng)
67PTtyb Pathum Thani (Thanyaburi)
703KKm Khon Kaen (Mueng)
No. 1
No. 4
No. 11
Roads
>1 subgroup
TH1A
TH1B
TH1C
outline.shp
Province
0.001 substitutions/site
Figure 2 between NJ tree of TH1 rabies sequences and the distribution map
Comparison
Comparison between NJ tree of TH1 rabies sequences and the distribution map. A comparison between the NJ
tree of 60 N gene sequences of TH1 rabies viruses (with the TH2 isolate 703KKm added as an outgroup) and the Thailand map
indicates geographical distributions of the subgroups TH1A, TH1B, and TH1C.
upper southern region (Fig. 2). On the other hand, those
of TH2 group were spread across more than three-quarters
of the entire country – from Phayao province in the north
(Fig. 4), to Ubol Ratchathani in the northeast corner (Fig.
5), and to the southern Yala province along the ThailandMalaysia border (Fig. 3).
Although there are some overlapping areas shared
between the TH1 and TH2 phylogroups, the viral transmission dynamics and evolutionary background the sublineages may not be similar which could explain why both
have different success levels in disease dispersals. It has
been proposed that the degree of differences in compartmentalization mechanisms may influence the duration
that each individual canine-associated rabies variant
resides in certain geographical regions [15]. Relationships
between dogs and humans within a community, dog population density, and relative dog-human population ratio
are common explanations for such compartmentalization
phenomenon [16,17]. Local geographical barriers such as
rivers and mountains are other important factors considered to have strong influences on the inhibition of the
spread of vector-borne diseases [18]. This inhibition effect
caused by natural barriers could, however, be compromised by human transportation routes, for instance
bridges, or roads and railways through mountains.
To estimate the epidemiological characteristics of the TH1
and TH2 Thai rabies groups, a phylogeographical concept
was introduced to infer their transmission dynamics
Page 5 of 11
(page number not for citation purposes)
BMC Infectious Diseases 2005, 5:52
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/5/52
NJ
Roads
>1 subgroup
TH2A
TH2B
outline.shp
Province
52
TH2
89
99
77
64
TH1
74
528NTrpb Nakhon Si Thammarat (Ron Phibun)
568YLrm Yala (Raman)
608SRm Satun (Mueang)
603KBlt Krabi (Lam Thap)
412SKsd Songkla (Sadao)
396Ylm Yala (Mueang)
503SNws Surat Thani (Wiang Sa)
415PLtm Phatthalung (Mueang)
666STm Satun (Mueang)
513PLm Phatthalung (Mueang)
589YLm Yala (Mueang)
548NTlsk Nakhon Si Thammarat (Lan Saka)
553STdkl Satun (Khuan Ka Long)
511NTts Nakhon Si Thammarat (Thung Song)
515KBlt Krabi (Lam Thap) 404PLkcs Phatthalung (Khao Chaison)
60
411NTht Nakhon Si Thammarat (Hua Sai)
406STm Satun (Mueang)
524KBkn Krabi (Khao Phanom)
499SNps Surat Thani (Phrasaeng)
TH2B
559TRpl Trang (Palian)
595Ylbns Yala (Bangnang Sata)
507TRrd Trang (Ratsada)
584TRkt Trang (Kantang)
66
510NTm Nakhon Si Thammarat (Mueang)
599TRhy Trang (Huai Yot)
408SKhy Songkla (Hat Yai)
413SKhy Songkla (Hat Yai)
400SKm
414SKm Songkla (Mueang) Songkla (Mueang)
578KBkt Krabi (Khong Thom)
502SNcb Surat Thani (Chai Buri)
747PGtp Phangnga (Thap Put)
500SNks Surat Thani (Khian Sa)
656PLppy
Phatthalung (Pa Phayom)
65
676KSm Kalasin (Mueang)
695LAck Roi Et (Chiang Khwan)
505KBlt Krabi (Lham Thap)
489SEkh Si Sa Ket (Khun Han)
485BRpk Buri Ram (Pa Kham)
289NRht Nakhon Ratchasima (Phimai)
38/43 Chaiyaphum (Mueang)
(Mueang)
39/43
Chaiyaphum
65
46/43 Chaiyaphum (Kaset Sombun)
33/43 Chaiyaphum (Phakdi Chumphon)
296CPksb Chaiyaphum (Kaset Sombun)
19/43 Chaiyaphum (Phakdi Chumphon)
691NKbk Nong Khai (Bueng Kan)
815PRls Phetchabun (Lom Sak)
762PRm Phetchabun (Mueang)
59
766PRm Phetchabun (Mueang)
769PRcd Phetchabun (Chon Daen)
68
816PRcd Phetchabun (Chon Daen)
690NKsps Nong Khai (So Phisai)
703KKm Khon Kaen (Mueang)
744UBdud Ubol Ratchathani (Det Udom)
TH2A
125SSktb Samut Sakhon
0.001 substitutions/site
Figure 3 between NJ tree of TH2A and TH2B rabies sequences and the distribution map
Comparison
Comparison between NJ tree of TH2A and TH2B rabies sequences and the distribution map. A comparison
between the bottom part of the NJ tree of TH2 rabies viruses (with the TH1 isolate 125SSktb added as an outgroup) and the
Thailand map indicates geographical distributions of the subgroups TH2A and TH2B.
[19,20]. Comparison between the sampling localities and
molecular phylogenetic-tree topology could determine
how viruses in each and different group are genetically
related. First, in Bangkok and the surrounding provinces
both TH1 and TH2 were identified as occurring together
(Fig. 1). This area is industrialized and highly populated.
Hundreds of mainroads, highways, and railways have
been built in the country heartland. Networks of transportation routes including bridges across waterways are an
effective means for vector borne viral transmission. This is
one explanation as to why some viral subgroups of both
TH1 and TH2 were discovered along both sides of Choa
Phraya and many other rivers (Fig. 6), as has been previously reported [14].
Secondly, we suggest that transmission of rabies virus may
be related to human activity, particularly human migration. Considering the phylogeographic areas of the 3
genetic subgroups of TH1 rabies virus (Fig. 2), genetic
exchanges within the TH1B subgroup between Sukhothai
in the north and Nonthaburi province near Bangkok,
almost 500-kilometres apart, could not have been accomplished by migrations of animal virus-vectors alone. It is
more likely that canine vectors of the TH1B genotype were
translocated from areas around Bangkok to the north, and
vice versa, simply by following movements of pet-owners
via the national mainroads number 1 and 11 (Fig. 2).
Similarly, the same translocation factors can be applied to
a long-distance dispersal of the TH1C subgroup from
Page 6 of 11
(page number not for citation purposes)
BMC Infectious Diseases 2005, 5:52
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/5/52
NJ
65
Roads
>1 subgroup
TH2C
TH2D
TH2E
TH2F
outline.shp
Province
459KSm Kalasin (Mueang)
700KStkt Kalasin (Tha Khantho)
460LAm Roi Et (Mueang)
486UMhsp Amnat Charoen (Hua Taphan)
708YSm Yasothon (Mueang)
481BRhr Buri Ram (Huai Rat)
689UMm Amnat Charoen (Mueang)
488UMm Amnat Charoen (Mueang)
742MDm Mukdahan (Mueang)
740MDdt Mukdahan (Don Tan)
487UMm Amnat Charoen (Mueang)
TH2F
725MDm Mukdahan (Mueang)
688Umm Amnat Charoen (Mueang)
63
705MDm Mukdahan (Mueang)
454LAm Roi Et (Mueang)
61
694LAsp Roi Et (Selaphum)
715YSm Yasothon (Mueang)
741YSm Yasothon (Mueang)
162PCm Phichit (Mueang)
805PCbmn Phichit (Bang Mun Nak)
423PN Phisanulok (Bang Rakam)
62SPbp Samut Prakan (Bang Phli)
133SSm Samut Sakhon (Mueang)
207SSm Samut Sakhon (Mueang)
313PBnyp Phetchaburi (Nong Ya Plong)
182CCbnp Chachoengsao (Bang Nam Priao)
329PBm Phetchaburi (Mueang)
319PBm Phetchaburi (Mueang)
131SPpsj Samut Prakan (Phra Samut Chedi)
TH2E
302RBpt Ratchaburi (Pak Tho)
316SMm Samut Songkhram (Mueang)
67
86SPm Samut Prakan (Mueang)
57
26NPpmt Nakhon Pathom (Phutthamonthon)
53
338PJm Prachuap Khiri Khan (Mueang)
349PBm Phetchaburi (Mueang)
195NBby Nonthaburi (Bang Yai)
68
53SPppd Samut Prakan (Phra Pradaeng)
C276BKpv Bangkok (Prawet)
98
237NYm Nakhon Nayok (Mueang)
HMS223RY Rayong (Klaeng)
774NNm Nan (Mueang)
70
775PYp Phayao (Pong)
773CMcp Chiang Mai (Chai Prakan)
HMS152S Si Sa Ket (Khukhan)
318KJtmk Kanchanaburi (Tha Maka)
70
317SBspn Suphan Buri (Song Phi Nong)
308KJm Kanchanaburi (Mueang)
332SBm Suphan Buri (Mueang)
304NPbl Nakhon Pathom (Bang Len)
307RBptr Ratchaburi (Photharam)
301RBm Ratchaburi (Mueang)
303KJtmk Kanchanaburi (Tha Maka)
TH2D
326KJtm Kanchanaburi (Tha Muang)
61
333KJm Kanchanaburi (Mueang)
99PTkl Pathum Thani (Khlong Luang)
56
335KJpnt Kanchanaburi (Phanom Thuan)
340SBspn Suphan Buri (Song Phi Nong)
151SBdc Suphan Buri (Dan Chang)
306RBptr Ratchaburi (Photharam)
91PTns Pathum Thani (Nong Suea)
295CPksb3 Chaiyaphum (Kaset Sombun)
711SLm Sakon Nakhon (Mueang)
68
714YSm Yasothon (Mueang)
69
704KKcp Khon Kaen (Chum Phae)
34/43 Chaiyaphum (Mueang)
294CPm Chaiyaphum (Mueang)
283NRpm Nakhon Ratchasima (Phimai)
281NRm Nakhon Ratchasima (Mueang)
282NRpc Nakhon Ratchasima (Pak Chong)
TH2C
136CLblm Chon Buri (Bang Lamung)
73
22CBkhm Chanthaburi (Kaeng Hang Maeo)
(Mueang)
HMS241CL
Chon
Buri
100
778LBtv Lop Buri (Tha Wung)
458LAm Roi Et (Mueang) 779NSly Nakhon Sawan (Lat Yao)
717UBm Ubol Ratchathani (Mueang)
64
78
53
0.001 substitutions/site
Figure 4 between NJ tree of TH2C, TH2D, TH2E, and TH2F rabies sequences and the distribution map
Comparison
Comparison between NJ tree of TH2C, TH2D, TH2E, and TH2F rabies sequences and the distribution map. A
comparison between the middle part of the NJ tree of TH2 rabies viruses and the Thailand map indicates geographical distributions of the subgroups TH2C, TH2D, TH2E, and TH2F.
central to southern Thailand, probably via the national
mainroad number 4 (Fig. 2). Transmission dynamics of
the TH1 subgroup might also have been influenced by a
combination of factors including social and socioeconomic status, human and animal population density in
addition to the availability of transportation routes.
The theory that the spread of canine rabies virus was instigated by pet-owner translocation via transportation routes
was supported in this study by the results of the distribution pattern of each subgroup of TH2 (Figs. 3, 4, 5). Members of the TH2 group appeared to be scattered across the
regions at a very distant range, and are unlikely to have
occurred due to animal self-translocation. From our analyses, we propose that genetically linked viruses of each
subgroup were localized in specific areas by utilizing
transportation routes throughout Thailand (as shown in
Fig. 3, 4, and 5), and areas that have more than one viral
group present are apparently local transportation, for
instance, Mueng district (Khon Kaen province), Pa Kham
district (Buri Ram province) and Phimi district (Nakhon
Ratchasima province) (shown as black areas in Fig. 3).
The most convincing support for the human-facilitated
rabies distribution hypothesis we propose herein is the
geographical distribution of the TH2B subgroup in which
all, except a few samples from the northeast, were from
the southern region of the country. This phylogeographic
subgroup with a 1300–1600 km spreading range, had a
very strong bootstrap supporting-value (89%) on the
Page 7 of 11
(page number not for citation purposes)
BMC Infectious Diseases 2005, 5:52
NJ
71
80
51
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/5/52
356UTth Uthai Thani (Thap Than)
353CNmnr Chai Nat (Manorom)
376SHib Sing Buri (In Buri)
355UThk Uthai Thani (Huai Khot)
352NStk Nakhon Sawan (Takhli)
380UTbr Uthai Thani (Ban Rai)
358CNsbr Chai Nat (Sankhaburi)
351NSm Nakhon Sawan (Mueang)
61
389LBm Lop Buri (Mueang)
374CNspy Chai Nat (Sapphaya)
357UTm Uthai Thani (Mueang)
362CNm Chai Nat (Mueang)
384SHib Sing Buri (In Buri)
393LBm Lop Buri (Mueang)
TH2H
363NScs Nakhon Sawan (Chumsaeng)
381NSttk Nakhon Sawan (Tha Tako)
361NSly Nakhon Sawan (Lat Yao)
354CNhk Chai Nat (Hankha)
425PN Phisanulok (Wang Thong)
795NScs Nakhon Sawan (Chumsaeng)
777LBm Lop Buri (Mueang)
55
780NSm Nakhon Sawan (Mueang)
100
Roads
>1 subgroup
TH2G
TH2H
outline.shp
806PNnm Phisanulok (Noen Maprang)
800UDm Uttaradit (Mueang)
814UDm Uttaradit (Mueang)
804UDm Uttaradit (Mueang)
807UDts Uttaradit (Thong Saen Khan)
718YSlkk Yasothon (Kham Khuean Kaeo)
731UBvrc Ubol Ratchathani (Warin Chamrap)
726UBbt Ubol Ratchathani (Buntharik)
732KSm Kalasin (Mueang)
723KKm Khon Kaen (Mueang)
738KKm Khon Kaen (Mueang)
473BRpk Buri Ram (Pa Kham)
465SRm Surin (Mueang)
83
678cBRm Buri Ram (Mueang)
685BRppc Buri Ram (Phlapphla Chai)
89
463SRsn Surin (Sanom)
698KSm Kalasin (Mueang)
64
89
466SRrbr Surin (Rattanaburi)
713KKcp Khon Kaen (Chum Phae)
709SEktr Si Sa Ket (Kantharalak)
288NRbl Nakhon Ratchasima (Ban Lueam)
54
472BRm Buri Ram (Mueang)
98
464SRskp Surin (Sikhoraphum)
67
728UBm Ubol Ratchathani (Mueang)
707LYm Loei (Mueang)
TH2G
0.001 substitutions/site
Figure 5 between NJ tree of TH2G and TH2H rabies sequences and the distribution map
Comparison
Comparison between NJ tree of TH2G and TH2H rabies sequences and the distribution map. A comparison
between the top part of the NJ tree of TH2 rabies viruses and the Thailand map indicates geographical distributions of the subgroups TH2G and TH2H.
genetic tree. We propose that this inter-regional migration
path of the TH2 subgroup is explained by a rural-to-urban
viral transmission polarity. [12,16] The majority of people
in the northeast have a relatively lower socioeconomic status than people living in other regions. Most of them are
conventional crop farmers with low annual income
[9,279 Baht (approximately US$ 230) average monthly
household income versus national average of 13,736 Baht
(approximately US$ 340), reported by National Statistical
Office on 2002] and during the off-growing season they
usually migrate to other regions to seek employment as
common laborers. The strong economics in southern
Thailand has been mainly supported by marine fishery as
well as the rubber plant and oil palm agricultural industry,
of which most workers originate from northeastern Thailand. Rabies virus infected canine pets accompanying the
migratory workers from the northeastern therefore could
be spread along their owners' travel routes. This would
not only explain the northeast-to-south migration path of
the TH2B viruses, but also could elucidate why most of
the TH2 subgroups examined were closely linked with
viral isolates from the northeastern region.
Page 8 of 11
(page number not for citation purposes)
BMC Infectious Diseases 2005, 5:52
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/5/52
Tak province
Uthai Thani
province
Suphan Buri
province
Major rivers
>1 subgroup
TH1A
TH1B
TH1C
TH2A
TH2B
TH2C
TH2D
TH2E
TH2F
TH2G
TH2H
outline.shp
Province
Myanmar
Ratchaburi province
Figure 6 between geographical distribution of rabies viruses in Thailand and in Kanchanaburi province
Comparison
Comparison between geographical distribution of rabies viruses in Thailand and in Kanchanaburi province.
Geographical distribution of all Thai rabies virus subgroups. Kanchanaburi province was magnified to show province geography
and roadmap. Red areas in the Kanchanaburi map indicate the collecting localities of rabies hosts in a tambon (a subdivision of
a district)-level. The map was retrieved from http://www.thaitambon.com/Maps/Kanchanaburi.htm
Selection of suitable areas using molecular epidemiological techniques should be considered as a powerful tool
when planning disease control strategies. For decades,
Thailand has invested vast sums of money and manpower
on the effort to control and vaccinate the dog population
in randomly selected districts and, recently, Bangkok capital city without success. Results of this research demonstrated that Bangkok and other metropolitan cities (such
as Prathum Thani, Samut Sakhon, Nakhon Sawan, Khon
Kaen, Ubol Ratchathani) contain various groups and subgroups of viruses, actively circulating to and from other
surrounding provinces (Fig. 6). Therefore, developing a
campaign for disease control in such city alone, without
considering neighboring areas, is highly unlikely to be
successful. We propose that the most appropriate place to
initiate a rabies control campaign should be in a
genetically isolated area, where there are either natural or
artificial barriers to prevent further viral influxes.
On a national scale, we propose that rabies control can be
successful if it is initiated in southern Thailand. This
region contains only the TH2B rabies subgroup. Furthermore, it is an "island-like" area surrounding by Andaman
Sea, Gulf of Thailand, and the Malaysian border. Influx
from the TH1C subgroup has been restricted to an area
around Ranong province, plausibly from high mountain
ridges. Moreover, the majority of the population in southern Thailand are Muslims who do not keep pet dogs or
feed stray dogs. Implementation of a rabies control in this
region should therefore be effective in terms of a dog population reduction and vaccination campaign, and the
enforcement of strict regulations regarding dog transfer.
Page 9 of 11
(page number not for citation purposes)
BMC Infectious Diseases 2005, 5:52
In order to test this concept of "targeting a genetically
defined area", a mass rabies control compaign should be
conducted in a suitable-size province with a homogeneous virus population. The province of Kanchanaburi,
19,483 km sq and about 130 km westwards from Bangkok, appears to be a good choice since, according to our
study, it contains only the TH2D rabies subgroups (Fig. 6)
which are clustered mostly on the southernmost tambons
(subdistricts; subdivisions of an district). The province is
also island-like in that it is surrounded by the mountainous Thailand-Myanmar border and also has mountain
ridges along the eastern boundary to other provinces. Any
strategic plan in this region should also include recommendations to control pet-dog movements via the
national mainroad number 323, the primary transportation route into the province. Moreover, in order to control
rabies situation, at least 50 – 70% of dogs must be vaccinated. Currently available vaccine used in Thailand is
injectable type, thus, requiring a capturing or restraining
process which is extremely difficult especially in the case
of community or stray dogs. Oral type vaccine such as that
used in wildlife once proven of its safety and efficacy in
dogs may be an alternative. Public participation in dog
population control and vaccination needs to be created.
Intensive and extensive educational activities should be
carried out to increase understanding of the necessity to
have rabies and dog population control program implemented [21]. Assessment of the success of such a program
can be measured by a strict surveillance of rabies incidence in humans and animals and by analyzing genetic
sequences of rabies virus as compared to others in adjacent provinces. This should also be correlated with transportation tracks on a local scale.
Conclusion
In conclusion, we have presented a novel approach to the
development of a rabies control and prevention program
through the utilization of genetic epidemiology. We
believe that the implementation of such a disease control
program utilizing existing information on the genetics of
circulating rabies viruses in a country like Thailand could
be successful if the campaign target areas have been carefully selected and limited to one circulating phylogroup of
virus and the movement of dogs along human transportation routes into the area is strictly enforced.
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/5/52
Authors' contributions
JD participated in data analysis and interpretation, phylogenetic tree construction, and writing the paper. SW participated in data collection and analysis, PCR primer
design, sequencing rabies genes, and writing the paper. BL
participated in specimen collection, data analysis, and
writing the paper. NR participated in data analysis, figure
preparation, and writing the paper. WH participated in
coordinating the study with the veterinarians throughout
the country, data analysis, and writing the paper. AP participated in coordinating the study with the physicians
throughout the country, data analysis, and writing the
paper. TH participated in study design, data analysis and
interpretation, and writing the paper. The first 3 authors
(JD, SW, BL) contributed equally to this work. All authors
read and approved the final manuscript.
Additional material
Additional File 1
Table 1 Taxon list of N-gene sequences of Thai rabies virus used in this
study
Click here for file
[http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/supplementary/14712334-5-52-S1.doc]
Acknowledgements
The authors are indebted to Deborah Briggs for her critical and useful comments on the manuscript. We also would like to thank these laboratories
which supplied rabies specimens for this study: Southern Veterinary
Research and Development Center, Nakhon Si Thammarat; Northern Veterinary Research and Development Center, Phitsanulok; Northern Veterinary Research and Development Center, Lampang; North Easthern
Veterinary Research and Development Center, Khon Kaen; North Easthern Veterinary Research and Development Center, Surin; Regional
Bureaus of Animal Health and Sanitary no.3, no.4, no.6, no.7, no.8, and no.9;
Provincial Livestock Offices (PLOs): Chaiyaphum, Nakhon Ratchasima,
Chai Nat, Phetchabun, Kamphaeng Phet, Surat Thani, Amnat Charoen, Si Sa
Ket, Udon Thani, Sakon Nakhon, and Kalasin; Department of Medical Science, Ministry of Public Health; and Regional Medical Science Center,
Nakhon Ratchasima. This work was supported in part by grants from Thailand Research Fund (DBG/01/2545) and National Science and Technology
Development Agency.
References
1.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationships with other people or organizations
that could inappropriately influence this research. All
authors have access to all data in the study and held final
responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Mitmoonpitak C, Wilde H, Tepsumetanon W: Current status of
animal rabies in Thailand. J Vet Med Sci 1997, 59:457-60.
Hemachudha T, Laothamatas J, Rupprecht CE: Human rabies: a
disease of complex neuropathogenetic mechanisms and
diagnostic challenges. Lancet Neurol 2002, 1:101-9.
PAHO: Epidemiological surveillance of rabies in the Americas Washington
DC: Pan American Health Organization; 2000.
Hemachudha T, Wacharapluesadee S, Lumlertdaecha B, Orciari LA,
Rupprecht CE, La-ongpant M, Juntrakul S, Denduangboripant J:
Sequence analysis of rabies virus in humans exhibiting
encephalitic or paralytic rabies. J Infect Dis 2003, 188:960-6.
Thompson JD, Gibson TJ, Plewniak F, Jeanmougin F, Higgins DG: The
ClustalX windows interface: flexible strategies for multiple
Page 10 of 11
(page number not for citation purposes)
BMC Infectious Diseases 2005, 5:52
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/5/52
sequence alignment aided by quality analysis tools. Nucleic
Acids Res 1997, 25:4876-82.
Swofford DL: PAUP*: phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (* and other
methods), version 4 Sunderland (MA): Sinauer Associates; 2002.
David D, Yakobson B, Smith JS, Stram Y: Molecular epidemiology
of rabies virus isolates from Israel and other Middle- and
Near-Eastern countries. J Clin Microbiol 2000, 38:755-62.
De Mattos CA, De Mattos CC, Smith JS, Miller ET, Papo S, Utera A,
Osburn BI: Genetic characterization of rabies field isolates
from Venezuela. J Clin Microbiol 1996, 34:1553-58.
Miksza LKC, Wadford DA, Schnurr PD: Molecular epidemiology
of enzootic rabies in California. J Clin Virol 1999, 14:207-19.
Nadin-Davis SA, Casey GA, Wandeler AI: A molecular epidemiological study of rabies virus in central Ontario and western
Quebec. J Gen Virol 1994, 75:2575-83.
Teichman BFV, Thomson GR, Meredith CD, Nel LH: Molecular epidemiology of rabies virus in South Africa: evidence for two
distinct virus groups. J Gen Virol 1995, 76:73-82.
Susetya H, Sugiyama M, Inagaki A, Ito N, Oraveerakul K, Traiwanatham N, Minamoto N: Genetic characterization of rabies field
isolates from Thailand. Microbiol Immunol 2003, 47:653-9.
Lumlertdacha B, Boongird K, Wanghongsa S, Wacharapluesadee S,
Chanhome L, Khawplod P, Hemachudha T, Kuzmin I, Rupprecht CE:
Survey of bat lyssaviruses in Thailand. Emerg Infect Dis in press.
Lumlertdacha B, Wachrapluesadee S, Denduangboripant J, Ruankaew
N, Hoonsuwan W, Puanghat A, Sakarasaeranee P, Briggs D, Hemachudha T: Complex genetic structure of rabies virus in Bangkok city and its surroundings: implications for canine rabies
control. Trans Roy Soc Trop Med Hyg in press.
Smith JS: Molecular epidemiology. In Rabies Edited by: Jackson
AC, Wunner WH. Amsterdam: Academic Press; 2002:79-111.
De Mattos CC, De Mattos CA, Loza-Rubio E, Aguilar-Setien A, Orciari LA, Smith JS: Molecular characterization of rabies virus isolates from Mexico: implications for transmission dynamics
and human risk. Am J Trop Med Hyg 1999, 61:587-97.
Holmes EC, Woelk CH, Kassis R, Bourhy H: Genetic constraints
and the adaptive evolution of rabies virus in nature. Virology
2002, 292:247-57.
Smith JS, Orciari LA, Yager PA, Seidel HD, Warner CK: Epidemiologic and historical relationships among 87 isolates as determined by limited sequence analysis. J Infect Dis 1992,
166:296-307.
Holmes EC: The phylogeography of human viruses. Mol Ecol
2004, 13:745-56.
Avise JC: Phylogeography: the history and formation of species London:
Harvard University Press; 2000.
Hemachudha T: Rabies and dog population control in Thailand:
Success or failure? J Med Assoc Thailand 2005, 88:120-123.
Pre-publication history
The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed
here:
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/5/52/prepub
Publish with Bio Med Central and every
scientist can read your work free of charge
"BioMed Central will be the most significant development for
disseminating the results of biomedical researc h in our lifetime."
Sir Paul Nurse, Cancer Research UK
Your research papers will be:
available free of charge to the entire biomedical community
peer reviewed and published immediately upon acceptance
cited in PubMed and archived on PubMed Central
yours — you keep the copyright
BioMedcentral
Submit your manuscript here:
http://www.biomedcentral.com/info/publishing_adv.asp
Page 11 of 11
(page number not for citation purposes)