Skip to main content
. 2015 Dec 21;10(12):e0144990. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0144990

Table 1. Values, descriptions and sources of the parameters driving the base metapopulation model of transmission.

(i = {TC; MB; UJ; NK; BB; MP}) Values in parentheses are the assumed ranges for the parameter sensitivity analysis.

Parameter Description Value Source
N Population size for the six patches 2.5 × 106 [52, 53]
μ Mortality/birth Rate 10510000 [43]
δ Natural recovery period 26 weeks (24, 28) [4446]
σ 1 Period between liver stage and blood-stage 7 days (5–10) [4749]
σ 2 Period between blood-stage and onset of gametocytemia 2 weeks (1.8, 2.2) [44, 50]
r AL elimination half-life 6 days (4, 8) [51]
τ Time to seek treatment 1/2 week Expert opinion
p Proportion of local infected population receiving treatment 0.95 [35, 36]
pf yr Proportion of foreign infected population that receive treatment in a local patch pf 1 = 0.5655(0.5652, 0.5658) (pre April 2005)pf 2 = 0.5500 (0.5494, 0.5506) (post April 2005) Estimated from model fitting process
seas i Seasonal forcing function Derived from data [38]
β i Annual number of mosquito bites per person x proportion of bites testing positive for sporozoites for patch i β TC = 0.334 (0.244, 0.425) β MB = 2.178 (2.056, 2.300) β UJ = 0.805 (0.700, 0.910) β NK = 1.330 (1.310, 1.350) β BB = 8.304 (7.903, 8.705) β MP = 94.999 (93.327, 96.671) Estimated from model fitting process
1α Rate of movement between sub-patch 2 and sub-patch 1 2 weeks−1(1.75, 2.25) Expert opinion
1k Rate of movement between 5 Mpumalanga municipalities 1/48.603 (1/51.328, 1/45.787) weeks−1 Estimated from model fitting process
1vy Maputo residents: Rate of movement between Maputo and 5 Mpumalanga municipalities 1v1=1/1258.828weeks-1(1/1261.249,1/1256.407) (pre-April 2005) 1v2=1/319.042weeks-1(1/322.796,1/315.333) (post April 2005) Estimated from model fitting process
1z Mpumalanga residents: Rate of movement between 5 Mpumalanga municipalities and Maputo 1z=1/765.19weeks1 Estimated from model fitting process
fwgt Foreign movement weight intensity 8.385 (8.232, 8.537) Estimated from model fitting process
lwgt Local movement weight intensity 2.613 (2.607, 2.618) Estimated from model fitting process
vc[i, t] vccov[i, t] × vef
vccov[i, t] Vector Control Coverage 0.22–0.90 Derived from data
vef Effectiveness of vector control 0.900 (0.897, 0.903) Estimated from model fitting process