Table 2.
Mean (standard deviation) relative contributions of major factors to the spatial distributions of dengue and JE, estimated by two-stage GBRT models.
| Category | Variable | Dengue (Relative Contributions %) # | Japanese Encephalitis (Relative Contributions %) # | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stage 1 | Stage 2 | Stage 1 | Stage 2 | ||
| Environmental | Basin (binary variable) | 3.27 (2.20) | 3.65 (1.55) | ||
| Paddy field (%) | 2.27 (0.48) | ||||
| Rainfed cropland (%) | 3.05 (0.59) | 3.20 (0.84) | |||
| Forest (%) | 1.82 (0.58) | 3.20 (0.62) | |||
| Grasslands (%) | 23.99 (8.87) | ||||
| River (%) | 2.52 (0.51) | ||||
| Rural residential land (%) | 3.69 (0.96) | ||||
| Other construction land (%) | 2.29 (0.46) | ||||
| Ecoclimatic | Annual mean temperature | 16.25 (4.88) | 14.92 (6.65) | 17.17 (6.52) | 2.68 (0.54) |
| Isothermality | 3.43 (0.68) | 3.82 (1.33) | 2.54 (0.44) | ||
| Temperature seasonality | 3.00 (2.23) | 8.78 (2.17) | |||
| Mean temperature of wettest quarter | 11.29 (2.62) | 2.05 (0.51) | |||
| Mean temperature of warmest quarter | 34.14 (7.35) | 6.34 (4.46) | |||
| Annual cumulative precipitation | 7.00 (5.60) | 27.30 (8.36) | |||
| Precipitation seasonality | 2.71 (0.62) | 2.77 (1.41) | 4.00 (0.65) | 4.03 (1.33) | |
| Precipitation of driest quarter | 4.62 (1.26) | 9.84 (2.77) | 5.16 (1.07) | ||
| Social | Index of case importation | - | 5.85 (3.93) | - | - |
| Proportion of women | 2.18 (0.43) | 2.75 (0.46) | |||
| Proportion of ≥60 years old | 3.01 (0.62) | 2.68 (0.62) | |||
| Number of general hospitals | 5.35 (1.30) | 3.75 (0.64) | |||
| Number of clinics | 3.18 (0.70) | ||||
| Biological | Density of population | 5.01 (1.06) | 4.03 (0.84) | 2.67 (0.62) | 2.33 (0.55) |
| Mammalian richness | 2.93 (0.76) | 6.86 (1.19) | 4.46 (0.81) | ||
| Density of pig | 3.79 (0.79) | 5.92 (2.29) | |||
| Density of cattle | 2.66 (1.02) | 3.04 (0.50) | |||
| Density of duck | 3.40 (0.72) | 5.09 (1.57) | |||
| Density of goat | 2.69 (1.73) | 3.10 (0.63) | |||
| Density of sheep | 2.60 (1.77) | 2.37 (0.52) | |||
| Density of chicken | 16.29 (8.28) | ||||
| Presence of Cx. tritaeniorhynchus & | - | - | 16.11 (7.08) | ||
| Presence of An. sinensis & | - | - | 2.61 (0.53) | ||
| Presence of Cx. pipiens quinquefasciatus & | - | - | 2.08 (0.61) | ||
| Presence of Ae. albopictus & | 7.13 (1.15) | 17.27 (7.56) | - | - | |
# The relative contributions were indicated as mean (standard deviation). “-” factors were not included in the whole model. & The presence of predominant mosquito species indicated the occurrence probability of each species predicted by the model. Stage 1 models the presence/absence of any reported human case, and stage 2 models the annual average incidences from 2014 to 2018 among presence locations. Mammalian richness indicated the number of mammal species.