Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-5bvrz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T11:47:21.202Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Rapid mortality transition of Pacific Islands in the 19th century

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 September 2016

B. S. PENMAN
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
S. GUPTA
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
G. D. SHANKS*
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK Australian Army Malaria Institute, Enoggera, Australia University of Queensland, School of Public Health, Brisbane, Australia
*
*Author for correspondence: Professor G. D. Shanks, Australian Army Malaria Institute, Enoggera, QLD 4051, Australia. (Email: dennis.shanks@defence.gov.au)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The depopulation of Pacific islands during the 16th to 19th centuries is a striking example of historical mass mortality due to infectious disease. Pacific Island populations have not been subject to such cataclysmic infectious disease mortality since. Here we explore the processes which could have given rise to this shift in infectious disease mortality patterns. We show, using mathematical models, that the population dynamics exhibited by Pacific Island populations are unlikely to be the result of Darwinian evolution. We propose that extreme mortality during first-contact epidemics is a function of epidemiological isolation, not a lack of previous selection. If, as pathogens become established in populations, extreme mortality is rapidly suppressed by herd immunity, Pacific Island population mortality patterns can be explained with no need to invoke genetic change. We discuss the mechanisms by which this could occur, including (i) a link between the proportion of the population transmitting infectious agents and case-fatality rates, and (ii) the course of infection with pathogens such as measles and smallpox being more severe in adults than in children. Overall, we consider the present-day risk of mass mortality from newly emerging infectious diseases is unlikely to be greater on Pacific islands than in other geographical areas.

Information

Type
Original Papers
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Population dynamics in Pacific Island populations, 1830–1930. Here we visualize data from census reports for various indigenous populations of Pacific islands. All reports other than those for Rotuma are as compiled and reviewed by Norma McArthur [3]; the Rotuma data came from other reports including original documents transcribed in the 1960s by Dr Alan Howard [20, 46]. To facilitate comparison between populations of different sizes, we display each report of population numbers relative to the size of the population at the preceding report. Each population's time series begins with a value of 1, at the first time point for which we have a report. Values >1 indicate that the population grew since the previous report; values <1 indicate that the population shrank since the previous report. The first available Fiji datapoint comes from 1879, but Fiji was estimated to have lost >1/5 of the indigenous Fijian population over a 4-month period in 1875 due to a measles outbreak [3], so for the Fiji time series we extrapolated a higher starting population in 1875.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Pacific Island population first-contact-like dynamics within the model. Here we illustrate a scenario in which the first introduction of three pathogens leads to a ⩾20% loss in population size over a quarter year period, but no more than a 5% loss over a quarter year period when the pathogens are introduced for a second time. Parameter values were as follows: θ1 = 0·1, θ2 = 0·35 and θ3 = 0·01, and γ = 1. All other parameters are given in the Methods section. No protective alleles were included in this scenario. Population size is indicated by a dotted black line; deaths as a proportion of total population is indicated by a solid red line; numbers infected with each pathogen are indicated by different coloured lines as shown in the legend.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Parameter combinations giving rise to a Pacific Island population first-contact-like pattern, in the absence of genetic changes but including a herd immunity effect on pathogen mortality. No protective alleles were included in this scenario. The maximum mortality rates for each of the three pathogens (θ1−3) were allowed to vary between 0 and 0·75. Latin Hypercube Sampling was used to identify combinations of θ1−3 which gave rise to a first-contact-like pattern as described in the Methods section. 25 000 different combinations of values for θ1−3 were tested. Panels (ac) illustrate results for different levels of parameter γ, which controlled the extent to which the proportion of the population already immune to a pathogen affected that pathogen's mortality rate. All other parameters were as detailed in the Methods section. Markers 1 and 2 in panel (c) indicate two key outcomes that only become possible when γ takes values approaching 1. The implications of these outcomes for the types of pathogen behaviours capable of generating a first-contact-like pattern are discussed further in the Results and Discussion sections.

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Starting frequencies of protective alleles necessary to create a Pacific Island population first-contact-like pattern if genetic changes can contribute to a drop in mortality rates. We assumed that heterozygosity and homozygosity for each protective allele provided 100% protection against death from the relevant pathogen (i.e. p1,ijk = 1, where i > 1, p2,ijk = 1, where j > 1, etc.). We used Latin Hypercube Sampling to select different starting frequencies for each of the three possible protective alleles, where each allele could start at a frequency between 0 and 1. 25 000 different combinations of starting allele frequencies were tested. Panels (af) illustrate combinations of starting allele frequencies (s1s3) which produced a first-contact-like pattern (as described in the Methods section) under six different pathogen mortality scenarios. s1 is the starting frequency of the allele that protects against the pathogen where R0 = 1·5; s2, R0 = 3·5 and s3, R0 = 15. Values of the three pathogen-specific maximum mortality rates, θ1, θ2 and θ3 are given in the title of each panel. In all panels, γ = 0. All other parameters are as given in the Methods section.