Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Influenza

Prediction is worth a shot

Nature volume 507, pages 47–48 (2014)Cite this article

Subjects

Predicting the long-term evolution of influenza is difficult. But a model incorporating the effects of deleterious and beneficial mutations has met the more tangible goal of predicting year-to-year frequencies of viral groups. See Article p.57

Physicist Niels Bohr famously said that “prediction is difficult, especially about the future”. Perhaps even more so than in physics, this statement holds true in biology. Nevertheless, biologists have repeatedly attempted to predict how their systems will fare in the future. When it comes to systems that evolve rapidly in response to changes in their environment, prediction becomes even harder. Despite this formidable challenge, Łuksza and Lässig1, on page 57 of this issue, Łuksza and Lässig1 tackle the problems of predicting how the influenza virus will evolve from one year to the next, and how such prediction can improve seasonal-flu vaccines.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it

$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Forecasting changes in influenza-clade frequencies.

References

  1. Łuksza, M. & Lässig, M. Nature 507, 57–61 (2014).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  2. Stöhr, K. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2, 517 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Carrat, F. & Flahault, A. Vaccine 25, 6852–6862 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Russell, C. A. et al. Vaccine 26 (Suppl. 4), D31–D34 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Smith, D. J. et al. Science 305, 371–376 (2004).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Medlock, J. & Galvani, A. P. Science 325, 1705–1708 (2009).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Katia Koelle and David A. Rasmussen are in the Department of Biology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708, USA.,

    Katia Koelle & David A. Rasmussen

Authors
  1. Katia Koelle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David A. Rasmussen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Katia Koelle or David A. Rasmussen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Koelle, K., Rasmussen, D. Prediction is worth a shot. Nature 507, 47–48 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13054

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13054

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing