Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30946747›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2019

Vector competence of Australian Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus for an epidemic strain of Zika virus.

Leon E Hugo, Liesel Stassen, Jessica La, Edward Gosden, O'mezie Ekwudu, Clay Winterford, Elvina Viennet, Helen M Faddy, Gregor J Devine, Francesca D Frentiu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. EliminatingInsects · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Thermal adaptation inProceedings. Biological sciences · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. The Common Mosquito (Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Leon E HugoMosquito Control Laboratory, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Liesel StassenInstitute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, and School of Biomedical Sciences Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Jessica LaInstitute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, and School of Biomedical Sciences Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Edward GosdenInstitute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, and School of Biomedical Sciences Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8882-3233
O'mezie EkwuduInstitute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, and School of Biomedical Sciences Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Clay WinterfordQIMR Berghofer Histotechnology Facility, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Elvina ViennetResearch and Development, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Helen M FaddyResearch and Development, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Gregor J DevineMosquito Control Laboratory, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6312-0390
Francesca D FrentiuInstitute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, and School of Biomedical Sciences Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8628-4216

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecent epidemics of Zika virus (ZIKV) in the Pacific and the Americas have highlighted its potential as an emerging pathogen of global importance. Both Aedes (Ae.) aegypti and Ae. albopictus are known to transmit ZIKV but variable vector competence has been observed between mosquito populations from different geographical regions and different virus strains. Since Australia remains at risk of ZIKV introduction, we evaluated the vector competence of local Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus for a Brazilian epidemic ZIKV strain. In addition, we evaluated the impact of daily temperature fluctuations around a mean of 28°C on ZIKV transmission and extrinsic incubation period. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL

findingsMosquitoes were orally challenged with a Brazilian ZIKV strain (8.8 log CCID50/ml) and maintained at either 28°C constant or fluctuating temperature conditions. At 3, 7 and 14 days post-infection (dpi), ZIKV RNA copies were quantified in mosquito bodies, as well as wings and legs, using qRT-PCR, while virus antigen in saliva (a proxy for transmission) was detected using a cell culture ELISA. Despite high body and disseminated infection rates in both vectors, the transmission rates of ZIKV in saliva of Ae. aegypti (50-60%) were significantly higher than in Ae. albopictus (10%) at 14 dpi. Both species supported a high viral load in bodies, with no significant differences between constant and fluctuating temperature conditions. However, a significant difference in viral load in wings and legs between species was observed, with higher titres in Ae. aegypti maintained at constant temperature conditions. For ZIKV transmission to occur in Ae. aegypti, a disseminated virus load threshold of 7.59 log10 copies had to be reached. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Australian Ae. aegypti are better able to transmit a Brazilian ZIKV strain than Ae. albopictus. The results are in agreement with the global consensus that Ae. aegypti is the major vector of ZIKV.

Indexed as

AedesAnimalsAustraliaBrazilMosquito VectorsRNA, ViralSalivaTemperatureViral LoadWings, AnimalZika VirusZika Virus InfectionRNA, Viral

Identifiers

PMID30946747
PMCPMC6467424

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.