ArticleParasites & vectors2019
Infection and transmission of Cache Valley virus by Aedes albopictus and Aedes aegypti mosquitoes.
Article in Parasites & vectors, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Vector competence acrossJournal of virology · 2026Review
- Identification and mapping of potential and highly likely vectors for selected vector-borne diseases in the EU and neighbouring countries.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2026Article
- Understanding the Burden of Agriculturally Significant Vector-Borne and Parasitic Diseases in Kansas.Vector borne and zoonotic diseases (Larchmont, N.Y.) · 2025Review
- Ecology and geography of Cache Valley virus assessed using ecological niche modeling.Parasites & vectors · 2024Article
- Exploring the transmission modalities of Bunyamwera virus.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2024Article
- Article
- Replication Kinetics of a Candidate Live-Attenuated Vaccine for Cache Valley Virus inVector borne and zoonotic diseases (Larchmont, N.Y.) · 2022Article
- Vector competence and immune response of Aedes aegypti for Ebinur Lake virus, a newly classified mosquito-borne orthobunyavirus.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2022Article
- Vector competence of Anopheles quadrimaculatus and Aedes albopictus for genetically distinct Jamestown Canyon virus strains circulating in the Northeast United States.Parasites & vectors · 2022Article
- Novel murine models for studying Cache Valley virus pathogenesis andEmerging microbes & infections · 2021Article
- Do tigers hunt during the day? Diel activity of the Asian tiger mosquito, Aedes albopictus (Diptera: Culicidae), in urban and suburban habitats of North America.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2021Article
- SARS-CoV-2 failure to infect or replicate in mosquitoes: an extreme challenge.Scientific reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCache Valley virus (CVV; Bunyavirales, Peribunyaviridae) is a mosquito-borne arbovirus endemic in North America. Although severe diseases are mainly observed in pregnant ruminants, CVV has also been recognized as a zoonotic pathogen that can cause fatal encephalitis in humans. Human exposures to CVV and its related subtypes occur frequently under different ecological conditions in the New World; however, neurotropic disease is rarely reported. High prevalence rates of neutralizing antibodies have been detected among residents in several Latin American cities. However, zoophilic mosquito species involved in the enzootic transmission are unlikely to be responsible for the transmission leading to human exposures to CVV. Mechanisms that lead to frequent human exposures to CVV remain largely unknown. In this study, competence of two anthropophilic mosquitoes, Aedes albopictus and Ae. aegypti, for CVV was determined using per os infection to determine if these species could play a role in the transmission of CVV in the domestic and peridomestic settings of urban and suburban areas.
resultsAedes albopictus were highly susceptible to CVV whereas infection of Ae. aegypti occurred at a significantly lower frequency. Whilst the dissemination rates of CVV were comparable in the two species, the relatively long period to attain maximal infectious titer in Ae. aegypti demonstrated a significant difference in the replication kinetics of CVV in these species. Detection of viral RNA in saliva suggests that both Ae. albopictus and Ae. aegypti are competent vectors for CVV under laboratory conditions.
conclusionsDifferential susceptibility to CVV was observed in Ae. albopictus and Ae. aegypti, reflecting their relatively different capacities for vectoring CVV in nature. The high susceptibility of Ae. albopictus to CVV observed in this study suggests its potential role as an efficient vector for CVV. Complemented by the reports of multiple CVV isolates derived from Ae. albopictus, our finding provides the basis for how the dispersal of Ae. albopictus across the New World may have a significant impact on the transmission and ecology of CVV.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.