Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33234076›Full record

ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2020

Last-come, best served? Mosquito biting order and

J Isaïa, A Rivero, O Glaizot, P Christe, R Pigeault

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Plastic responses ofBiology letters · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Last-come, best served? Mosquito biting order andProceedings. Biological sciences · 2020
    Article
  6. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

J IsaïaDepartment of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne, CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland.
A RiveroMIVEGEC (UMR CNRS 5290), Montpellier, France.
O GlaizotDepartment of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne, CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland.
P ChristeDepartment of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne, CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland.
R PigeaultDepartment of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne, CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland.
University of Lausanne · CHCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRMusée cantonal de zoologie de Lausanne · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A pervasive characteristic of parasite infections is their tendency to be overdispersed. Understanding the mechanisms underlying this overdispersed distribution is of key importance as it may impact the transmission dynamics of the pathogen. Although multiple factors ranging from environmental stochasticity to inter-individual heterogeneity may explain parasite overdispersion, parasite infection is also overdispersed in an inbred host population maintained under laboratory conditions, suggesting that other mechanisms are at play. Here, we show that the aggregated distribution of malaria parasites within mosquito vectors is partially explained by a temporal heterogeneity in parasite infectivity triggered by the bites of mosquitoes. Parasite transmission tripled between the mosquito's first and last blood feed in a period of only 3 h. Surprisingly, the increase in transmission is not associated with an increase in parasite investment in production of the transmissible stage. Overall, we highlight that

Indexed as

Insect Bites and StingsMosquito VectorsPlasmodiumAnimalsAnophelesCulexHost-Parasite InteractionsMalariaavian malariaoverdispersionPlasmodiumtemporal heterogeneitytransmission

Identifiers

PMID33234076
PMCPMC7739503
OpenAlexW3100825274

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.