Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35333866›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2022

Effects of ivermectin treatment of backyard chickens on mosquito dynamics and West Nile virus transmission.

Karen M Holcomb, Chilinh Nguyen, Brian D Foy, Michelle Ahn, Kurt Cramer, Emma T Lonstrup, Asli Mete, Lisa A Tell, Christopher M Barker

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Karen M HolcombDavis Arbovirus Research and Training Laboratory, Department of Pathology, Microbiology, and Immunology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9403-3756
Chilinh NguyenCenter for Vector-borne Infectious Diseases, Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Pathology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-8772-9088
Brian D FoyCenter for Vector-borne Infectious Diseases, Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Pathology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, United States of America.
Michelle AhnDavis Arbovirus Research and Training Laboratory, Department of Pathology, Microbiology, and Immunology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America.
Kurt CramerDavis Arbovirus Research and Training Laboratory, Department of Pathology, Microbiology, and Immunology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-6006-348X
Emma T LonstrupDavis Arbovirus Research and Training Laboratory, Department of Pathology, Microbiology, and Immunology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-7491-8875
Asli MeteCalifornia Animal Health and Food Safety Lab, Department of Pathology, Microbiology & Immunology, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7612-6713
Lisa A TellDepartment of Medicine and Epidemiology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America.
Christopher M BarkerDavis Arbovirus Research and Training Laboratory, Department of Pathology, Microbiology, and Immunology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7941-346X
University of California, Davis · USColorado State University · US

Funding

UC Davis Clinical and Translational Science CenterUL1TR001860 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI KENYON, NICHOLAS J., LYLES, COURTNEY REES · 2016 to 2025
$47.3M
UC Davis CTSC TL1 Administrative Supplement to Recognize Excellence in Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility MentorshipTL1TR001861 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI MEDICI, VALENTINA · 2016 to 2025
$4.7M
West Nile virus control through mosquitocidal avian bloodmealsR01AI148633 · NIAID · COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI FOY, BRIAN DAVID · 2020 to 2024
$3.3M
NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR001861NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001860NCEZID CDC HHS U01 CK000516NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI148633
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVector control strategies typically rely on pesticides to target mosquitoes involved in enzootic and zoonotic transmission of West Nile virus (WNV). Nevertheless, increasing insecticide resistance and a desire to reduce pesticide usage provide the impetus for developing alternative strategies. Ivermectin (IVM), an antiparasitic drug which is widely used in human and veterinary medicine, is a potential alternative for targeted control because Culex mosquitoes experience increased mortality following ingestion of IVM in bloodmeals. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL

findingsWe conducted a randomized field trial to investigate the impact of treating backyard chicken flocks with IVM in urban neighborhoods across Davis, California on mosquito populations and WNV transmission dynamics. We observed a significant reduction in WNV seroconversions in treated vs. untreated chickens, suggesting a reduction in WNV transmission intensity around treated flocks. We also detected a reduction in parity rates of Cx. tarsalis near treated vs. untreated flocks and increased mortality in wild mosquitoes following a bloodmeal on treated chickens (IVM serum concentration > 5ng/mL) vs. chickens with IVM serum concentrations < 5 ng/mL. However, we did not find a significant difference in abundance or infection prevalence in mosquitoes between treatment groups associated with the reductions in seroconversions. Mosquito immigration from surrounding larval habitat, relatively low WNV activity in the study area, and variable IVM serum concentrations likely contributed to uncertainty about the impact. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Taken together, our results point to a reduction in WNV transmission due to the impact of IVM on Culex mosquito populations and support the ongoing investigation of oral administration of IVM to wild birds for local control of WNV transmission, although further work is needed to optimize dosing and understand effects on entomological endpoints.

Indexed as

CulexCulicidaeWest Nile FeverWest Nile virusAnimalsChickensIvermectinMosquito VectorsIvermectin

Identifiers

PMID35333866
PMCPMC9012369
OpenAlexW4220884409

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.