| Literature DB >> 25591112 |
Steven A Juliano1, Gabriel Sylvestre Ribeiro2, Rafael Maciel-de-Freitas2, Márcia G Castro2, Claudia Codeço3, Ricardo Lourenço-de-Oliveira2, L Philip Lounibos4.
Abstract
Two hypotheses for how conditions for larval mosquitoes affect vectorial capacity make opposite predictions about the relationship of adult size and frequency of infection with vector-borne pathogens. Competition among larvae produces small adult females. The competition-susceptibility hypothesis postulates that small females are more susceptible to infection and predicts frequency of infection should decrease with size. The competition-longevity hypothesis postulates that small females have lower longevity and lower probability of becoming competent to transmit the pathogen and thus predicts frequency of infection should increase with size. We tested these hypotheses for Aedes aegypti in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, during a dengue outbreak. In the laboratory, longevity increases with size, then decreases at the largest sizes. For field-collected females, generalised linear mixed model comparisons showed that a model with a linear increase of frequency of dengue with size produced the best Akaike's information criterion with a correction for small sample sizes (AICc). Consensus prediction of three competing models indicated that frequency of infection increases monotonically with female size, consistent with the competition-longevity hypothesis. Site frequency of infection was not significantly related to site mean size of females. Thus, our data indicate that uncrowded, low competition conditions for larvae produce the females that are most likely to be important vectors of dengue. More generally, ecological conditions, particularly crowding and intraspecific competition among larvae, are likely to affect vector-borne pathogen transmission in nature, in this case via effects on longevity of resulting adults. Heterogeneity among individual vectors in likelihood of infection is a generally important outcome of ecological conditions impacting vectors as larvae.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25591112 PMCID: PMC4325623 DOI: 10.1590/0074-02760140455
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz ISSN: 0074-0276 Impact factor: 2.743
Fig. 1: predicted survivorship curves for adult female Aedes aegypti in the laboratory that are not infected with dengue (A) or infected with dengue (B). Statistical analysis reported in the Results section. Plotted wing lengths were chosen to span the range of sizes of females included in the experiment.
Mixed effect generalised linear models for the relationship of wing length to frequency of dengue infection
| Model effects | AICc | ∆AICc | Exp[-0.5(∆AICc)] | wi |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wing, day, day2, site | 301.87 | 0 | 1 | 0.5608 |
| Wing, wing2, day, day2, site | 302.47 | 0.60 | 0.7408 | 0.4155 |
| Day, day2, site | 308.20 | 6.33 | 0.0422 | 0.0237 |
| Sum | - | - | 1.7830 | - |
all considered models included linear and quadratic effects of date of collection and the random effect of site. Weight of evidence (wi) expresses exp[-0.5(∆AICc)] as a proportion of the sum of that column and indicates the evidence for the model (i.e., the probability that the model is the correct one). AICc: Akaike’s information criterion with a correction for small sample sizes.
Fig. 2: predicted frequencies of dengue infection among field collected female Aedes aegypti from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Day of collection is expressed as days since 1 March 2008. All models included a random effect for collection site (n = 13 dengue positive sites). The predicted relationships are shown holding site effect constant at the value for collections from Valqueire (Supplementary data, Table II). Statistical assessment of support for linear (A) and quadratic (B) models of frequency vs. wing length (mm) is given in Table I. Uncertainty of predicted frequencies given in Table II.
Estimates of standard error (SE) of prediction for models of the relationship of frequency of dengue infection to wing length
| Wing (mm) | Model | Model (wi) | Predicted frequency (dengue) | Conditional SE predicted | Model selection uncertainty | Average predicted frequency (dengue) | Unconditional SE predicted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.0 | Wing, wing2 | 0.4155 | 0.078 | 0.062 | 0.001 | 0.112 | 0.335 |
| Wing | 0.5608 | 0.145 | 0.086 | 0.011 | |||
| - | 0.0237 | 0.275 | 0.116 | 0.055 | |||
| 3.0 | Wing, wing2 | 0.4155 | 0.399 | 0.147 | 0.074 | 0.299 | 0.547 |
| Wing | 0.5608 | 0.368 | 0.141 | 0.059 | |||
| - | 0.0237 | 0.275 | 0.116 | 0.022 | |||
| 4.0 | Wing, wing2 | 0.4155 | 0.220 | 0.352 | 0.004 | 0.348 | 0.590 |
| Wing | 0.5608 | 0.667 | 0.208 | 0.260 | |||
| - | 0.0237 | 0.275 | 0.116 | 0.014 |
all models include date and date2. For prediction, the random effect of site was held constant at the value for Valqueire (Supplementary data), which had an intermediate frequency of dengue-positive females (0.1719) and date was held constant at 21 April (middle of the epidemic). Conditional SE includes only the uncertainty within the model. Unconditional SE includes that uncertainty plus model selection uncertainty weighted by evidence (wi). For details see Anderson (2008).
Fig. 3: relationship of frequency of female Aedes aegypti infected with dengue [± standard error (SE), binomial formula] and mean female body size (± SE) for 23 sites in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and vicinity during the dengue epidemic of 2008. For number of females from each site, see Supplementary data.
Site locations, numbers of females collected and infected and proportion infected for 23 sites sampled in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and vicinity in 2008
| Site | Females (n) | Dengue positive | p(infected) | SE p(infected) | Degrees | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S latitude | W longitude | |||||
| Abolição | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22.88778 | 43.29917 |
| Anil | 14 | 1 | 0.07143 | 0.06883 | 22.95444 | 43.34000 |
| Bonsucesso | 6 | 2 | 0.33333 | 0.19245 | 22.86306 | 43.25306 |
| Brás de Pina | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22.82917 | 43.29889 |
| Caju | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22.88000 | 43.22056 |
| Catumbi | 17 | 4 | 0.23529 | 0.10288 | 22.91806 | 43.19694 |
| Curicica | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22.95000 | 43.39028 |
| Fiocruz | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22.87488 | 43.24544 |
| Fundão | 2 | 1 | 0.5 | 0.35355 | 22.85306 | 43.22583 |
| Gávea | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22.97972 | 43.24083 |
| Grajaú | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22.92833 | 43.26028 |
| Jardim Guanabara | 258 | 7 | 0.02713 | 0.01011 | 22.81167 | 43.20361 |
| Mangueira | 25 | 7 | 0.28 | 0.0898 | 22.90389 | 43.23694 |
| Nova Iguaçu | 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22.75889 | 43.45083 |
| Olaria | 12 | 1 | 0.08333 | 0.07979 | 22.84667 | 43.27306 |
| Ricardo de Albuquerque | 19 | 2 | 0.10526 | 0.07041 | 22.83694 | 43.39750 |
| Rio Comprido | 5 | 1 | 0.2 | 0.17889 | 22.92750 | 43.20806 |
| São Gonçalo | 47 | 6 | 0.12766 | 0.04868 | 22.82694 | 43.05389 |
| Taquara | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22.92222 | 43.38806 |
| Tubiacanga | 25 | 12 | 0.48 | 0.09992 | 22.78300 | 43.23300 |
| Valqueire | 64 | 11 | 0.17188 | 0.04716 | 22.88972 | 43.36694 |
| Vargem Pequena | 3 | 1 | 0.33333 | 0.27217 | 22.98056 | 43.46361 |
| Vila Isabel | 12 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22.91556 | 43.24861 |
: Ilha do Governador, a neighborhood in the North Zone of Rio de Janeiro; SE: standard error.