| Literature DB >> 33298165 |
Constentin Dieme1, Alexander T Ciota2,3, Laura D Kramer2,3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mayaro virus (MAYV; Alphavirus, Togaviridae) is an emerging pathogen endemic in South American countries. The increase in intercontinental travel and tourism-based forest excursions has resulted in an increase in MAYV spread, with imported cases observed in Europe and North America. Intriguingly, no local transmission of MAYV has been reported outside South America, despite the presence of potential vectors.Entities:
Keywords: Aedes albopictus; Anopheles quadrimaculatus; Mayaro virus; Vector competence
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33298165 PMCID: PMC7724717 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-020-04478-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Aedes albopictus and Anopheles quadrimaculatus infection rates, dissemination rates, and transmission rates after exposure to Mayaro virus
| Mosquito species | Replicate | Blood meal titer (log10 PFU/ml) | 7 dpi | 14 dpi | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Infection rate, | Dissemination rate, | Dissemination efficiency, | Transmission rate, N (%) | Transmission efficiency, | Infection rate, | Dissemination rate, | Dissemination efficiency, N (%) | Transmission rate, N (%) | Transmission efficiency, | |||||
| 1 | 8.23 | 30 | 30 (100.0) | 29 (96.67) | 29 (96.67) | 13 (44.82) | 13 (43.33) | 30 | 30 (100.0) | 30 (100.0) | 30 (100.0) | 24 (80.0) | 24 (80.0) | |
| 2 | 8.14 | 30 | 30 (100.0) | 30 (100.0) | 30 (100.0) | 10 (33.33) | 10 (33.33) | 30 | 30 (100.0) | 30 (100.0) | 30 (100.0) | 21 (70.0) | 21 (70.0) | |
| 3 | 7.97 | 30 | 30 (100.0) | 27 (90.0) | 27 (90.0) | 9 (33.33) | 9 (30.00) | 30 | 30 (100.0) | 30 (100.0) | 30 (100.0) | 13 (43.33) | 13 (43.33) | |
| Mean ± SD | NA | 30 | 100.0 | 95.56 ± 5.09 | 95.56 ± 5.09 | 37.16 ± 6.63 | 35.55 ± 6.94 | 30 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 64.44 ± 18.96 | 64.44 ± 18.96 | |
| 1 | 8.06 | 30 | 25 (83.33) | 19 (76.0) | 19 (63.33) | 8 (42.11) | 8 (26.66) | 30 | 21 (70.00) | 16 (76.19) | 16 (53.33) | 7 (43.75) | 7 (23.33) | |
| 2 | 7.87 | 30 | 25 (83.33) | 8 (32.0) | 8 (26.67) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 30 | 19 (63.33) | 7 (36.84) | 7 (23.33) | 4 (57.14) | 4 (13.33) | |
| 3 | 8.39 | 30 | 24 (80.0) | 18 (75.0) | 18 (60.0) | 6 (33.33) | 6 (20.0) | 30 | 27 (90.00) | 18 (66.67) | 18 (60.00) | 8 (44.44) | 8 (26.67) | |
| Mean ± SD | NA | 30 | 82.22 ± 1.92 | 61.0 ± 2 5.12 | 50.0 ± 20.27 | 25.15 ± 22.22 | 15.55 ± 13.88 | 30 | 74.44 ± 13.88 | 59.9 ± 20.53 | 45.55 ± 19.53 | 48.44 ± 7.54 | 21.11 ± 6.94 | |
We used the infection rates, dissemination rates, and transmission rates for comparison within mosquito species. A significant difference within mosquito species was only observed for Ae. albopictus transmission [P < 0.0001, odds ratio (OR) 0.3269, 95% conficence interval (CI) 0.1769–0.6043]. Significant differences were observed between Ae. albopictus and An. quadrimaculatus infection rates (P < 0.0001, OR 38.7, 95% CI 2.281–656.8 and P < 0.0001, OR 61.45, 95% CI 3.665–1030 , at 7 dpi and 14 dpi, respectively) and dissemination efficiencies at both time points (P < 0.0001, OR 21.5, 95% CI 7.27–63.58 and P < 0.0001, OR 213.9, 95% CI 12.88–3554, at 7 dpi and 14 dpi, respectively). Between species, the transmission efficiencies were significantly different at both time points (P < 0.0017, OR 2.995, 95% CI 1.465–6.122 at 7 dpi and P < 0.0001, OR 6.773, 95% CI 3.482–13.17 at 14 dpi)
dpi, Days post-infection; NA, not applicable, PFU, plaque-forming units; SD standard deviation