Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Jul 17;12(7):e0006637.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0006637. eCollection 2018 Jul.

Zika virus outbreak in the Pacific: Vector competence of regional vectors

Elodie Calvez  1 , Laurence Mousson  2 , Marie Vazeille  2 , Olivia O'Connor  1 , Van-Mai Cao-Lormeau  3 , Françoise Mathieu-Daudé  4 , Nicolas Pocquet  5 , Anna-Bella Failloux  2 , Myrielle Dupont-Rouzeyrol  1
Affiliations

Zika virus outbreak in the Pacific: Vector competence of regional vectors

Elodie Calvez et al. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. .

Abstract

Background: In 2013, Zika virus (ZIKV) emerged in French Polynesia and spread through the Pacific region between 2013 and 2017. Several potential Aedes mosquitoes may have contributed to the ZIKV transmission including Aedes aegypti, the main arbovirus vector in the region, and Aedes polynesiensis, vector of lymphatic filariasis and secondary vector of dengue virus. The aim of this study was to analyze the ability of these two Pacific vectors to transmit ZIKV at a regional scale, through the evaluation and comparison of the vector competence of wild Ae. aegypti and Ae. polynesiensis populations from different Pacific islands for a ZIKV strain which circulated in this region during the 2013-2017 outbreak.

Methodology/principal findings: Field Ae. aegypti (three populations) and Ae. polynesiensis (two populations) from the Pacific region were collected for this study. Female mosquitoes were orally exposed to ZIKV (107 TCID50/mL) isolated in the region in 2014. At 6, 9, 14 and 21 days post-infection, mosquito bodies (thorax and abdomen), heads and saliva were analyzed to measure infection, dissemination, transmission rates and transmission efficiency, respectively. According to our results, ZIKV infection rates were heterogeneous between the Ae. aegypti populations, but the dissemination rates were moderate and more homogenous between these populations. For Ae. polynesiensis, infection rates were less heterogeneous between the two populations tested. The transmission rate and efficiency results revealed a low vector competence for ZIKV of the different Aedes vector populations under study.

Conclusion/significance: Our results indicated a low ZIKV transmission by Ae. aegypti and Ae. polynesiensis tested from the Pacific region. These results were unexpected and suggest the importance of other factors especially the vector density, the mosquito lifespan or the large immunologically naive fraction of the population that may have contributed to the rapid spread of the ZIKV in the Pacific region during the 2013-2017 outbreak.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Pacific map locating Ae. aegypti and Ae. polynesiensis sampling sites.
Ae. aegypti sampling sites are represented by the red stars and Ae. polynesiensis sampling sites by the dark star in a white dot. This map was generated using map files provided by ESRI in its ArcMap package.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Aedes aegypti from the Pacific region infected with ZIKV.
(A) Infection rate, (B) dissemination rate, (C) transmission rate and (D) transmission efficiency at 6, 9, 14 and 21 days post-infection (dpi). Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals. Numbers of mosquitoes tested are indicated above each bar plot. Significant differences are indicated by asterisks (*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001). NT indicates that females were not tested for this analysis point.
Fig 3
Fig 3. Aedes polynesiensis from the Pacific region infected with ZIKV.
(A) Infection rate, (B) dissemination rate, (C) transmission rate and (D) transmission efficiency at 6, 9, 14 and 21 days post-infection (dpi). Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals. Numbers of mosquitoes tested are indicated above each bar plot. Significant differences are indicated by asterisks (*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Kuno G, Chang GJ, Tsuchiya KR, Karabatsos N, Cropp CB. Phylogeny of the genus Flavivirus. Journal of virology. 1998;72(1):73–83. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chouin-Carneiro T, Vega-Rua A, Vazeille M, Yebakima A, Girod R, Goindin D, et al. Differential Susceptibilities of Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus from the Americas to Zika Virus. PLOS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10(3):e0004543 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004543 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Diallo D, Sall AA, Diagne CT, Faye O, Ba Y, Hanley KA, et al. Zika virus emergence in mosquitoes in southeastern Senegal, 2011. PLoS One. 2014;9(10). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Duffy MR, Chen T-H, Hancock WT, Powers AM, Kool JL, Lanciotti RS, et al. Zika Virus Outbreak on Yap Island, Federated States of Micronesia. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(24):2536–43. 10.1056/NEJMoa0805715 . - DOI - PubMed
    1. Petersen LR, Jamieson DJ, Powers AM, Honein MA. Zika Virus. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(16):1552–63. 10.1056/NEJMra1602113 . - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Grants and funding

This work was supported by the Actions Concertées Inter Pasteuriennes (ZikAe Project, ACIP A-15-2014). This work was partly funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under ZIKAlliance Grant Agreement No. 734548 and by the Ministère des Outre-mer (SEOM). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.