English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  Vector-borne diseases are a major public health concern and cause significant morbidity and mortality. Zika virus (ZIKV) is the etiologic agent of a massive outbreak in the Americas that originated in Brazil in 2015 and shows a strong association with congenital ZIKV syndrome in newborns. Cache Valley virus (CVV) is a bunyavirus that causes mild to severe illness in humans and ruminants. In this study, we investigated the vector competence of Virginia mosquitoes for ZIKV and CVV to explore their abilities to contribute to potential outbreaks.    Methods  To determine vector competence, mosquitoes were fed a blood meal comprised of defibrinated sheep blood and virus. The presence of midgut or salivary gland barriers to ZIKV infection were determined by intrathoracic inoculation  vs  oral infection. After 14-days post-exposure, individual mosquitoes were separated into bodies, legs and wings, and saliva expectorant. Virus presence was detected by plaque assay to determine midgut infection, dissemination, and transmission rates.    Results  Transmission rates for  Ae. albopictus  orally infected (24%) and intrathoracically inoculated (63%) with ZIKV was similar to  Ae. aegypti  (48% and 71%, respectively). Transmission rates of ZIKV in  Ae. japonicus  were low, and showed evidence of a midgut infection barrier demonstrated by low midgut infection and dissemination rates from oral infection (3%), but increased transmission rates after intrathoracic inoculation (19%).  Aedes triseriatus  was unable to transmit ZIKV following oral infection or intrathoracic inoculation. CVV transmission was dose-dependent where mosquitoes fed high titer (ht) virus blood meals developed higher rates of midgut infection, dissemination, and transmission compared to low titer (lt) virus blood meals. CVV was detected in the saliva of  Ae. albopictus  (ht: 68%, lt: 24%),  Ae. triseriatus  (ht: 52%, lt: 7%),  Ae. japonicus  (ht: 22%, lt: 0%) and  Ae. aegypti  (ht: 10%; lt: 7%).  Culex pipiens  and  Cx. restuans  were not competent for ZIKV or CVV.    Conclusions  This laboratory transmission study provided further understanding of potential ZIKV and CVV transmission cycles with  Aedes  mosquitoes from Virginia. The ability for these mosquitoes to transmit ZIKV and CVV make them a public health concern and suggest targeted control programs by mosquito and vector abatement districts.

Vector competence of Virginia mosquitoes for Zika and Cache Valley viruses