Intercepted Mosquitoes at New Zealand’s Ports of Entry, 2001 to 2018: Current Status and Future Concerns

Ammar, Sherif E.; Mclntyre, Mary; Swan, Tom; Kasper, Julia; Derraik, José G. B.; Baker, Michael G; Hales, Simon

doi:10.3390/tropicalmed4030101

Cited by 29 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…aegypti with aerial incursions have been noted at New Zealand ports. 17 Considering the broad sympatry of these species throughout the Indo-Pacific, 43 these findings raise questions about why marine incursions are relatively rare for Ae. aegypti and why aerial incursions are relatively rare for Ae.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…albopictus and Ae. aegypti both disperse internationally on vessels like ships and aeroplanes, 17–19 analysis of their genetic structure in the Indo-Pacific has indicated that gene flow pathways are different in these species. 20 Likewise, interceptions at New Zealand borders found that most Ae.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…aegypti were transported as adults on aeroplanes. 17 One potential reason for these differences is that Ae. albopictus may be able to withstand longer transportation times and colder minimum temperatures by undergoing diapause, 21–23 an option unavailable to Ae.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Incursion pathways of the Asian tiger mosquito (Aedes albopictus) into Australia contrast sharply with those of the yellow fever mosquito (Aedes aegypti)

Schmidt

Chung

Rooyen

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUNDUnderstanding pest incursion pathways is critical for preventing new invasions and for stopping the transfer of alleles that reduce the efficacy of local control methods. The mosquitoes Aedes albopictus (Skuse) and Ae. aegypti (Linnaeus) are both highly invasive disease vectors, and through a series of ongoing international incursions are continuing to colonise new regions and spread insecticide resistance alleles among established populations. This study uses high-resolution molecular markers and a set of 241 reference genotypes to trace incursion pathways of Ae. albopictus into mainland Australia, where no successful invasions have yet been observed. We contrast these results with incursion pathways of Ae. aegypti, investigated previously.RESULTSAssignments successful identified China, Japan, Singapore and Taiwan as source locations. Incursion pathways of Ae. albopictus were entirely different to those of Ae. aegypti, despite broad sympatry of these species throughout the Indo-Pacific region. Incursions of Ae. albopictus appeared to have come predominantly along marine routes from key trading locations, while Ae. aegypti was mostly linked to aerial routes from tourism hotspots.CONCLUSIONThese results demonstrate how genomics can help decipher otherwise cryptic incursion pathways. The inclusion of reference genotypes from the Americas may help resolve some unsuccessful assignments. While many congeneric taxa will share common incursion pathways, this study highlights that this is not always the case, and incursion pathways of important taxa should be specifically investigated. Species differences in aerial and marine incursion rates may reflect the efficacy of ongoing control programs such as aircraft disinsection.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Incursion pathways of the Asian tiger mosquito (Aedes albopictus) into Australia contrast sharply with those of the yellow fever mosquito (Aedes aegypti)

Schmidt

Chung

Rooyen

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…populations can spread advantageous alleles that reduce the efficacy of local control programs [ 24 ]. Incursions of these species are frequently linked to vessels such as ships and planes [ 19 , 20 , 25 ], and when source locations can be identified they are often far from the point of collection [ 20 , 25 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Population genomics of two invasive mosquitoes (Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus) from the Indo-Pacific

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The arbovirus vectors Aedes aegypti (yellow fever mosquito) and Ae. albopictus (Asian tiger mosquito) are both common throughout the Indo-Pacific region, where 70% of global dengue transmission occurs. For Ae. aegypti all Indo-Pacific populations are invasive, having spread from an initial native range of Africa, while for Ae. albopictus the Indo-Pacific includes invasive populations and those from the native range: putatively, India to Japan to Southeast Asia. This study analyses the population genomics of 480 of these mosquitoes sampled from 27 locations in the Indo-Pacific. We investigated patterns of genome-wide genetic differentiation to compare pathways of invasion and ongoing gene flow in both species, and to compare invasive and native-range populations of Ae. albopictus. We also tested landscape genomic hypotheses that genetic differentiation would increase with geographical distance and be lower between locations with high connectivity to human transportation routes, the primary means of dispersal at these scales. We found that genetic distances were generally higher in Ae. aegypti, with Pacific populations the most highly differentiated. The most differentiated Ae. albopictus populations were in Vanuatu, Indonesia and Sri Lanka, the latter two representing potential native-range populations and potential cryptic subspeciation respectively. Genetic distances in Ae. aegypti increased with geographical distance, while in Ae. albopictus they decreased with higher connectivity to human transportation routes. Contrary to the situation in Ae. aegypti, we found evidence of long-distance Ae. albopictus colonisation events, including colonisation of Mauritius from East Asia and of Fiji from Southeast Asia. These direct genomic comparisons indicate likely differences in dispersal ecology in these species, despite their broadly sympatric distributions and similar use of human transport to disperse. Our findings will assist biosecurity operations to trace the source of invasive material and for biocontrol operations that benefit from matching genetic backgrounds of released and local populations.

show abstract

“…aegypti and one adult of Ae. albopictus (Ammar et al, 2019). In general, mosquitoes transported in airplanes are considered less probable to establish due to the low number of adults transported.…”

Section: Aircraft Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rift Valley Fever – epidemiological update and risk of introduction into Europe

Nielsen¹,

Álvarez²,

Bicout³

et al. 2020

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rift Valley fever (RVF) is a vector‐borne disease transmitted by a broad spectrum of mosquito species, especially Aedes and Culex genus, to animals (domestic and wild ruminants and camels) and humans. Rift Valley fever is endemic in sub‐Saharan Africa and in the Arabian Peninsula, with periodic epidemics characterised by 5–15 years of inter‐epizootic periods. In the last two decades, RVF was notified in new African regions (e.g. Sahel), RVF epidemics occurred more frequently and low‐level enzootic virus circulation has been demonstrated in livestock in various areas. Recent outbreaks in a French overseas department and some seropositive cases detected in Turkey, Tunisia and Libya raised the attention of the EU for a possible incursion into neighbouring countries. The movement of live animals is the most important pathway for RVF spread from the African endemic areas to North Africa and the Middle East. The movement of infected animals and infected vectors when shipped by flights, containers or road transport is considered as other plausible pathways of introduction into Europe. The overall risk of introduction of RVF into EU through the movement of infected animals is very low in all the EU regions and in all MSs (less than one epidemic every 500 years), given the strict EU animal import policy. The same level of risk of introduction in all the EU regions was estimated also considering the movement of infected vectors, with the highest level for Belgium, Greece, Malta, the Netherlands (one epidemic every 228–700 years), mainly linked to the number of connections by air and sea transports with African RVF infected countries. Although the EU territory does not seem to be directly exposed to an imminent risk of RVFV introduction, the risk of further spread into countries neighbouring the EU and the risks of possible introduction of infected vectors, suggest that EU authorities need to strengthen their surveillance and response capacities, as well as the collaboration with North African and Middle Eastern countries.

show abstract

Intercepted Mosquitoes at New Zealand’s Ports of Entry, 2001 to 2018: Current Status and Future Concerns

Cited by 29 publications

References 46 publications

Incursion pathways of the Asian tiger mosquito (Aedes albopictus) into Australia contrast sharply with those of the yellow fever mosquito (Aedes aegypti)

Incursion pathways of the Asian tiger mosquito (Aedes albopictus) into Australia contrast sharply with those of the yellow fever mosquito (Aedes aegypti)

Population genomics of two invasive mosquitoes (Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus) from the Indo-Pacific

Rift Valley Fever – epidemiological update and risk of introduction into Europe

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About