Ecological niche modelling of potential West Nile virus vector mosquito species and their geographical association with equine epizootics in Italy.
- Journal Article
- Climate
- Disease Outbreaks
- Disease Prevalence
- Disease Surveillance
- Disease Transmission
- Ecology
- Environmental Stressors
- Epidemiology
- Epizootic
- Equine Diseases
- Equine Health
- Geographical Differences
- Mosquito-borne Diseases
- Predictive Model
- Public Health
- Vector-borne disease
- Veterinary Research
- West Nile Virus
- Zoonotic Diseases
Summary
This study uses ecological niche modelling to map potential habitats for West Nile Virus-transmitting mosquitoes in Italy and explores their geographical correlation with outbreaks of the disease in horses. It provides crucial insights into the environmental factors contributing to mosquito distribution, which can aid in anticipating and managing the spread of the disease.
Thorough Explanation
The research focused on modelling how 13 mosquito species potentially carrying the West Nile virus (WNV) could be distributed across Italy in response to different environmental factors. These predictions were then linked with occurrence data for outbreaks of the virus among horses recorded from 2008 to 2010.
- The modelling software Maxent applied was intended to generate ecological niche models for the 13 mosquito species, considering factors such as location and environmental conditions.
- The species screened included Culex pipiens, Aedes albopictus, Anopheles maculipennis, Culex modestus, Ochlerotatus geniculatus, Ochlerotatus caspius, Coquillettidia richiardii, Aedes vexans, Anopheles plumbeus, Aedes cinereus, Culex theileri, Ochlerotatus dorsalis, and Culiseta longiareolata.
- The model predicted suitable habitats for each species considering multiple environmental variables. It identified that elevation, temperature, and precipitation had the highest influence on the species distribution. However, the presence of the host population and landscape variables also contributed, but to a lesser extent.
- The predictive models showed a widespread distribution of suitable habitats for mosquito species such as Culex pipiens, Aedes albopictus, and Anopheles maculipennis across Italy, while others like Culex modestus, Ochlerotatus geniculatus, and Coquillettidia richiardii had their suitable habitats concentrated in the north-central regions. Aedes cinereus and Culex theileri were restricted to the coastal and southern areas.
- The researchers associated the predicted WNV mosquito habitat distributions with recorded WNV outbreak locations among equines. The results suggested a significantly higher likelihood of disease outbreaks in the areas suitable for Cx. modestus and Cx. pipiens, indicating a geographical overlap between the predicted distribution of these species and the observed distribution of the disease in horses.
In summary, the research provides a valuable understanding of the role of environmental variables in shaping mosquito species distributions associated with WNV. These insights can contribute significantly to creating predictive models for disease outbreaks and guiding practices for prevention and management.
Cite This Article
Publication
Researcher Affiliations
- Dipartimento di Sanità Pubblica Veterinaria e Sicurezza Alimentare, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy, lapo.mughini.gras@rivm.nl.
MeSH Terms
- Animals
- Culicidae / virology
- Disease Outbreaks / statistics & numerical data
- Disease Outbreaks / veterinary
- Disease Transmission, Infectious / statistics & numerical data
- Ecosystem
- Horse Diseases / epidemiology
- Horse Diseases / virology
- Horses
- Insect Vectors / virology
- Italy / epidemiology
- West Nile Fever / transmission
References
- Epidemiol Infect. 2011 Jun;139(6):818-25
- PLoS One. 2010 Dec 15;5(12):e14324
- J Insect Sci. 2010;10:110
- BMC Public Health. 2012 Dec 27;12:1116
- Emerg Infect Dis. 2002 Dec;8(12):1372-8
- Clin Lab Med. 2010 Mar;30(1):47-65
- Open Virol J. 2010 Apr 22;4:29-37
- Emerg Infect Dis. 2003 Mar;9(3):311-22
- Emerg Infect Dis. 2003 Oct;9(10):1287-93
- Med Vet Entomol. 2004 Mar;18(1):14-9
- Int J Health Geogr. 2010 Jan 21;9:2
- C R Hebd Seances Acad Sci. 1964 Nov 30;259:4170-2
- Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2011 May;11(5):551-7
- Emerg Infect Dis. 1999 Sep-Oct;5(5):643-50
- Med Vet Entomol. 2005 Mar;19(1):2-21
- Annu Rev Entomol. 2008;53:61-81
- Geospat Health. 2010 Nov;5(1):45-57
- Int J Health Geogr. 2008 May 01;7:19
- J Med Entomol. 2009 Nov;46(6):1269-81
- Science. 2004 Mar 5;303(5663):1535-8
- Euro Surveill. 2012 May 17;17(20):
- Parasitol Res. 2008 Dec;103 Suppl 1:S29-43
- PLoS One. 2007 Sep 05;2(9):e824
- J Med Entomol. 2006 Sep;43(5):936-46
- Emerg Infect Dis. 2002 Dec;8(12):1385-91
- Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2010 Nov;10(9):875-84
- PLoS One. 2010 Feb 24;5(2):e9396
- Zoonoses Public Health. 2010 May;57(3):211-9
- Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2008 Oct;8(5):589-95
- Vet Ital. 2008 Jul-Sep;44(3):483-97, 499-512
- Epidemics. 2009 Sep;1(3):153-61
- J Med Entomol. 2006 May;43(3):552-63