Content uploaded by Anakkathil Sudeep
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Anakkathil Sudeep on Mar 19, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Anakkathil Sudeep
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Anakkathil Sudeep on Mar 19, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
INTRODUCTION
Aedes vittatus (Bigot) mosquito, initially identied
as Culex vittatus, rst reported from Corsica in Europe,
has garnered public attention recently due to its associa-
tion with Zika virus (ZIKV)1–2. In addition, the mosquito
is known to play an important role in the maintenance
and transmission of viruses of public health importance,
viz. yellow fever virus (YFV), dengue virus (DENV), and
chikungunya virus (CHIKV). All the viruses have been
repeatedly isolated from wild caught mosquitoes dem-
onstrating their role in the maintenance of these viruses
in nature1. Experimental studies have also shown their
potential not only in replicating these viruses but also in
transmitting them to susceptible hosts. Initially the mos-
quito was placed under subgenus Stegomyia due to mor-
phological similarities; but, subsequently placed under
subgenus Aedimorphus and later on under the subgenus
Fredwardsius based on the distinctive characteristics that
distinguished it from other subgenera of genus Aedes2–3. It
is a peridomestic mosquito and found breeding in various
microhabitats, but predominantly in rock pools4. Three
pairs of small round silvery white spots on the scutum
makes the mosquito easily distinguishable from other
commonly found Aedes species. Other characteristic fea-
tures include, wings with narrow scales on all veins, dark
tibiae with white spots, presence of white band on the
base of tibiae, white bands on the tarsomeres 1–4, fully
white fth tarsomere etc4. The expansion of geographic
distribution, ability to breed in various macro- and micro-
habitats, high anthropophily (readily feeds on humans)
and competence to transmit important arboviruses makes
it an important mosquito species to be dealt with. This
review, discusses the geographical distribution of Ae.
vittatus mosquito, its breeding habitats, susceptibility to
arboviruses of public health importance and potential to
act as an important vector or abridge vector of viruses like
YFV, CHIKV, DENV and ZIKV.
Global distribution
The Ae. vittatus mosquito is geographically dis-
tributed throughout tropical Asia, Africa and the Medi-
Review Article
Aedes vittatus (Bigot) mosquito: An emerging threat to public health
A.B. Sudeep & P. Shil
1ICMR–National Institute of Virology, Microbial Containment Complex, Pune, India
ABSTRACT
Aedes vittatus (Bigot) mosquito is a voracious biter of humans and has a geographical distribution throughout tropical
Asia, Africa and the Mediterranean region of Europe. It is predominantly a rock-hole breeder, though it can breed
in diverse macro- and micro-habitats. The mosquito plays an important role in the maintenance and transmission of
yellow fever (YFV), dengue (DENV), chikungunya (CHIKV) and Zika (ZIKV) viruses. It has been implicated as an
important vector of YFV in several African countries as evidenced by repeated virus isolations from the mosquito
and its potential to transmit the virus experimentally. Similarly, DENV-2 has been isolated from wild caught Ae.
vittatus mosquitoes in Senegal, Africa which has been shown to circulate the virus in sylvatic populations without
causing human infection. Experimental studies have shown replication of the virus at a low scale in naturally infected
mosquitoes while high rate of infection and dissemination have been reported in parenterally infected mosquitoes.
Natural isolation of ZIKV has been reported from Senegal and Cote d’Ivoire from these mosquitoes. They were found
highly competent to transmit the virus experimentally and the transmission rate is at par with Ae. leuteocephalus, the
primary vector of ZIKV. A few CHIKV isolations have also been reported from the mosquitoes in Senegal and other
countries in Africa. Experimental studies have demonstrated high susceptibility, early dissemination and ecient
transmission of CHIKV by Ae. vittatus mosquitoes. The mosquitoes with their high susceptibility and competence
to transmit important viruses, viz. YFV, DENV, CHIKV and ZIKV pose a major threat to public health due to their
abundance and anthropophilic behaviour.
Key words Aedes vittatus; chikungunya; dengue; Zika; yellow fever
J Vector Borne Dis 54, December 2017, pp. 295–300
J Vector Borne Dis 54, December 2017
296
Fig. 1: Geographic distribution (Grey area) of Ae.vittatus mosquitoes.
Data not available
and village land covers, the maximum prevalence was
observed in the savannah and barren land covers. Stud-
ies on the seasonal prevalence of the mosquitoes have
shown their presence mainly during June to October in
the forested land cover; June to August in savannahs, July
to October in barren lands and June to October in village
land covers9. However, in the Osogo metropolis in south-
western Nigeria, breeding of the mosquito was mainly
found in discarded containers and septic tanks10. Similar
to these results, Tewari et al11 reported profuse breeding
of the mosquitoes throughout the year in peridomestic/
outdoor containers in India. The breeding was observed
in cement tanks, cement cisterns, mud pots, metal and
terranean region of Europe3. It is predominantly found
throughout Africa either as a canopy (sylvatic) mosquito,
forest ground mosquito or peridomestic mosquito in rural
areas5. In Europe, the species is restricted to the occiden-
tal Mediterranean region comprising Italy, France, Spain
and Portugal. In Asia, the mosquito is found in several
countries including India. The countries in the three con-
tinents where the mosquito is highly prevalent are listed in
Table 1. The Fig. 1 depicts the global distribution.
Breeding habitats
Aedes vittatus is predominantly a rock-hole breeder in
Africa, though it can breed in diverse macro- and micro-
habitats6. Species distribution study in rock pools on insel-
bergs in northern Nigeria has shown predominant breed-
ing of Ae. vittatus mosquitoes, contributing to 92.8% of
the total population7. The investigators also observed that
the species is least aected by physico-chemical param-
eters of the rock hole habitats. Another study has also re-
ported the high prevalence of the mosquito in Katsina area
of Nigeria where breeding was mainly observed in rock
pools8. On the contrary, Diallo et al 9 observed maximum
breeding of the mosquito in puddles (52.3%) followed
by rock holes (48.3%), discarded containers (2.9%), tree
holes (0.7%) and fresh fruit husks (0.5%) in Kedougou
region in Senegal. They also observed that though the
mosquito was prevalent in forest, savannah, barren land,
Table 1. The countries in Asia, Africa and Europe, where Aedes
vittatus (Bigot) mosquito is predominantly distributed
Continents Countries
Asia Bangladesh, China, Cambodia, India, Iran, Laos,
Malaysia, Nepal, Pakistan Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka,
Thailand, Vietnam and Yemen
Africa Algeria, Angola, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso,
Cameroon, Central African Republic, Comoros, Cote
d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti,
Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Kenya,
Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique,
Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone,
Somalia, South Africa, Sudan and South Sudan,
Tanzania, Tunisia, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe.
Europe France, Italy, Portugal and Spain
297
Sudeep & Shil: Aedes vittatus, an emerging threat
plastic containers and discarded containers with almost
equal proportions in three dengue endemic villages in
Vellore district, Tamil Nadu. However, cement tanks and
cement cisterns showed higher breeding preference in
comparison to other containers. Rajavel et al12 reported
the presence of this mosquito in the mangrove forests of
Karnataka and Kerala. They observed the prevalence of
the immatures mainly in tree holes and swamp pools. The
mosquito eggs are highly resistant to extreme temperature
and other climatic conditions and can tide over the dry sea-
son for prolonged periods13, as the researchers observed
the emergence of Ae. vittatus larvae from eggs that were
lying in granite rock pools at the temperature of 40°C and
relative humidity of 5% for 4.5 months.
Public health importance of Ae. vittatus
Aedes vittatus is a voracious biter of humans and
plays an important role in the maintenance and transmis-
sion of several arboviruses. It has been incriminated as an
important vector of yellow fever in Africa as evidenced
by virus isolations and its high anthropophily8. Several
other viruses, viz. dengue, chikungunya and Zika have
been isolated from the mosquito demonstrating its poten-
tial to replicate and transmit these viruses experimentally.
However, its role as a vector of these viruses still needs
further investigation.
Natural isolations and experimental studies with arbovi-
ruses of public health importance
Yellow fever virus: Yellow fever is highly endemic in
sub-Saharan Africa and tropical South America with ap-
prox. 2,00,000 cases and ≥30,000 deaths annually, despite
having an eective vaccine14. The virus is transmitted by
a plethora of mosquito species comprising sylvatic, rural
and urban mosquitoes15. Several isolations of the virus
have been made from Ae. vittatus mosquitoes in Nige-
ria, Senegal, Cote d’Ivoire, Sudan, West Africa etc. and
the mosquito is being suspected as the natural vector of
YFV8, 15. During the YFV outbreak in Gambia 1978–79,
it was suspected that Ae. vittatus played an important role
in the initial transmission16. Experimental transmission of
YFV to monkeys by infected mosquitoes has been shown
successfully demonstrating the vectorial capacity of the
mosquito17.
Dengue virus: Dengue is one of the most important
arboviral infections of humans with approx. 390 million
cases and over one million deaths annually18. Several
countries in Africa and Asia especially in the tropical and
subtropical regions are endemic to the virus and is trans-
mitted mainly by Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus mosqui-
toes. Aedes vittatus has also been indicted as a probable
vector of DENV as evidenced by virus isolations and their
ability to replicate and transmit the virus in the laboratory.
Diallo et al19 reported the isolation of DENV-2 from wild
caught female Ae. vittatus mosquitoes (sylvatic popula-
tions) from southeastern Senegal during 1999–2000. Iso-
lation of DENV-2 from sylvatic Ae. vittatus mosquitoes
without human infections has been reported from Cote
d’Ivoire demonstrating sylvatic DENV circulation20–21.
Experimental studies have shown that Ae. vittatus
mosquitoes are susceptible to infection with all four se-
rotypes of dengue virus22. Mavale et al22 found that the
infection rate is slow in oral fed mosquitoes (<5%) and
presence of virus in brain tissues and salivary glands was
detected only after Day 7 post-infection (PI) irrespective
of serotypes. However, rapid increase in viral titre was
observed in parenterally infected mosquitoes (>63%) as
the virus could be detected on Day 5 PI for DENV-1, 2, and
3 serotypes and Day 7 PI for DENV-4. Maximum titre was
detected on Day 9 PI (2.4 dex), and the mosquitoes main-
tained the titres in the range of 1.8 to 2.2 dex on subse-
quent days (between Day 11 and 15) PI. The investigators
also demonstrated that despite having a low infection rate,
salivary glands were found infected, indicating their com-
petence to transmit the virus to susceptible hosts. Based
on the results of the study, the investigators have opined
that the mosquitoes, though with low infection rate, may
act as a natural vector or play an important role in the
maintenance of the virus in nature. Complementary nd-
ings were reported by Diallo et al23 during their studies
with DENV-2 in Kedougou, Senegal. They observed that
Ae. vittatus mosquitoes are less susceptible to DENV-2
(infection rate 6–18%), though they have shown higher
rate of dissemination than highly susceptible vector mos-
quitoes, viz. Ae. furcifer and Ae. luteocephalus. The high
dissemination rate is suggestive of their enhanced poten-
tial to transmit DENV-2. The authors, however, feel that
the mosquito has little or no role in the transmission of
dengue virus as evidenced by low susceptibility and the
lack of infection in mosquitoes collected from epidemic
areas along with Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus. Similar
observation has been reported by Tewari et al11 as they
could not detect/isolate DENV from Ae. vittatus mos-
quitoes collected from dengue endemic villages in Tamil
Nadu, India.
Zika virus: ZIKV has drawn global attention as an
emerging and re-emerging pathogen of public health im-
portance, with its potential to cause Guillain-Barré syn-
drome (GBS) and microcephaly in neonates in French
J Vector Borne Dis 54, December 2017
298
Polynesia and Brazil, respectively24–27. The virus is trans-
mitted mainly by Ae. aegypti mosquitoes, though several
other Aedes mosquitoes including Ae. vittatus play an im-
portant role in the virus transmission28. Three isolations
of ZIKV have been reported from Ae. vittatus adult mos-
quitoes collected from the Kedougou region in Senegal
of western Africa during June–September 20115. ZIKV
positivity was observed in mosquitoes collected from for-
est canopy, forest ground and villages. Isolation of ZIKV
has also been reported from Cote d’Ivoire from Ae. vit-
tatus during an investigation29 of YFV outbreak in 1999.
In a study, experimentally infected Ae. vittatus (Ke-
dougou strain) mosquitoes not only replicated ZIKV, but
also showed high dissemination rate (27%) to dierent
organs of the mosquito30. The investigators of the study
also detected presence of the virus in saliva in a small
proportion, demonstrating its competence to transmit the
virus. Transmission rate was found at par with Ae. luteo-
cephalus, the primary vector of ZIKV in Senegal. How-
ever, the low infection rate of salivary glands of the former
is a question mark on its potential to transmit the virus.
The Ae. aegypti strains from Kedougou and Dakkar also
replicated ZIKV, but failed to transmit the virus.
Chikungunya virus: CHIKV was rst isolated in
Tanzania in1952–53 during an outbreak of dengue like
illness, which subsequently spread to other African and
Asian countries causing outbreaks31. During 2004, re-
emergence of the virus in a virulent form was reported
from the eastern coast of Africa which caused devastat-
ing outbreaks in Indian Ocean Islands, India and south-
east Asia32. Dramatic geographical expansion of the virus
has been observed since 2012, leading to autochthonous
transmission in the Caribbean Islands, South and North
American countries33. Though Ae. aegypti is incriminated
as the principal vector of the virus, Ae. albopictus and
several other mosquitoes play an important role in virus
transmission. CHIKV has been isolated from Ae. vittatus
mosquitoes on several occasions in Africa. Diallo et al34
reported isolation of four strains of CHIKV during viro-
logical investigations in mosquitoes carried out in Kedou-
gou, Senegal between 1972 and 1996.
Mourya and Banerjee35 demonstrated experimental
transmission of CHIKV (Asian strain) by Ae. vittatus
mosquitoes to infant mice on Day 5 post-infection (PI).
Progressive increase in salivary gland positivity and trans-
mission ecacy was observed as days of PI progressed,
resulting in the highest percentage on Day 13 PI. The in-
vestigators, however, failed to demonstrate transovarial
transmission of CHIKV by Ae. vittatus mosquitoes. Re-
cently, Diagne et al36 demonstrated high susceptibility,
early dissemination and ecient transmission of West
African strain of CHIKV by Ae. vittatus mosquitoes. The
mosquitoes showed high infection rate ranging from 50 to
100% between Day 5 and 15 PI. The Kedougou strain of
Ae. vittatus was found more competent to disseminate the
virus than Ae. aegypti mosquitoes used in the study. It was
also observed that the Kedougou strain of Ae. vittatus was
having higher infection rate and virus dissemination than
that of the Indian strains used by Mourya and Banerjee35.
Initial studies by Sudeep et al (Unpublished data) have
shown rapid replication of East/Central/South African
(ECSA) strain of CHIKV in an Indian strain of Ae. vittatus
mosquitoes. The investigators observed 3 log10 TCID50/
ml increase in virus titre on Day 3 PI in intra-thoracically
inoculated mosquitoes. The mosquitoes maintained the
titre without signicant changes throughout the study pe-
riod of 12 days. Virus dissemination to legs and wings
was also found at a higher rate as virus could be detected
in these organs on Day 3 PI with titres of 4 and 0.7 log10
TCID50/ml, respectively. Virus dissemination to salivary
glands and saliva was detected only on Day 6 PI (1.23
log10 TCID50/ml) but increased to ~4 log10 TCID50/ml on
Day 12 PI. However, they could not demonstrate virus
replication in orally fed mosquitoes.
Susceptibility and transmission potential to other arbovi-
ruses of public health importance
Though, Ae. vittatus is not implicated as a vector for
any other arboviruses apart from those mentioned above,
recent studies by Sudeep et al (Unpublished data), have re-
vealed the susceptibility of the mosquito to several viruses
of public health importance in India. Japanese encephali-
tis (JEV), West Nile (WNV) and Chandipura viruses were
found replicating in the mosquito when infected by intra-
thoracic inoculation. The mosquitoes maintained JEV for
a period of 12 days, but the salivary glands were not found
infected. On the contrary, high degree of WNV replica-
tion was found in the mosquitoes with rapid dissemina-
tion to wings, legs and salivary glands as early as on Day
6 PI. WNV was detected in saliva with a titre of >3log10
TCID50/ml on Day 6 PI with a progressive increase on
subsequent days PI (up to Day 12 PI) demonstrating its
vector potential.
Recommendations
Not much importance has been given to the mosquito
as a vector to-date, despite the isolation of important ar-
boviruses, viz. dengue, chikungunya, yellow fever and
Zika viruses. Vector competence to WNV is an important
nding and will have major repercussions if the mosqui-
toes are exposed to the virus. More studies are needed to
299
determine the potential of the mosquito and to conrm its
vectorial capacity.
CONCLUSION
The last few decades have seen the emergence and re-
emergence of several arboviruses in virulent forms caus-
ing severe outbreaks across the globe. The re-emergence
of chikungunya virus and recently the Zika virus have gar-
nered global attention due to high disease burden and loss
of human lives. The population explosion of mosquitoes
and other arthropods due to global warming, increased
commerce and travel as well as man-made changes to the
environment has contributed to increase in arthropod-
borne infections globally. The population of mosquitoes,
mainly Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus, has shown tremen-
dous global expansion and play an important role in the
transmission of major arbovirus infections, viz. dengue,
chikungunya, yellow fever and Zika virus diseases. Aedes
vittatus, another important member of the genus has wide
distribution in Asia, Africa and the Mediterranean coun-
tries and plays an important role in the maintenance and
transmission of the above viruses. All the four important
arboviruses, viz. dengue, chikungunya, yellow fever and
Zika viruses have been isolated from Ae. vittatus mos-
quitoes with experimental evidence of transmission. The
mosquito may be playing a low key role by maintaining
these viruses during non-epidemic periods. However, its
high susceptibility to these important viruses, high rate of
dissemination; and high anthropophily make these mos-
quitoes a concern for public health should there be any
adaptation by viruses as observed for Ae. albopictus mos-
quitoes during the chikungunya outbreak in La Reunion
and India during 2005–06.
Conict of interest: None.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors thank Dr D.T. Mourya, Director, NIV,
Pune for the continuous support and Dr Atanu Basu and
Dr K. Alagarasu for critically examining the manuscript.
REFERENCES
1. Jupp PG, McIntosh BM. Aedes furcifer and other mosquitoes
as vectors of chikungunya virus at Mica, northeastern Trans-
vaal, South Africa. J Am Mosq Control Assoc 1990; 6(3):
415–20.
2. Reinert, JF. Description of Fredwardsius, a new subgenus of
Aedes (Diptera: Culicidae). Eur Mosq Bull 2000; 6: 1–7.
3. Melero-Alcíbar R. The pupae of Spanish Culicinae II: Aedes
vittatus Bigot, 1861 (Diptera: Culicidae). European Mosq Bull
2006; 21: 19–22.
4. Alikhan M, Ghamdi KA, Mahyoub JA. Aedes mosquito species
in western Saudi Arabia. J Insect Sci 2014; 14: 69.
5. Diallo D, Sall AA, Diagne CT, Faye O, Faye O, et al. Zika virus
emergence in mosquitoes in southeastern Senegal, 2011. PLoS
One 2014; 9(10): e109442. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0109442.
6. Service MW. Studies on the biology and taxonomy of Aedes
(Stegomya) vittatus (Bigot) (Diptera: Culicidae) in northern Ni-
geria. Trans R Soc Entomol Soc Lond 1970; 122: 101–43.
7. Adebote DA, Oniye SJ, Muhammed YA. Studies on mosquitoes
breeding in rock pools on inselbergs around Zaria, northern Ni-
geria. J Vector Borne Dis 2008; 45(1): 21–8.
8. Service MW. Survey of the relative prevalence of potential yel-
low fever vectors in northwest Nigeria. Bull World Health Or-
gan 1974; 50: 487–94.
9. Diallo D, Diagne C, Hanley KA, Sall AA, Buenemann M, Ba Y,
et al. Larval ecology of mosquitoes in sylvatic arbovirus foci in
southeastern Senegal. Parasit Vectors 2012; 5: 286.
10. Adeleke MA, Adebimpe WO, Hassan AO, Oladejo SO, Olaoye
I, Olatunde OG, et al. Larval habitats of mosquito fauna in Os-
ogbo metropolis, southwestern Nigeria. Asian Pacic J Trop
Biomed 2013; 3(9): 673–7.
11. Tewari SC, Thenmozhi V, Katholi CR, Manavalan R, Muni-
rathinam A, Gajanana A. Dengue vector prevalence and virus
infection in a rural area in south India. Trop Med Int Health
2004; 9(4): 499–507.
12. Rajavel AR, Natarajan R, Vaidyanathan K. Mosquitoes of the
mangrove forests of India: Pt VI–Kundapur, Karnataka and
Kannur, Kerala. J Am Mosq Control Assoc 2006; 22: 582–5.
13. Irving-Bell RJ, Inyang EN, Tamu G. Survival of Aedes vitta-
tus (Diptera: Culicidae) eggs in hot, dry rock pools. Trop Med
Parasitol 1991; 42(1): 63–6.
14. Ngoagouni C, Kamgang B, Manirakiza A, Nangouma A, Paupy
C, Nakoune E, et al. Entomological prole of yellow fever
epidemics in the Central African Republic, 2006–2010. Parasit
Vectors 2012; 5: 175.
15. Lee VH, Moore DL. Vectors of the 1969 yellow fever epidemic
on the Jos Plateau, Nigeria. Bull World Health Organ 1972; 46:
669–73.
16. Germain M, Francy DB, Monath TP, Ferrara L, Bryan J, Salaun
JJ, et al. Yellow fever in the Gambia, 1978–1979: Entomologi-
cal aspects and epidemiological correlations. Am J Trop Med
Hyg 1980; 29(5): 929–40.
17. Huang YM. Medical entomology studies—VIII. Notes on the
taxonomic status of Aedes vittatus (Diptera: Culicidae). Contrib
Am Entomol Inst 1977; 14(1): 1–132.
18. Bhatt S, Gething PW, Brady OJ, Messina JP, Farlow AW, Moyes
CL, et al. The global distribution and burden of dengue. Nature
2013; 496 (7446): 504–7. doi: 10.1038/nature12060.
19. Diallo M, Ba Y, Sall AA, Diop OM, Ndione JA, Mondo M, et
al. Amplication of the sylvatic cycle of dengue virus Type 2,
Senegal, 1999–2000: Entomologic ndings and epidemiologic
considerations. Emerg Infect Dis 2003; 9: 362–7.
20. Cordellier R, Bouchite B, Roche J-C, Monteny N, Diaco B,
Akoliba P. The sylvatic distribution of dengue 2 virus in the sub-
Sudanese savanna areas of Ivory Coast in 1980: Entomological
data and epidemiological study. Entomol Med Parasit 1983; 21:
165–79.
21. Zahouli JBZ, Utzinger J, Adja MA, Müller P, Malone D, Tano
Y, et al. Oviposition ecology and species composition of Aedes
spp. and Aedes aegypti dynamics in variously urbanized settings
Sudeep & Shil: Aedes vittatus, an emerging threat
J Vector Borne Dis 54, December 2017
300
in arbovirus foci in southeastern Côte d’Ivoire. Parasit Vectors
2016; 9: 523.
22. Mavale MS, Ilkal MA, Dhanda V. Experimental studies on the
susceptibility of Aedes vittatus to dengue viruses. Acta Virol
1992; 36(4): 412–6.
23. Diallo M, Sall AA, Moncavo AC, Ba V, Fernandez Z, Ortiz D,
et al. Potential role of sylvatic and domestic African mosquito
species in dengue emergence. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2005; 73:
445–9.
24. Dyer O. Zika virus spreads across Americas as concerns mount
over birth defects. BMJ 2015; 351: h6983. doi: 10.1136/bmj.
h6983.
25. Triunfol M. A new mosquito-borne threat to pregnant women
in Brazil. Lancet Infect Dis 2016; 16(2): 156–7. doi: 10.1016/
S1473-3099(15)00548-4.
26. Ventura CV, Maia M, Bravo-Filho V, Góis AL, Belfort Jr R.
Zika virus in Brazil and macular atrophy in a child with micro-
cephaly. Lancet 2016; 387(10037): 2502. doi: 10.1016/S0140-
6736(16)30776-0.
27. Fauci AS, Morens DM. Zika virus in the Americas - Yet an-
other arbovirus threat. N Engl J Med 2016; 374(7): 601–4. doi:
10.1056/NEJMp1600297.
28. Hayes EB. Zika virus outside Africa. Emerg Infect Dis 2009;
15: 1347–50.
29. Akoua-Ko C, Diarrassouba S, Benie VB, Ngbichi JM, Boz-
oua T, Bosson A, et al. Investigation surrounding a fatal case
of yellow fever in Cote d’Ivoire in 1999. Bull Soc Pathol Exot
2001; 94 (3): 227–30.
30. Diagne CT, Diallo D, Faye O, Ba Y, Faye O, Gaye A, et al.
Potential of selected Senegalese Aedes spp. mosquitoes (Dip-
tera: Culicidae) to transmit Zika virus. BMC Infect Dis 2015;
15: 492. doi: 10.1186/s12879-015-1231-2.
31. Sudeep AB, Parashar D. Chikungunya: An overview. J Biosci
2008; 33: 443–9.
32. Weaver SC, Lecuit M. Chikungunya virus and the global spread
of a mosquito-borne disease. N Engl J Med 2015; 372: 1231–9.
33. Petersen LR, Powers AM. Chikungunya: Epidemiology. F1000
Res 2016; 5(F1000 Faculty Rev): 82. doi: 10.12688/f1000re-
search.7171.1.
34. Diallo M, Thonnon J, Traore-Lamizana M, Fontenille D. Vec-
tors of chikungunya virus in Senegal: Current data and trans-
mission cycles. Am J Trop Med Hyg 1999; 60(2): 281–6.
35. Mourya DT, Banerjee K. Experimental transmission of chikun-
gunya virus by Aedes vittatus mosquitoes. Indian J Med Res
1987; 86: 269–71.
36. Diagne CT, Faye O, Guerbois M, Knight R, Diallo D, Faye O,
et al. Vector competence of Aedes aegypti and Aedes vittatus
(Diptera: Culicidae) from Senegal and Cape Verde Archipelago
for west African lineages of chikungunya virus. Am J Trop Med
Hyg 2014: 91(3): 635–41.
Correspondence to: Dr A.B. Sudeep, ICMR-National Institute of Virology, Microbial Containment Complex, Sus Road, Pashan,
Pune–411 021, India.
E-mail: sudeepmcc@yahoo.co.in
Received: 18 January 2017 Accepted in revised form: 24 August 2017
