AJTMH ASTMH MEMBERSHIP INFORMATION: astmh@astmh.org
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg., 3(1), 1954, pp. 147-159
Copyright © 1954 by The American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Reeves, W. C.
Right arrow Articles by Kent, N. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Reeves, W. C.
Right arrow Articles by Kent, N. E.

Murray Valley Encephalitis: A Survey of Suspected Mosquito Vectors1

W. C. Reeves2, E. L. French3, E. N. Marks4 AND N. E. Kent3

A survey of the mosquitoes of a section of the Murray River Valley of Australia has provided data of value to epidemiologic investigators of Murray Valley encephalitis and to persons possibly concerned with mosquito problems in this area.

In these studies, 16 species of mosquitoes are recorded. Laboratory tests for Murray Valley encephalitis virus on 17,833 mosquitoes representing 10 species have been negative. Several other types of virus, an unclassified pox virus and myxomatosis virus, were isolated from mosquitoes collected.

Interpretation of data on the biology of adult mosquitoes permits some evaluation of the relative potential importance of the various species as vectors of Murray Valley encephalitis. It is concluded that certain species should be suspected as vectors, in the following order of importance: Culex annulirostris, Culex fatigans "complex," Mansonia linealis, Aedes theobaldi and possibly Anopheles annulipes. As no epidemiologic evidence could be found that the virus was still present in the area studied, the negative findings neither prove nor disprove that mosquitoes are vectors of this virus, and further studies are warranted.

A sample of 71 larval collections has been analyzed as to larval habitats, association of various species, the conditions of water source and use leading to mosquito breeding and possible control problems. It is suggested that an effective program for mosquito control would require modification of existing irrigation facilities and practices, as well as an attack on natural and purely domestic water sources of mosquitoes.


1 This work was aided by a grant from the National Health and Medical Research Council, Canberra.


2 George Williams Hooper Foundation for Medical Research and the School of Public Health, University of California, San Francisco and Berkeley, California.


3 Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Melbourne; Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne.


4 Graduate Research Assistant, National Mosquito Control Committee; Department of Entomology, University of Queensland, Brisbane.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1954 by the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene.