1921
Volume 79, Issue 4
  • ISSN: 0002-9637
  • E-ISSN: 1476-1645

Abstract

Members of the complex are considered as biting nuisance and vectors of important arbo-viruses including West Nile virus (WNV). To analyze the genetic structure of urban and rural populations of form pipiens and gain insights into behavioral implications, mosquitoes were collected from established WNV transmission foci in Connecticut from October 2006 through October 2007, examined by using microsatellite markers, and compared with other populations from neighboring states in the northeastern United States. The mean numbers of alleles per locus for the aboveground form pipiens populations ranged from 11.5 ± 2.3 to 13.2 ± 2.4 and were not significantly different. In contrast, form molestus had greatly reduced allelic diversities with an average of 4.4 ± 1.2 alleles per locus, which was significantly lower than that of any of the form pipiens populations analyzed. We did not detect significant genetic differences between urban and rural populations of form pipiens from Connecticut nor did we observe temporal genetic changes. However, in a comparative analysis with populations of neighboring states, New Jersey, New York, and Massachusetts, genetic variations associated with geographic distance were identified. In the analyses of Bayesian clustering and principal component analysis, we identified two clusters separating form molestus from form pipiens populations, indicating that form molestus was genetically distinct from any of the form pipiens populations examined during this study.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.4269/ajtmh.2008.79.518
2008-10-01
2017-09-24
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/14761645/79/4/0790518.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.4269/ajtmh.2008.79.518&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Andreadis TG, Anderson JF, Vossbrinck CR, 2001. Mosquito surveillance for West Nile virus in Connecticut, 2000: isolation from Culex pipiens, Cx. restuans, Cx. salinarius, and Culiseta melanura. Emerg Infect Dis 7 : 670–674.
  2. Andreadis TG, Anderson JF, Vossbrinck CR, Main AJ, 2004. Epidemiology of West Nile virus in Connecticut: a five-year analysis of mosquito data 1999–2003. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis 4 : 360–378.
  3. Bernard KA, Maffei JG, Jones SA, Kauffman EB, Ebel G, Dupuis AP 2nd, Ngo KA, Nicholas DC, Young DM, Shi PY, Kulasekera VL, Eidson M, White DJ, Stone WB, Kramer LD, 2001. West Nile virus infection in birds and mosquitoes, New York State, 2000. Emerg Infect Dis 7 : 679–685.
  4. Lukacik G, Anand M, Shusas EJ, Howard JJ, Oliver J, Chen H, Backenson PB, Kauffman EB, Bernard KA, Kramer LD, White DJ, 2006. West Nile virus surveillance in mosquitoes in New York State, 2000–2004. J Am Mosq Control Assoc 22 : 264–271.
  5. Vinogradova EB, 2000. Culex pipiens pipiens Mosquitoes: Taxonomy, Distribution, Ecology, Physiology, Genetics, Applied Importance and Control. Sofia, Bulgaria: Pensoft Publishers.
  6. Apperson CS, Harrison BA, Unnasch TR, Hassan HK, Irby WS, Savage HM, Aspen SE, Watson DW, Rueda LM, Engber BR, Nasci RS, 2002. Host-feeding habits of Culex and other mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae) in the Borough of Queens in New York City, with characters and techniques for identification of Culex mosquitoes. J Med Entomol 39 : 777–785.
  7. Apperson CS, Hassan HK, Harrison BA, Savage HM, Aspen SE, Farajollahi A, Crans W, Daniels TJ, Falco RC, Benedict M, Anderson M, McMillen L, Unnasch TR, 2004. Host feeding patterns of established and potential mosquito vectors of West Nile virus in the eastern United States. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis 4 : 71–82.
  8. Molaei G, Andreadis TG, Armstrong PM, Anderson JF, Vossbrinck CR, 2006. Host feeding patterns of Culex mosquitoes and West Nile virus transmission, northeastern United States. Emerg Infect Dis 12 : 468–474.
  9. Harbach RE, Harrison BA, Gad AM, 1984. Culex (Culex) molestus Forskal (Diptera: Culicidae): neotype designation, description, variation, and taxonomic status. Proc Entomol Soc Wash 86 : 521–542.
  10. Spielman A, 1964. Studies on autogeny in Culex pipiens populations in nature. I. Reproductive isolation between autogenous and anautogenous populations. Am J Hyg 80 : 175–183.
  11. Spielman A, 2001. Structure and seasonality of nearctic Culex pipiens populations. Ann NY Acad Sci 951 : 220–234.
  12. Spielman A, 1971. Studies on autogeny in natural populations of Culex pipiens. II. Seasonal abundance of autogenous and anautogenous populations. J Med Entomol 8 : 555–561.
  13. Fonseca DM, Keyghobadi N, Malcolm CA, Mehmet C, Schaffner F, Mogi M, Fleischer RC, Wilkerson RC, 2004. Emerging vectors in the Culex pipiens complex. Science 303 : 1535–1538.
  14. Selkoe KA, Toonen RJ, 2006. Microsatellites for ecologists: a practical guide to using and evaluating microsatellite markers. Ecol Lett 9 : 615–629.
  15. Reiter P, 1983. A portable, battery-powered trap for collecting gravid Culex mosquitoes. Mosq News 43 : 496–498.
  16. Kent RJ, Harrington LC, Norris DE, 2007. Genetic differences between Culex pipiens f. molestus and Culex pipiens pipiens (Diptera: Culicidae) in New York. J Med Entomol 44 : 50–59.
  17. Darsie RFJ, Ward RA, 1981. Identification and geographical distribution of the mosquitoes of North America, north of Mexico. Mosq Syst 1 (Suppl): 1–313.
  18. Andreadis TG, Thomas MC, Shepard JJ, 2005. Identification guide to the mosquitoes of Connecticut. Conn Agric Exp Stn Bull 966 : 1–178.
  19. Crabtree MB, Savage HM, Miller BR, 1995. Development of a species-diagnostic polymerase chain reaction assay for the identification of Culex vectors of St. Louis encephalitis virus based on interspecies sequence variation in ribosomal DNA spacers. Am J Trop Med Hyg 53 : 105–109.
  20. Van Oosterhout C, Hutchinson WF, Wills DP, Shipley P, 2004. Program note: micro-checker: software for identifying and correcting genotyping errors in microsatellite data. Mol Ecol Notes 4 : 535–538.
  21. Rousset F, 2007. Genepop’007: a complete reimplementation of the Genepop software for Windows and Linux. Mol Ecol Res 8 : 103–106.
  22. Guo SW, Thompson EA, 1992. Performing the exact test of Hardy-Weinberg proportion for multiple alleles. Biometrics 48 : 361–372.
  23. Raymond M, Rousset F, 1995. GENEPOP (version 1.2): population genetics software for exact tests and ecumenicism. J Hered 86 : 248–249.
  24. Rice WR, 1989. Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution Int J Org Evolution 43 : 223–225.
  25. Weir BS, Cockerham CC, 1984. Estimating F-statistics for the analysis of population structure. Evolution Int J Org Evolution 38 : 1358–1370.
  26. Slatkin M, 1995. A measure of population subdivision based on microsatellite allele frequencies. Genetics 139 : 457–462.
  27. Excoffier L, Laval G, Schneider S, 2005. Arlequin version 3.0: an integrated software package for population genetics data analysis. Evol Bioinform Online 1 : 47–50.
  28. Goodman SJ, 1997. R ST Calc: a collection of computer programs for calculating unbiased estimates of genetic differentiation and determining their significance for microsatellite data. Mol Ecol 6 : 881–885.
  29. Rousset F, 1997. Genetic differentiation and estimation of gene flow from F-statistics under isolation by distance. Genetics 145 : 1219–1228.
  30. Mantel N, 1967. The detection of disease clustering and a generalized regression approach. Cancer Res 27 : 209–220.
  31. Goudet J, 2001. FSTAT, a program to estimate and test gene diversities and fixation indices (version 2.9.3). Available at: http://wwwunilch/izea/softwares/fstathtml. Updated from Goudet (1995).
  32. Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P, 2000. Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155 : 945–959.
  33. Rosenberg NA, 2004. Distruct: a program for the graphical display of population structure. Mol Ecol Notes 4 : 137–138.
  34. Bahnck CM, Fonseca DM, 2006. Rapid assay to identify the two genetic forms of Culex (Culex) pipiens L. (Diptera: Culicidae) and hybrid populations. Am J Trop Med Hyg 75 : 251–255.
  35. Smith JL, Keyghobadi N, Matrone MA, Escher RL, Fonseca DM, 2005. Cross-species comparison of microsatellite loci in the Culex pipiens complex and beyond. Mol Ecol Notes 5 : 697–700.
  36. Keyghobadi N, Matrone MA, Ebel GD, Kramer LD, Fonseca DM, 2004. Microsatellite loci from the northern house mosquito (Culex pipiens), a principal vector of West Nile virus in North America. Mol Ecol Notes 4 : 20–22.
  37. Wattier R, Engel CR, Saumitou-Laprade P, Valero M, 1998. Short allele dominance as a source of heterozygote deficiency at microsatellite loci: experimental evidence at the dinucleotide locus Gv1CT in Gracilaria gracilis (Rhodophyta). Mol Ecol 7 : 1569–1573.
  38. Gingrich JB, Williams GM, 2005. Host-feeding patterns of suspected West Nile virus mosquito vectors in Delaware, 2001–2002. J Am Mosq Control Assoc 21 : 194–200.
  39. Kilpatrick AM, Kramer LD, Jones MJ, Marra PP, Daszak P, 2006. West Nile virus epidemics in North America are driven by shifts in mosquito feeding behavior. PLoS Biol 4 : e82.
  40. Savage HM, Aggarwal D, Apperson CS, Katholi CR, Gordon E, Hassan HK, Anderson M, Charnetzky D, McMillen L, Unnasch EA, Unnasch TR, 2007. Host choice and West Nile virus infection rates in blood-fed mosquitoes, including members of the Culex pipiens complex, from Memphis and Shelby County, Tennessee, 2002–2003. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis 7 : 365–386.
  41. Hamer GL, Kitron UD, Brawn JD, Loss SR, Ruiz MO, Goldberg TL, Walker ED, 2008. Culex pipiens (Diptera: Culicidae): a bridge vector of West Nile virus to humans. J Med Entomol 45 : 125–128.
  42. Kilpatrick AM, Kramer LD, Jones MJ, Marra PP, Daszak P, Fonseca DM, 2007. Genetic influences on mosquito feeding behavior and the emergence of zoonotic pathogens. Am J Trop Med Hyg 77 : 667–671.
  43. Byrne K, Nichols RA, 1999. Culex pipiens in London underground tunnels: differentiation between surface and subterranean populations. Heredity 82 : 7–15.
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.4269/ajtmh.2008.79.518
Loading
/content/journals/10.4269/ajtmh.2008.79.518
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplementary Data

Supplemental tables A1-A6

Supplemental figure

  • Received : 26 Feb 2008
  • Accepted : 15 Jul 2008

Most Cited This Month

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error