4.7 Article

Larval competition differentially affects arbovirus infection in Aedes mosquitoes

Journal

ECOLOGY
Volume 86, Issue 12, Pages 3279-3288

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1890/05-0209

Keywords

Aedes aegypti; Aedes albopictus; arborvirus model system; indirect effects; mosquitoes; Sindbis virus (SINV); susceptibility to infection; trait-mediated effects

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Both density-mediated and trait-mediated indirect biotic interactions may be important in structuring communities. Indirect interactions in many study systems remain unexplored; in part, because they are often difficult to detect, and in many instances, have been identified empirically only when unexpected results arise. Indirect effects induced by competition may be particularly important among organisms with complex life cycles, wherein competitive effects experienced in one life stage influence species interactions in one or more subsequent stages. We determined whether species-specific effects of larval competition in the mosquitoes Aedes albopictus and Aedes aegypti have indirect effects at the adult stage, specifically testing for effects on arboviral infection with Sindbis virus (SINV). For A. albopictus, but not for A. aegypti, competition resulted in greater infection, body titer, and dissemination rates compared to low-competition conditions. Whole body titers of virus increased with adult size irrespective of competition. However, between competitive treatments, mosquitoes from low-competition conditions had greater mean size, with lower infection rates and lower whole body titers than the smaller mosquitoes from high-competition conditions. These results suggest that larval competition, common in natural mosquito populations, has important indirect effects on adults by altering mosquito-virus interactions. Such indirect effects may change transmission parameters of pathogens.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available