4.3 Article

Temporal and Spatial Variability of Entomological Risk Indices for West Nile Virus Infection in Northern Colorado: 2006-2013

Journal

JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ENTOMOLOGY
Volume 53, Issue 2, Pages 425-434

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/jme/tjv234

Keywords

West Nile virus; Culex tarsalis; Culex pipiens; surveillance; vector index

Funding

  1. City of Fort Collins West Nile virus Surveillance grant

Ask authors/readers for more resources

West Nile virus (WNV) is enzootic in northern Colorado. Annual surveillance activities in Fort Collins, CO, include collecting female Culex mosquitoes and testing them for the presence of WNV RNA in order to calculate 1) Culex female abundance, 2) WNV infection rate, and 3) the vector index (VI). These entomological risk indices inform public policy regarding the need for emergency adulticiding. Currently, these are calculated on a city-wide basis. In this study, we present descriptive data from historical surveillance records spanning 2006-2013 to discern seasonal and yearly patterns of entomological risk for WNV infection. Also, we retrospectively test the hypothesis that entomological risk is correlated with human transmission risk and is heterogeneous within the City of Fort Collins. Four logistically relevant zones within the city were established and used to test this hypothesis. Zones in the eastern portion of the city consistently had significantly higher Culex abundance and VI compared with zones in the west, leading to higher entomological risk indicators for human WNV infection in the east. Moreover, the relative risk of a reported human case of WNV infection was significantly higher in the eastern zones of the city. Our results suggest that a more spatially targeted WNV management program may better mitigate human risk for WNV infection in Fort Collins, and possibly other cities where transmission is enzootic, while at the same time reducing pesticide use.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available