MINI REVIEW article

Front. Ecol. Evol., 09 November 2020

Sec. Behavioral and Evolutionary Ecology

Volume 8 - 2020 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2020.582943

Does Plasmodium Infection Affect Mosquito Attraction?

  • 1. Red de Biología y Conservación de Vertebrados, Instituto de Ecología, Xalapa, Mexico

  • 2. Center for Conservation Genomics, Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, Washington, DC, United States

  • 3. Center for Vector Biology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, United States

Abstract

Vector-host interactions play a central role in the transmission of vector-borne diseases. Determining the factors that affect vector attraction to vertebrate hosts is critical to understand disease ecological dynamics. Using malaria as the primary model, we reviewed studies that examined whether pathogen infection and host traits affect mosquito attraction. We found contradictory results examining mosquito attraction to birds infected with Plasmodium parasites, presumably because of widely variable experimental approaches. We summarize current experimental findings and propose standardized experimental approaches for future studies.

Introduction

Insect vectors have often been considered passive vessels that carry pathogens without exerting much selection. However, vectors may suffer high pathogen-related mortalities (Valkiūnas et al., 2014; ), and vectors selection of vertebrate hosts to obtain blood meals is not random or solely based on host availability, they follow general and specific host cues such as carbon dioxide and volatile body chemicals (). Interestingly, both host choice and host attractiveness may be manipulated by the parasite in order to increase its transmission success (i.e., manipulation hypothesis; ).

The process by which pathogens manipulate vectors’ behavior can be indirect during the development in a vertebrate host (e.g., increased attractiveness of infected hosts to uninfected vectors), and/or direct during the cycle inside the vectors (e.g., increase in attraction or feeding rates toward uninfected hosts; ). These changes have profound implications for pathogen transmission. For instance, uninfected vectors highly attracted toward infected hosts would initially increase transmission in local populations (). Generalist mosquito species feeding on birds and mammals (depending on host availability; ) play important roles in the transmission of zoonotic pathogens (e.g., Culex pipiens transmitting West Nile virus (WNV) and Usutu (USUV) virus among birds, equids, and humans; ; ). Thus, investigating drivers of mosquito host selection is essential to understand the dynamics of vertebrate-vector-pathogen systems.

In recent years avian haemosporidian parasites have received attention as model systems to understand the ecology and evolution of vector-borne parasites (). In particular because they are widespread, infect a large proportion of bird species worldwide, and affect bird fitness and survival (; Valkiūnas, 2005; ). Thus, by focusing on avian malaria, here we provide an overview of the factors affecting host selection by mosquitoes concentrating on Culex mosquitoes, which transmit human pathogens, bird pathogens, and zoonotic pathogens that use birds as reservoirs (WNV, USUV). Although Culex mosquitoes have a broad range of hosts, some are predominantly mammophilic and others are ornithophilic (e.g., Culex theileri vs. Cx. pipiens), yet their feeding behaviors depend on the species and population of origin, which also affects the parasites they transmit (; ; ).

Birds are used as models to analyze factors within species that affect host attractiveness to mosquitoes, which include mosquito and bird pathogen infection status, differences in the production of natural chemicals by birds (uropygial gland secretion and volatile compounds), host sex, and interactions among some of these factors (Table 1). We took advantage of studies on human and mice malaria systems that also addressed some of these factors to suggest next steps for studies on bird attractiveness to mosquitoes. We found discrepancies among studies, which may be due to differences in study design (Table 1). Therefore, we propose standardized experimental approaches to help identify generalities and contingencies in pathogen-vector-host interactions using avian malaria as a model (Figure 1).

TABLE 1

Plasmodium Infections
Indirect manipulation
Host sp.Vector sp.*Parasite speciesFactorMain ResultsExperimental detailsSource**
Avian hosts
Great tit – Parus majorCulex pipiens (wild caught). Not tested for pipiens and molestus forms and hybrids.Plasmodium sp. – natural infectionsMosquito attraction as a function of bird infection.Infected birds less attractive than uninfected birds. Females more attractive to mosquitoes than males.Dual-choice olfactometer. Twenty-eight paired experiments combining six infected and five uninfected birds. Birds kept out of sight of the mosquitoes. Parasitemia not assessed. Experiments lasted 15 min.1
Domestic canary – Serinus canariaCx. pipiens (S-LAB strain)Plasmodium relictum (SGS1) – experimental infectionFeeding choice as a function of bird infection and infection stage (acute or chronic).Mosquitoes fed more on chronically infected birds than on either uninfected or acutely infected birds. Mosquito preference for birds with higher hematocrit. No difference between uninfected birds and birds during acute infection.Paired birds in 25 independent cages with 70 mosquitoes each. Feeding experiments lasted 2 h. Birds were immobilized.2
House sparrow – Passer domesticusCx. pipiens – wild caught. Not tested for pipiens and molestus forms and hybrids.Plasmodium sp. – natural infectionsFeeding choice as a function of bird infection.No difference in feeding rates between infected and uninfected birds.Twenty pairs of infected and uninfected birds exposed to mosquitoes. Birds were not immobilized. Experiments lasted 12 h.Yan et al. (2018b)3
House sparrow – Passer domesticusCx. pipiens – wild caught. Not tested for pipiens and molestus forms and hybrids.Plasmodium sp. – natural infectionsFeeding choice as a function of parasite levels.Higher feeding rates on non-treated (higher parasite levels) than on treated birds. Higher feeding rates on females.Parasitemia reduced via primaquine treatment. Nineteen pairs of infected non-treated birds and infected treated birds exposed to an average of 151 mosquitoes. Birds were not immobilized. Experiments lasted 12 h.Yan et al. (2018b)4
Jackdaw – Corvus monedula, and house sparrow – Passer domesticusWild caught Ochlerotatus (Aedes) caspius and Cx. pipiens (not tested for pipiens and molestus forms and hybrids).Plasmodium sp. – natural infectionsFeeding choice as a function of bird infection, sex and body massNo difference in feeding rates for both mosquito species according to Plasmodium infection status and body mass for both bird species. Ochlerotatus caspius fed more on female than on male jackdaws.Birds single-housed. Parasitemia not assessed. Experiments lasted 30 min. Birds were immobilized.5

Indirect manipulation
Host sp.Vector sp.*Parasite speciesFactorMain ResultsExperimental detailsSource**

Mammal hosts
Mice – Mus musculusAnopheles stephensiPlasmodium chabaudi – clones CR and ERFeeding choice as a function of host infection.Higher rates of mosquito feeding on infected hosts when compared to uninfected hosts. Positive relationship between parasitemia and feeding rates.Groups of six mice uninfected, infected with either CR or ER or infected with a 1:1 mix of both Plasmodium clones. Mosquito exposure at 14 dpi. Asexual stages and gametocyte ratios calculated by microscopy. Anesthetized single-house mice exposed to 20–40 mosquitoes. Experiments lasted 20 min.
Mice – Mus musculusAnopheles stephensiPlasmodium chabaudi – clone ASMosquito attraction as a function of host infection and infection stage.Gametocyte-positive mice after acute stage more attractive (vs. negative and vs. chronically infected gametocyte-negative mice). Attractiveness associated to changes in volatile profiles due to infection.Dual-choice assay in wind tunnel. Six pairs of infected and uninfected mice exposed to 20 mosquitoes for 15 min.
Humans – Homo sapiens (children)Anopheles gambiae – ICIPE lab strainPlasmodium falciparum – natural infectionsMosquito attraction as a function of infection and gametocyte presence.Children harboring gametocytes more attractive when compared to uninfected and to infected children harboring asexual parasite stages only. No difference in attractiveness after antimalarial treatment.Children divided into three categories: uninfected, infected presenting asexual parasite forms only, and infected presenting gametocytes. One hundred mosquitoes released at the central chamber of three-way olfactometers in 12 experiments containing one child of each category. Experiments lasted 30 min.
Humans – Homo sapiens (adults)Anopheles darlingiPlasmodium vivax – natural infectionsMosquito attraction as a function of gametocyte presence in infected humans.Patients harboring gametocytes more attractive when compared to patients with no visible gametocytes and when compared to patients during and after antimalarial treatment.One foot of P. vivax-infected patients exposed to 10 F1 mosquitoes in single-choice olfactometers (three replicates each time) for 10 min. A subset of these patients were exposed to mosquitoes during and after antimalarial therapy (7 and 14 days after diagnosis, respectively). Gametocyte presence evaluated by microscopy only.

Host sp.Vector sp.*Parasite speciesFactorMain ResultsExperimental detailsSource**

Mammal hosts
Humans – Homo sapiens (children)Anopheles gambiae – Mbita strainPlasmodium falciparum – natural infectionsMosquito attraction as a function of gametocyte presence and intensity in infected humans.Children with gametocytes detected by microscopy (higher intensity) more attractive than the other three groups (parasite free, asexual stages only and submicroscopic gametocyte levels). Similar attractiveness among all groups after treatment.Children divided into four groups: Uninfected, asexual parasite stage only, gametocyte detected by qPCR only, and gametocyte detected by microscopy and by qPCR. One hundred mosquitoes in a dual-choice system. Experiments lasted 30 min and were repeated 3 weeks after antimalarial treatment.
Humans – Homo sapiens (adults)Anopheles coluzzii – lab colonyPlasmodium falciparum NF54 strain – experimental infectionsMosquito attraction as a function of host infection.Odor samples from infected individuals less attractive when compared to treated and to uninfected individuals in one trial. No difference observed in the second trial.Groups of 30 mosquitoes exposed to cotton pads with odor from infected humans and with ammonia (negative control) in a dual-choice system for 15 min. Odor samples from infected humans collected before, during (6–8 dpi) and after (34 dpi) treatment with antimalarial.
Humans – Homo sapiens (children – body odor)Anopheles gambiae – Mbita strainPlasmodium falciparum – natural infectionMosquito attractiveness of foot odor as a function of host infection.Odors from infected children more attractive when compared to odor from the same children after parasite clearance with antimalarials. No effect of gametocyte presence or absence.Groups of 10 mosquitoes placed in a dual-choice system containing socks worn by the same child before and after antimalarial treatment (six replicates). A total 23 children presented circulating gametocytes (qPCR testing), 10 did not present circulating gametocytes (microscopy testing) and 12 were not infected (qPCR testing). Experiments lasted 15 min.

Direct manipulation
Host sp.Vector sp.*Parasite speciesFactorMain ResultsExperimental detailsSource**

Avian hosts
Domestic canary – Serinus canariaCx. pipiens (S-LAB strain)Plasmodium relictum (SGS1) – experimental infectionFeeding rate of sporozoite-infected and uninfected mosquitoes as function of bird infectionBoth infective and uninfected mosquitoes feed more on chronically infected birds when compared with uninfected birds. Positive correlation between hematocrit level and feeding rate in infected birds for both infected and uninfected mosquitoesBirds from different groups exposed to mosquitoes in different cages. Ten cages with uninfected birds and 10 cages with infected birds exposed to 40 infected and 40 uninfected mosquitoes each. Behavioral assay at peak of sporozoite presence in mosquitoes, 12–14 dpbm. Behavioral assay 53–55 dpi of bird host. Immobilized birds. Feeding experiment lasted 2 h.6
Domestic canary – Serinus canariaCx. pipiens (S-LAB strain)Plasmodium relictum (SGS1) – experimental infectionFeeding rate as a function of mosquito infectivity (harboring sporozoites).No difference in feeding rate between infective and uninfected mosquitoes at the end of the experiments (3 h). Uninfected mosquitoes feed faster than infective mosquitoes.Six cages, each with an uninfected bird exposed to 45 uninfected and 45 sporozoite-infected mosquitoes (13 dpbm). Immobilized birds.7

Direct manipulation
Host sp.Vector sp.*Parasite speciesFactorMain ResultsExperimental detailsSource**

Mammal hosts
Humans – Homo sapiens (adults)Anopheles stephensi (NIH strain)Plasmodium yoelii (clone 17XNL)Host choice as a function of mosquito infection, parasite stage and immune challenge.Mosquitoes feeding on infected blood less likely to fly toward a human during oocyst stage and more likely to fly toward a human during sporozoites stage when compared to negative controls. Same changes were observed in mosquitoes infected with heat-killed E. coli.Host-seeking was tested at short and long ranges. Behavioral challenges in mosquitoes injected with heat-killed E. coli. Trials conducted over a 1 h period.
Human – Homo sapiens (odor)Anopheles gambiae – Ngousso strainP. falciparum – NF54 strainLanding behavior in matrixes with human odor as a function of sporozoite infection in mosquitoes.Infective mosquitoes more attracted to human odor when compared to uninfected mosquitoes.Twenty mosquitoes of each group were provided with a choice of matrixes with and without human odor. Average landing rate calculated for each matrix group over 3 min.
Humans – Homo sapiensAnopheles gambiae and An. coluzzii – lab colonies replenished with wild-caught mosquitoes. An. arabiensis – wild-caught.Plasmodium falciparum – natural infections.Host choice as a factor of mosquito infection and parasite developmental stages (non-infectious vs. infectious).No difference in host choice between infected and uninfected mosquitoes and between mosquitoes harboring either oocysts or sporozoites.Mosquitoes fed on blood containing active and inactivated gametocytes from the same human host. Mosquito host-seeking tested in dual-choice system using humans, calf and outdoor air (control) lasting 30 min. Twenty infected and 20 uninfected mosquitoes tested simultaneously. Eight experimental replicates using 9 different gametocyte carriers.

Arboviruses infections
Host sp.Vector sp.VirusFactorMain ResultsExperimental detailsSource

House sparrow – Passer domesticusCulex quinquefasciatus and Culex tarsalis (lab colony)St. Louis encephalitis virus and Western equine encephalitis virus – laboratory strainsMosquito attraction as a function of Arbovirus infection in birdsNo difference in C. quinquefasciatus attraction toward SLEV-infected birds. No difference in C. tarsalis attraction toward WEEV-infected birds. Culex quinquefasciatus more attracted to adults than to nestlings.Host attractiveness measured with 10 mosquitoes in each trial in a 50 cm single-choice vertical olfactometer (birds placed at the bottom) for 10 min.8
Human – Homo sapiens and chicken – Gallus gallus domesticus (odors)Cx. pipiens form pipiens (wild caught).West Nile virus lineage 2 (originated from Greece)Host-seeking response and host choice as a function of mosquito infectionWNV-infected mosquitoes had lower host-seeking response when compared to controls. No changes in flight duration and blood-feeding propensity.Host-seeking response measured in an olfactometer. Between 53 and 57 mosquitoes from each group exposed to human and chicken odors for 7 min.Vogels et al. (2017)

Host sp.Vector sp.FactorMain ResultsExperimental detailsSource

Crow – Corvus brachyrhynchusCx. pipiens/Cx. restuans and Aedes vexans (experiment performed in the wild)Mosquito attraction toward CO2 baited traps as a function of trap height and presence of uropygial gland secretion.Cx. pipiens/Cx. restuans more attracted to traps at 5 m high with uropygial gland secretion and dry ice (source of CO2) when compared to traps with dry ice only (control group). No difference when traps were placed at 1.5 m high and in the attraction of Ae. vexans at both heights.Study performed in Ontario, Canada. Uropygial secretion from frozen glands applied to cotton swabs. Swabs with and without uropygial gland secretion were attached to CDC traps baited with dry ice. Traps run at heights of 1.5 and 5 m in a total of 280 trap catches.
American robin – Turdus migratoriusSeveral species observed during filming, including Cx. pipiens, Cx. restuans, and Aedes albopictus as the most commonMosquito landing rates on either adults or nestlings of American robins at nests.Mosquitoes land more frequently on nesting adults than on nestlings, and parental brooding activities reduces mosquitos landing rates on nestlings.Natural experiment using direct observations via filming.
Blue birds – Sialia sialisCulex quinquefasciatus (wild caught)Feeding choice as a function of bird’s age (mother vs. nestlings).No feeding preference between mother and nestlings. Feeding upon mothers decreased as age of the nestlings increased.Mosquitoes introduced into nest boxes containing mother and nestlings. Around 22 mosquitoes per nest box. Exposure run overnight.
Zebra finch – Taeniopygia guttataCulex quinquefasciatus – laboratory colonyFeeding choice as a function of corticosterone level in birdsHigher feeding rates on birds with artificially elevated levels of corticosterone.Birds received one or two implants of corticosterone and were assigned to CORT+ and CORT++ groups, respectively. Negative control and birds from both CORT groups exposed simultaneously to 50 mosquitoes for 13 h. Birds were not immobilized.11
House sparrows – Passer domesticusCx. pipiens (Laboratory colony)Mosquito attraction toward chemicals from uropygial gland secretions as a function of bird sex and ageMosquitoes more attracted to uropygial gland secretions from adults over nestlings. No preference for adults over fledglings. No difference in preference for adults, nestlings or fledglings when using semi-volatile components isolated from secretions.Use of dual olfactometer. Thirty mosquitoes for each trial, which lasted 45 min.
House sparrow – Passer domesticus European starling – Sturnus vulgaris American robin – Turdus migratoriusCx. pipiens (laboratory colony)Mosquito attraction to chemicals from uropygial gland secretions as a function of bird species.Chemical composition of robins’ uropygial gland secretions was different to those of sparrows and starlings. No differences on Cx. pipiens preference for secretions of robins over those of sparrows. However, Cx. pipiens more attracted to live starlings and starlings secretions than to either live robins or their secretions.Adult House sparrows, European starlings and American robins. Thirty mosquitoes for each trials, which lasted 2 h.

Host sp.Vector sp.FactorMain ResultsExperimental detailsSource

House sparrow – Passer domesticusCx. pipiens – wild caught (not distinguished for pipiens and molestus forms).Feeding choice as a function of bird metabolic rate.Mosquito feeding rate similar between control and treatment group. Negative association between mosquito feeding preference and bird resting metabolic rate. Positive association between mosquito feeding preference and bird body mass.Use of 2,4-dinitrophenol to induce higher metabolic rate. Thirty juvenile House sparrows, 21 males and nine females. Trials included a pair of birds exposed to an average of 190 mosquitoes for 12 h. Birds were not immobilized.Yan et al. (2018a)12
Great tit – Parus majorCx. pipiens (laboratory colony established with local mosquitoesFeeding choice as a function of host sex.No difference in host choice due to nestling sexEighteen independent cages with a pair of 14 days old siblings, one male and on female. Twenty-five uninfected mosquitoes in each cage allowed to feed for 1 h. Host sex determined by PCR.
House sparrow – Passer domesticus (juveniles)Wild caught Ochlerotatus (Aedes) caspius and Cx. pipiens (not tested for pipiens and molestus forms and hybrids)Mosquito attraction toward uropygial gland secretion.No difference in mosquito attraction between uropygial gland secretion and negative controls.Dual choice (Y-shaped) olfactometer. Negative controls consisted on air flow with no stimuli. Each trial run with 20 mosquitoes (6–15 days old) for 15 min. Cx. pipiens assayed in 21 trials and O. caspius assayed in 20 trials.10
House sparrow – Passer domesticus (juveniles)Cx. pipiens – wild caught. Not tested for pipiens and molestus forms and hybrids.Mosquito attraction toward uropygial gland secretions and whole-body odor as a function of Plasmodium infection.Mosquitoes more attracted to whole-body odors of infected sparrows regardless of sex. No effect when using uropygial secretions. The volatile lipophilic fraction of the uropygial secretion was not different between infected and uninfected sparrows.Dual choice (Y-shaped) olfactometer. Experimental pairs were always of the same sex. Each trial run with 20 mosquitoes (6–15 days old) for 15 min in complete darkness. Analyzed whether Plasmodium spp. infections alter chemical composition of uropygial secretions.9
Chicken (Gallus gallus domesticus), pigeon (Columba livia), and magpie (Pica pica)Culex quinquefasciatus (Thai strain) and Cx. pipiens molestus (laboratory colony)Mosquito attraction toward whole-body odor in the presence or absence of an extra source of CO2.Cx. quinquefasciatus more attracted to both chicken sexes and to female pigeons. No difference toward male pigeons and magpies. Addition of CO2.increased attraction toward chickens and pigeons, but not toward magpies. Culex p. molestus more attracted only to chickens (both sexes). No effect on the addition of CO2.Single-choice and dual choice olfactometers used for Cx. quinquefasciatus and for Cx. p. molestus, respectively. Bird sex determined only for chickens and pigeons. Ten trials performed with 30 mosquitoes lasting 4 min for Cx. quinquefasciatus and 2 min for Cx. p. molestus.

Studies conducted on mosquito attraction toward bird, humans and mice.

* Cx. pipiens for Diptera taxonomists is still under debate, and sometimes is used as a synonym of Cx. quinquefasciatus. Some authors even write is as Cx. pipiens quinquefasciatus. ** Superscript numbers, whenever present, are related to the experiments described in Figure 1. From the perspective of the vector, here we consider an indirect manipulation when the parasite is infecting the vertebrate host (i.e., the parasitic infection changes some trait of the host that makes it more attractive to the vector), and a direct manipulation when the parasite is inside the vector.

FIGURE 1

Current Experimental Approaches

In general, laboratory experiments assess mosquito attraction using dual-choice olfactometers, or they assess feeding choice by placing mosquitoes inside cages containing target host groups. Olfactometers expose mosquitoes to olfactory host cues (CO2 and volatile compounds) and prevent mosquitoes from using visual cues or differences in body temperature for host detection (; ; ). This approach is useful for studies using chemical stimuli collected from hosts and has the advantage to protect hosts from being bitten by mosquitoes. Host attractiveness in single-choice system can be measured as the number of mosquitoes approaching a host in one end of an enclosure or in a tunnel in relation to the number of mosquitoes released at the opposite end (; ).

Feeding rates can be measured by comparing the proportion of mosquitoes taking a blood meal from single-housed () or pair-housed hosts. In the latter, two hosts from different groups (e.g., control vs. experimental group) are placed inside the same cage where mosquitoes are released and host choice is assessed via microsatellite testing (Yan et al., 2018b) or by molecular sexing methods (; Yan et al., 2018a) using engorged mosquitoes to determine blood source. Overall, studies varied in duration and type (attraction assays using olfactometers vs. feeding choice inside cages), with feeding experiments used either immobilized or non-immobilized birds (Table 1). These differences, therefore, may explain discrepancies in the general findings.

Indirect and Direct Manipulation of Vector’s Behavior by Pathogens

Pathogens can modify conditions within vertebrate hosts or within vectors to increase transmission rates from infected to uninfected hosts. These indirect and direct vector manipulations, respectively, may affect host-seeking behaviors, feeding behaviors, or both ().

Infected Hosts and Mosquito Attraction

Most studies tested whether hosts infected with Plasmodium parasites are more attractive to uninfected mosquitoes or whether uninfected mosquitoes feed more on infected hosts (indirect vector manipulation). Some of these studies also tested whether hosts with higher number of circulating gametocytes (sexual parasite stage that is infective to mosquitoes) were more attractive to mosquitoes even when compared with hosts with low levels of gametocytes (Table 1).

Avian Malaria

, found that laboratory-reared Cx. pipiens fed more on domestic canaries (Serinus canaria) infected with a laboratory strain of Plasmodium relictum (SGS1) when compared to uninfected birds. This effect was detected in birds undergoing chronic infections (24–26 days post infection – dpi), but not in birds undergoing the acute phase of the infection (10 dpi; ). Mosquitoes fed more on birds with a higher hematocrit, a measure that can be interpreted as a higher blood quality ().

Four avian malaria studies used wild caught Cx. pipiens and free-living birds infected with Plasmodium spp. and uninfected birds to assess vector manipulation in more natural systems (Table 1). One set of experiments conducted by Yan et al. (2018b) compared infected birds with their counterparts treated with primaquine to reduce parasitemia (the number of circulating parasites). They found mosquitoes fed more on infected birds than on treated birds, which provided experimental support for the vector manipulation hypothesis. Similarly, mosquitoes were more attracted to body odors isolated from infected birds when compared to uninfected birds (). However, this effect was not observed when using uropygial gland secretion collected from the same bird groups. Other experiments found that mosquitoes were either more attracted to uninfected birds () or that infection status did not change mosquito feeding rates when compared to control groups (Yan et al., 2018b; ).

From the discussed studies, two used dual-choice olfactometers to assess mosquito attraction to birds or to chemical compounds collected from birds, while three studies released mosquitoes inside cages containing single birds or pairs of infected and uninfected birds that were immobilized in most cases (except Yan et al., 2018b; Table 1). Observed contrasting results addressing the host manipulation hypothesis may be the result of differences in host, vector and parasites used and/or due to differences in experimental settings.

Human and Mice Malaria

Most studies on human malaria found that natural Plasmodium infections are associated with higher host attractiveness to vectors. Three out of four studies found that Anopheles mosquitoes were more attracted to humans harboring microscopically detectable gametocytes when compared to uninfected people and to people with only asexual stages detectable in the blood stream (; ; ). The fourth study showed that socks worn by children parasitized by Plasmodium falciparum were more attractive to mosquitoes when compared with socks worn by the same children after the completion of antimalarial treatment (). A study during its first trial using feet odors found that samples from individuals infected with P. falciparum were less attractive to mosquitoes when compared to cotton pads from the same individuals after antimalaria treatment and compared to odors from uninfected people; the second trial did not find any difference in mosquito attraction ().

Two studies using mice malaria found that Plasmodium chabaudi infection increased Anopheles stephensi feeding rates () and attraction () when compared to uninfected hosts. This latter study found this effect only during the initial chronic stage, which was associated to microscopically observable levels of circulating gametocytes. These studies on mammals also show contrasting results, precluding generalizations and strengthening the fact of having a standard initial experimental design.

Infected Mosquitoes and Host-Feeding

Pathogens can influence host-seeking and feeding behaviors during their development inside mosquitoes. Because mosquitoes only become infective a few days or even weeks after blood feeding on an Plasmodium-infected host (i.e., once sporozoites are found in salivary glands; Valkiūnas et al., 2013; ), changes in host-seeking and feeding behaviors may be displayed differentially according to vector infective stage rather than infection status only.

When mosquitoes were simultaneously exposed to both Plasmodium-infected and uninfected birds, both infective and uninfected mosquitoes fed more frequently on Plasmodium-infected birds (). When exposed to uninfected birds, uninfected mosquitoes fed faster than infective mosquitoes, but the final feeding rate after the 3 h the experiment lasted was identical between both groups (). This demonstrates that experiment duration can affect results, because the authors would have observed higher feeding rates of uninfected mosquitoes if experiments had lasted only 1 h.

Mosquitoes that fed on Plasmodium yoelii-infected mice were less attracted to hosts during the oocyst stage (non-infective) than during the sporozoite stage, when they engaged in higher rates of host-seeking behavior when compared to negative controls (). However, these changes were also observed in mosquitoes that were not infected after feeding on infected mice. Therefore, the observed behavioral changes may be due to Plasmodium infections and to unspecific immune stimuli in the challenged mosquitoes.

Laboratory reared Anopheles gambiae harboring sporozoites of a laboratory strain of P. falciparum were more attracted to human odor when compared to infective mosquitoes exposed to negative-controls (). In contrast, three different species of wild caught Anopheles infected with P. falciparum from natural infections had similar attraction rates to humans when compared with uninfected mosquitoes ().

Chemical Compounds Studied in Relation to Vector Attraction

Differences in mosquito attraction are related to dissimilarities in chemical volatiles produced by each host, which can be modified by pathogen infections. were the first to show that whole-body odor from Plasmodium-infected birds are more attractive to mosquitoes when compared to uninfected birds. demonstrated that mice displayed different odor profiles when infected with Plasmodium chabaudi and became more attractive to mosquitoes after the acute phase of infection. Mice produced fewer volatile chemicals during the acute phase of infection and attracted less mosquitoes. In humans, increased mosquito attraction toward Plasmodium-infected children was associated to changes in skin odor profile driven by increases in the production of aldehydes (). Children infected with P. falciparum in Malawi produced a different chemical breath composition than uninfected children (), which mosquitos can use as a cue to find their hosts (). Thus, the chemical volatiles emitted by hosts and how they change during infection likely constitute the most important factor determining vector attraction.

Birds’ uropygial (or preen) gland produces some antimicrobial and antifungal chemicals that protect the plumage and skin of birds; they also provide defense against ectoparasites and haemosporidian infection (; ). Some studies suggest that uropygial gland secretions can attract vectors (), but others suggest no increased attraction toward such secretions () or toward common chemicals from uropygial glands () when compared to negative controls (no stimuli). The amount of volatile compounds of uropygial glands differ among adult, fledging and nestling house sparrows (Passer domesticus), but these differences did not modify mosquito attraction in dual-choice olfactometer assays (). Plasmodium infection did not change the composition of the volatile fraction of uropygial gland secretion in house sparrows when compared to the uninfected group, and this may explain the similar mosquito attraction toward the secretion from both bird groups (). However, other study showed that exposure to Plasmodium altered the wax ester composition of the secretion in song sparrows (Melospiza melodia), regardless of whether infections were cleared or not (). Therefore, more research is needed to cover the whole array of chemicals produced by the uropygial gland and their effect on different vector species and families (). Particularly considering that parasites from different Haemosporida genera (e.g., Haemoproteus, Leucocytozoon) are transmitted by different Diptera families, which have both different life cycles and ecologies ().

Studies Focused on Other Host Attributes

Physiological differences (e.g., hormones) and differential exposure between males and females due to sex-specific physiology (e.g., immunosuppression due to breeding activities), behavior (e.g., nesting), morphology (e.g., body size), and pathogen infections can influence mosquito attraction (; ). For instance, Cx. pipiens were more attracted to female Great tits (Parus major; ). Ochlerotatus caspius fed more on female than on male jackdaws (Corvus monedula), but no difference was observed when using Cx. pipiens. In addition, these two mosquito species did not show sex-biased feeding preference toward house sparrows (). did not find any mosquito feeding preference between sexes, but they used nestlings instead of adults (see also ). Higher feeding rate on female birds by wild-caught Culex restuans has been reported during the nesting period, suggesting the role of seasonality in this process (), but this has yet to be investigated under laboratory conditions. Yan et al. (2018a) found that mosquitos fed less on birds with higher resting metabolic rate, which authors interpreted as related to bird activity, where birds with higher metabolic rates are more active and thus display more defensive behaviors than more lethargic individuals. Finally, elevated levels of corticosterone increased bird attractiveness to mosquitoes despite the fact that these birds displayed increased anti-mosquito behaviors when compared to the control group (). Increases in corticosterone levels may lead to Plasmodium resurgence in the blood stream in chronically infected birds with an increase in parasitemia (). Therefore, the interaction between elevated stress hormone levels and parasitemia may synergistically increase bird attractiveness to mosquitoes, but this has yet to be tested. Different results across studies may be due to differences in life history traits of bird species, which may in turn influence exposure to vectors and species-specific physiological trade-offs. Hence, we suggest that fair comparisons and generalizations must be done across species (both hosts and vectors) with similar life history traits.

Summary of Current Evidence and Implications for Future Studies

We found that fewer studies assessed direct effects of avian and mammalian Plasmodium on mosquito host choice (infective mosquitoes) when compared to the number of studies on indirect effects on mosquitoes (infected vertebrate hosts). Rearing mosquitoes under laboratory conditions over many generations may alter some genetic traits involved in their responsiveness to host cues (), but nothing is known about whether genetic bottlenecks would change as a function of host-vector-parasite lineage assemblages (). Although using hosts (birds and mice), mosquitoes and pathogens maintained in laboratories has provided fundamental tests of hypothesis related to the vector manipulation by pathogens, experiments mimicking natural conditions using wild caught mosquitoes are essential to fill in gaps for real world situations.

Free-living birds are infected with genetic lineages that vary in their pathological effects as a function of host species and parasite lineage (; ). Assays using experimental infections have focused on domestic canaries infected with a P. relictum strain (SGS1) kept in the laboratory over dozens of passages, while assays using free-living birds have used three avian species naturally infected with a high diversity of parasites. In , 21 of 23 jackdaws exposed to wild-caught Cx. pipiens were naturally infected with P. relictum (SGS1), and yet these authors did not find differences in mosquito feeding rates between infected and uninfected birds. On the other hand, laboratory-reared mosquitoes fed more on canaries experimentally infected with a laboratory strain of P. relictum SGS1 ().

The use of naturally infected birds has the limitation of confounding the bird’s infection stage during mosquito exposure. This is because in birds the Plasmodium acute stage of infection usually finishes within a month post infection. After this period surviving birds enter the chronic stage of infection, in which they display low parasitemia for long periods or even for their entire life (Valkiūnas, 2005). In many of the studies, free-living birds were undergoing chronic infections when exposed to mosquitoes and parasitemia was not evaluated. Interestingly, mosquitoes were more attracted to chronically infected birds when compared to acute infection stages in experimental settings (), which may be interpreted as a parasite avoidance strategy because high parasitemia in the host is associated to high vector mortality ().

Birds and mosquitoes can be co-infected by different genetically related or unrelated parasites (e.g., co-infection between Plasmodium parasites and WNV; ; ). Co-infections by different Plasmodium spp. and other related haemosporidians are often found in wild birds (e.g., Valkiūnas et al., 2006). Yet, evidence for the effects of multiple infections on vector feeding behavior and on fitness of both bird hosts (e.g., ) and vectors (e.g., ) is still very limited (see ). To complicate matters further, if mosquitoes are more attracted to birds co-infected with Plasmodium and arboviruses than to birds infected with arboviruses only, avian malaria may indirectly increase the transmission of zoonotic pathogens. Future studies, therefore, should perform feeding or attraction assays using birds experimentally infected with strains of different Plasmodium species with as few laboratory passages as possible, and also using different parasite groups (e.g., malaria and arbovirus). In addition, stage of infection (acute vs. chronic) and gametocyte levels (parasitemia) should be taken into consideration in studies using both natural and experimental infections. Furthermore, mosquitoes captured from the wild should be favored over populations kept in the laboratory for many generations. This would provide more real settings to understand host attractiveness to free-moving mosquitoes in nature.

Important issues to consider when planning experiments are:

  • (1) will birds be free or immobilized? Free birds may reflect natural conditions, but immobilized birds will increase vector sample size and reduce vector mortality by birds’ behavioral defenses. (2) Will birds be visible to vectors or just odor cues will be investigated? Our opinion is that light levels should reflect those from the natural conditions during which vector activity peaks, which depends on vector species. (3) What would be the duration of the experiment? Immobilizing birds allows for shorter feeding experiments (1–3 h), while 15 min seems to be a common and reasonable time for attraction experiments. Ideally, researchers must know the natural feeding ecology of the studied vector in order to make an informed decision on the duration of experiments. Finally, (4) co-infections by different Plasmodium lineages or different parasite genera (e.g., Plasmodium/Haemoproteus) that are ubiquitous in nature, or even by Haemosporidians and arboviruses (e.g., WNV and USUV) should be considered. Understanding factors that change mosquito attraction to birds may have implications for human health as well, since highly ornithophilic mosquitoes such as Cx. pipiens, Cx. perexiguus, and Cx. restuans are vectors of some arboviruses that may affect humans, such as WNV and USUV (e.g., ; Vázquez et al., 2011; ). Thus, further studies are necessary to understand the range of effects that multiple infections may have on host-vector contact rates and, hence, on the dynamics of parasite transmission. Our review highlights the need to design and implement general standard experimental procedures to obtain comparable results, which can help to generalize findings across studies and to identify contingencies (Figure 1) that later will allow drawing generalizations by, for instance, conducting meta-analyses.

Statements

Author contributions

Both authors have made a substantial, direct and intellectual contribution to the work, and approved it for publication.

Funding

DS-A has been supported by Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (CONACYT, project number Ciencia Básica 2011-01-168524 and project number Problemas Nacionales 2015-01-1628). FCF was supported by National Science Foundation grant 1717498 as part of the joint NSF-NIH-USDA Ecology and Evolution of Infectious Diseases program.

Acknowledgments

We thank Sergio Ibáñez-Bernal, Daniela A. Dutra, Dina M. Fonseca, the editor Laura Gangoso and the three reviewers for their comments that highly improved the quality of this review.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

  • 1

    Abella-MedranoC. A.Ibáñez-BernalS.Carbó-RamírezP.Santiago-AlarconD. (2018). Blood-meal preferences and avian malaria detection in mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae) captured at different land use types within a neotropical montane cloud forest matrix.Parasitol. Int.67313320. 10.1016/j.parint.2018.01.006

  • 2

    AllanS. A.BernierU. R.KlineD. L. (2006). Laboratory evaluation of avian odors for mosquito (Diptera: Culicidae) attraction.J. Med. Entomol.43225231. 10.1093/jmedent/43.2.225

  • 3

    ApplegateJ. E.BeaudoinR. L. (1970). Mechanism of spring relapse in avian malaria: effect of gonadotropin and corticosterone.J. Wildl. Dis.6443447. 10.7589/0090-3558-6.4.443

  • 4

    AtkinsonC. T.Van RiperI. I. I. C. (1991). “Pathogenicity and epizootiology of avian haematozoa: Plasmodium, Leucocytozoon and Haemoproteus,” in Bird-Parasite Interacctions, edsLoyeJ. E.ZukM. (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 1948.

  • 5

    BatistaE. P.CostaE. F.SilvaA. A. (2014). Anopheles darlingi (Diptera: Culicidae) displays increased attractiveness to infected individuals with Plasmodium vivax gametocytes.Parasit. Vector.7:251. 10.1186/1756-3305-7-251

  • 6

    BrugmanV. A.Hernández-TrianaL. M.MedlockJ. M.FooksA. R.CarpenterS.JohnsonN. (2018). The role of Culex pipiens L. (Diptera: Culicidae) in virus transmission in Europe.Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health15:389. 10.3390/ijerph15020389

  • 7

    Burkett-CadenaN. D.LigonR. A.LiuM.HassanH. K.HillG. E.EubanksM. D.et al (2010). Vector-host interactions in avian nests: do mosquitoes prefer nestlings over adults?Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg.83395399. 10.4269/ajtmh.2010.10-0048

  • 8

    BusulaA. O.BousemaT.MweresaC. K.MasigaD.LoganJ. G.SauerweinR. W.et al (2017). Gametocytemia and attractiveness of Plasmodium falciparum-infected kenyan children to Anopheles gambiae mosquitoes.J. Infect. Dis.216291295. 10.1093/infdis/jix214

  • 9

    CatorL. J.GeorgeJ.BlanfordS.MurdockC. C.BakerT. C.ReadA. F.et al (2013). ‘Manipulation’ without the parasite: altered feeding behaviour of mosquitoes is not dependent on infection with malaria parasites.Proc. R. Soc. B280:20130711. 10.1098/rspb.2013.0711

  • 10

    CornetS.NicotA.RiveroA.GandonS. (2013a). Both infected and uninfected mosquitoes are attracted toward malaria infected birds.Malar. J.12:179. 10.1186/1475-2875-12-179

  • 11

    CornetS.NicotA.RiveroA.GandonS. (2013b). Malaria infection increases bird attractiveness to uninfected mosquitoes.Ecol. Lett.16323329. 10.1111/ele.12041

  • 12

    CornetS.NicotA.RiveroA.GandonS. (2019). Avian malaria alters the dynamics of blood feeding in Culex pipiens mosquitoes.Malar. J.1882. 10.1186/s12936-019-2690-5

  • 13

    CozzaroloC.-S.SironiN.GlaizotO.PigeaultR.ChristeP. (2019). Sex-biased parasitism in vector-borne disease: vector preference?PLoS One14:e0216360. 10.1371/journal.pone.0216360

  • 14

    DarbroJ. M.DhondtA. A.VermeylenF. M.HarringtonL. C. (2007). Mycoplasma gallisepticum infection in house finches (Carpodacus mexicanus) affects mosquito blood feeding patterns.Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg.77488494. 10.4269/ajtmh.2007.77.488

  • 15

    de BoerJ. G.RobinsonA.PowersS. J.BurgersS. L. G. E.CaulfieldJ. C.BirkettM. A.et al (2017). Odours of Plasmodium falciparum-infected participants influence mosquito-host interactions.Sci. Rep.7:9283. 10.1038/s41598-017-08978-9

  • 16

    De MoraesC. M.StanczykN. M.BetzH. S.PulidoH.SimD. G.ReadA. F.et al (2014). Malaria-induced changes in host odors enhance mosquito attraction.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.1111107911084. 10.1073/pnas.1405617111

  • 17

    Díez-FernándezA.Martínez-de la PuenteJ.GangosoL.FerragutiM.SoriguerR.FiguerolaJ. (2020a). House sparrow uropygial gland secretions do not attract ornithophilic nor mammophilic mosquitoes.Med. Vet. Entomol.2020:12401. 10.1111/mve.12401

  • 18

    Díez-FernándezA.Martínez-de la PuenteJ.GangosoL.LópezP.SoriguerR.MartínJ.et al (2020b). Mosquitoes are attracted by the odour of Plasmodium-infected birds.Int. J. Parasitol.50569575. 10.1016/j.ijpara.2020.03.013

  • 19

    EgiziA. M.FarajollahiA.FonsecaD. M. (2014). Diverse host feeding on nesting birds may limit early-season West Nile virus amplification.Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis.14447453. 10.1089/vbz.2013.1536

  • 20

    FarajollahiA.FonsecaD. M.KramerL. D.Marm KilpatrickA. (2011). “Bird biting” mosquitoes and human disease: a review of the role of Culex pipiens complex mosquitoes in epidemiology.Infect. Genet. Evol.1115771585. 10.1016/j.meegid.2011.08.013

  • 21

    FergusonH. M.RiveroA.ReadA. F. (2003). The influence of malaria parasite genetic diversity and anaemia on mosquito feeding and fecundity.Parasitology127919. 10.1017/s0031182003003287

  • 22

    GandonS. (2018). Evolution and manipulation of vector host choice.Am. Nat.1922334. 10.1086/697575

  • 23

    GarvinM. C.AustinA.BoyerK.GefkeM.WrightC.PryorY.et al (2018a). Attraction of Culex pipiens to house sparrows is influenced by host age but not uropygial gland secretions.Insects9:127. 10.3390/insects9040127

  • 24

    GarvinM. C.AustinA. L.StrackerN. H.SlowinskiS. P.RutterJ. E.ButlerM.et al (2018b). Attraction of Culex pipiens to uropygial gland secretions does not explain feeding preference for American robins.J. Vect. Ecol.43110116. 10.1111/jvec.12290

  • 25

    GervasiS. S.Burkett-CadenaN.BurganS. C.SchreyA. W.HassanH. K.UnnaschT. R.et al (2016). Host stress hormones alter vector feeding preferences, success, and productivity.Proc. R. Soc. B283:20161278. 10.1098/rspb.2016.1278

  • 26

    GrievesL. A.KellyT. R.BernardsM. A.MacDougall-ShackletonE. A. (2018). Malarial infection alters wax ester composition of preen oil in songbirds: results of an experimental study.Auk: Ornithol. Adv.135767776. 10.1642/AUK-17-242.1

  • 27

    GriffingS. M.KilpatrickA. M.ClarkL.MarraP. P. (2007). Mosquito landing rates on nesting American robins (Turdus migratorius).Vect. Borne Zoonot. Dis.7437443. 10.1089/vbz.2006.0560

  • 28

    Gutiérrez-LópezR.Martínez-de la PuenteJ.GangosoL.SoriguerR.FiguerolaJ. (2019a). Effects of host sex, body mass and infection by avian Plasmodium on the biting rate of two mosquito species with different feeding preferences.Parasit. Vect.12:87. 10.1186/s13071-019-3342-x

  • 29

    Gutiérrez-LópezR.Martínez-de la PuenteJ.GangosoL.YanJ.SoriguerR.FiguerolaJ. (2019b). Experimental reduction of host Plasmodium infection load affects mosquito survival.Sci. Rep.9:8782. 10.1038/s41598-019-45143-w

  • 30

    Gutiérrez-LópezR.Martínez-de la PuenteJ.GangosoL.SoriguerR.FiguerolaJ. (2020). Plasmodium transmission differs between mosquito species and parasite lineages.Parasitology147441447. 10.1017/S0031182020000062

  • 31

    HeilM. (2016). Host manipulation by parasites: cases, patterns and remaining doubts.Front. Ecol. Evol.4:80. 10.3389/fevo.2016.00080

  • 32

    HimmelT.HarlJ.PfannerS.NedorostN.NowotnyN.WeissenböckH. (2020). Haemosporidioses in wild Eurasian blackbirds (Turdus merula) and song thrushes (T. philomelos): an in situ hybridization study with emphasis on exo-erythrocytic parasite burden.Malar. J.19:69. 10.1186/s12936-020-3147-6

  • 33

    HughesT.IrwinP.HofmeisterE.PaskewitzS. M. (2010). Occurrence of avian Plasmodium and West Nile virus in Culex species in Wisconsin.J. Am. Mosq. Control Assoc.262431. 10.2987/09-5893.1

  • 34

    Ibáñez-BernalS.Rivera-GarcíaK. D.Abella-MedranoC. A. (2020). “Introduction to the taxonomy and general biology of Diptera (Insecta) involved in the transmission of avian haemosporida,” in Avian Malaria and Related Parasites in the Tropics - Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, edsSantiago-AlarconD.MarzalA. (Cham: Springer).

  • 35

    KellyM.SuC.-Y.SchaberC.CrowleyJ. R.HsuF.-F.CarlsonJ. R.et al (2015). Malaria parasites produce volatile mosquito attractants.mBio6:e00235-15.

  • 36

    KilpatrickA. M.KramerL. D.JonesM. J.MarraP. P.DaszakP. (2006). West Nile virus epidemics in North America are driven by shifts in mosquito feeding behavior.PLoS Biol.4:e82. 10.1371/journal.pbio.0040082

  • 37

    LacroixR.MukabanaW. R.GouagnaL. C.KoellaJ. C. (2005). Malaria infection increases attractiveness of humans to mosquitoes.PLoS Biol.3:e298. 10.1371/journal.pbio.0030298

  • 38

    LalubinF.BizeP.van RooyenJ.ChristeP.GlaizotO. (2012). Potential evidence of parasite avoidance in an avian malarial vector.Anim. Behav.84539545. 10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.06.004

  • 39

    MagallanesS.MøllerA. P.García-LongoriaL.de LopeF.MarzalA. (2016). Volume and antimicrobial activity of secretions of the uropygial gland are correlated with malaria infection in house sparrows.Parasit. Vect.9:232. 10.1186/s13071-016-1512-1517

  • 40

    Martínez-de la PuenteJ.Díez-FernándezA.SoriguerR.RambozziL.PeanoA.MeneguzP.et al (2020). Are malaria-infected birds more attractive to mosquito vectors.Ardeola68251264. 10.13157/arla.68.1.2021.fo1

  • 41

    MarzalA.BenschS.ReviriegoM.BalbontinJ.De LopeF. (2008). Effects of malaria double infection in birds: one plus one is not two.J. Evol. Biol.21979987. 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2008.01545.x

  • 42

    MedeirosM. C. I.AndersonT. K.HigashiguchiJ. M.KitronU. D.WalkerE. D.BrawnJ. D.et al (2014). An inverse association between West Nile virus serostatus and avian malaria infection status.Parasit. Vect.7:415. 10.1186/1756-3305-7-415

  • 43

    NguyenP. L.VantauxA.HienD. F.DabiréK. R.YameogoB. K.GouagnaL.-C.et al (2017). No evidence for manipulation of Anopheles gambiae, An. coluzzii and An. arabiensis host preference by Plasmodium falciparum.Sci. Rep.7:9415. 10.1038/s41598-017-09821-x

  • 44

    PalinauskasV.Martínez-de la PuenteJ.Hernández-SotoR. S.MarzalA. (2020). “Experimental Parasitology and Ecoimmunology: concepts and opportunities in avian Haemosporidian studies,” Avian Malaria and Related Parasites in the Tropics, edsSantiago-AlarconD.MarzalA. (Cham: Springer).

  • 45

    PalinauskasV.ValkiūnasG.BolshakovC. V.BenschS. (2011). Plasmodium relictum (lineage SGS1) and Plasmodium ashfordi (lineage GRW2): the effects of the co-infection on experimentally infected passerine birds.Exp. Parasitol.127527533. 10.1016/j.exppara.2010.10.007

  • 46

    PalinauskasV.ŽiegytėR.IezhovaT. A.IlgūnasM.BernotienėR.ValkiūnasG. (2016). Description, molecular characterisation, diagnostics and life cycle of Plasmodium elongatum (lineage pERIRUB01), the virulent avian malaria parasite.Int. J. Parasitol.46697707. 10.1016/j.ijpara.2016.05.005

  • 47

    RiveroA.GandonS. (2018). Evolutionary ecology of avian malaria: past to present.Trends Parasitol.34712726. 10.1016/j.pt.2018.06.002

  • 48

    RobinsonA.BusulaA. O.VoetsM. A.BeshirK. B.CaulfieldJ. C.PowersS. J.et al (2018). Plasmodium-associated changes in human odor attract mosquitoes.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.115E4209E4218. 10.1073/pnas.1721610115

  • 49

    RochlinI.FarajiA.HealyK.AndreadisT. G. (2019). West Nile virus mosquito vectors in North America.J. Med. Entomol.5614751490. 10.1093/jme/tjz146

  • 50

    RussellC. B.HunterF. F. (2005). Attraction of Culex pipiens/restuans (Diptera: Culicidae) mosquitoes to bird Uropygial gland odors at two elevations in the niagara region of Ontario.J. Med. Entomol.42301305. 10.1093/jmedent/42.3.301

  • 51

    SalibianA.MontaltiD. (2009). Physiological and biochemical aspects of the avian uropygial gland.Braz. J. Biol.69437446. 10.1590/s1519-69842009000200029

  • 52

    Santa-AnaM.KhademM.CapelaR. (2006). Natural infection of Culex theileri (Diptera: Culicidae) with Dirofilaria immitis (Nematoda: Filarioidea) on Madeira Island.Portugal J. Med. Entomol.43104106. 10.1093/jmedent/43.1.104

  • 53

    SchaberC. L.KattaN.BollingerL. B.MwaleM.Mlotha-MitoleR.TrehanI.et al (2018). Breathprinting reveals malaria-associated biomarkers and mosquito attractants.J. Infect. Dis.21715531560. 10.1093/infdis/jiy072

  • 54

    ScottT. W.LorenzL. H.EdmanJ. D. (1990). Effects of house sparrow age and arbovirus infection on attraction of mosquitoes.J. Med. Entomol.27856863. 10.1093/jmedent/27.5.856

  • 55

    SimpsonJ. E.Folsom-O’KeefeC. M.ChildsJ. E.SimonsL. E.AndreadisT. G.Diuk-WasserM. A. (2009). Avian host-selection by Culex pipiens in experimental trials.PLoS One4:e7861. 10.1371/journal.pone.0007861

  • 56

    SmallegangeR. C.van GemertG. J.van de Vegte-BolmerM.GezanS.TakkenW.SauerweinR. W.et al (2013). Malaria infected mosquitoes express enhanced attraction to human odor.PLoS One8:e63602. 10.1371/journal.pone.0063602

  • 57

    SpanoudisC. G.AndreadisS. S.BrayD. P.Savopoulou-SoultaniM.IgnellR. (2020). Behavioural response of the house mosquitoes Culex quinquefasciatus and Culex pipiens molestus to avian odours and its reliance on carbon dioxide.Med. Vet. Entomol.34129137. 10.1111/mve.12429

  • 58

    TakkenW.VerhulstN. O. (2013). Host preferences of blood-feeding mosquitoes.Annu. Rev. Entomol.58433453. 10.1146/annurev-ento-120811-153618

  • 59

    ValkiūnasG. (2005). Avian Malaria Parasites and Other Haemosporidia, 1st Edn, Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

  • 60

    ValkiūnasG.BenschS.IezhovaT. A.KrižanauskienëA.HellgrenO.BolshakovC. V. (2006). Nested cytochrome b polymerase chain reaction diagnostics underestimate mixed infections of avian blood haemosporidian parasites: microscopy is still essential.J. Parasitol.92418422. 10.1645/ge-3547rn.1

  • 61

    ValkiūnasG.KazlauskienëR.BernotienëR.BukauskaitëD.PalinauskasV.IezhovaT. A. (2014). Haemoproteus infections (Haemosporida, Haemoproteidae) kill bird-biting mosquitoes.Parasitol. Res.11310111018. 10.1007/s00436-013-3733-4

  • 62

    ValkiūnasG.KazlauskienëR.BernotienëR.PalinauskasV.IezhovaT. A. (2013). Abortive long-lasting sporogony of two Haemoproteus species (Haemosporida, Haemoproteidae) in the mosquito Ochlerotatus cantans, with perspectives on haemosporidian vector research.Parasitol. Res.11221592169. 10.1007/s00436-013-3375-6

  • 63

    VázquezA.RuizS.HerreroL.MorenoJ.MoleroF.MagallanesA.et al (2011). West Nile and Usutu viruses in mosquitoes in Spain, 2008-2009.Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg.85178181. 10.4269/ajtmh.2011.11-0042

  • 64

    VogelsC. B. F.FrosJ. J.PijlmanG. P.van LoonJ. J. A.GortG.KoenraadtC. J. M. (2017). Virus interferes with host-seeking behaviour of mosquito.J. Exp. Biol.22035983603. 10.1242/jeb.164186

  • 65

    YanJ.BroggiJ.Martínez-de la PuenteJ.Gutiérrez-LópezR.GangosoL.SoriguerR.et al (2018a). Does bird metabolic rate influence mosquito feeding preference?Parasit. Vector.11:110. 10.1186/s13071-018-2708-9

  • 66

    YanJ.Martínez-de la PuenteJ.GangosoL.Gutiérrez-LópezR.SoriguerR.FiguerolaJ. (2018b). Avian malaria infection intensity influences mosquito feeding patterns.Int. J. Parasitol.48257264. 10.1016/j.ijpara.2017.09.005

Summary

Keywords

behavioral manipulation, vector attraction, experimental parasitology, arboviruses, avian malaria, Culicidae, Diptera

Citation

Santiago-Alarcon D and Ferreira FC (2020) Does Plasmodium Infection Affect Mosquito Attraction?. Front. Ecol. Evol. 8:582943. doi: 10.3389/fevo.2020.582943

Received

13 July 2020

Accepted

21 October 2020

Published

09 November 2020

Volume

8 - 2020

Edited by

Laura Gangoso, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC), Spain

Reviewed by

Rafael Gutiérrez López, University of Porto, Portugal; Leanne Grieves, McMaster University, Canada; Jiayue Yan, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, United States

Updates

Copyright

*Correspondence: Diego Santiago-Alarcon, ; Francisco C. Ferreira,

This article was submitted to Behavioral and Evolutionary Ecology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution

Disclaimer

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Outline

Figures

Cite article

Copy to clipboard


Export citation file


Share article

Article metrics