4.8 Article

Climate and Urbanization Drive Mosquito Preference for Humans

Journal

CURRENT BIOLOGY
Volume 30, Issue 18, Pages 3570-+

Publisher

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2020.06.092

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Pew
  2. Klingenstein-Simons
  3. Gruber Foundation
  4. National Institutes of Health [R00DC012069, R01AI101112, U01AI115595]
  5. Helen Hay Whitney Postdoctoral Fellowship
  6. Princeton University Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology
  7. African Studies Program
  8. Verily Life Sciences
  9. New York Stem Cell Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The majority of mosquito-borne illness is spread by a few mosquito species that have evolved to specialize in biting humans, yet the precise causes of this behavioral shift are poorly understood. We address this gap in the arboviral vector Aedes aegypti. We first collect and characterize the behavior of mosquitoes from 27 sites scattered across the species' ancestral range in sub-Saharan Africa, revealing previously unrecognized variation in preference for human versus animal odor We then use modeling to show that over 80% of this variation can be predicted by two ecological factors-dry season intensity and human population density. Finally, we integrate this information with whole-genome sequence data from 375 individual mosquitoes to identify a single underlying ancestry component linked to human preference. Genetic changes associated with human specialist ancestry were concentrated in a few chromosomal regions. Our findings suggest that human-biting in this important disease vector originally evolved as a by-product of breeding in human-stored water in areas where doing so provided the only means to survive the long, hot dry season. Our model also predicts that the rapid urbanization currently taking place in Africa will drive further mosquito evolution, causing a shift toward human-biting in many large cities by 2050.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available