bioRxiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/bioRxiv

bioRxiv · 10.1101/821819

Quantification of human-mosquito contact rate using surveys and its application in determining dengue viral transmission risk

Thongsripong, P.·Qu, Z.·Yukich, J. O.·Hyman, J. M.·Wesson, D. M.
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Aedes-borne viral diseases, including dengue fever, chikungunya, and Zika, have been surging in incidence and spreading to new areas where their mosquito vectors thrive. To estimate viral transmission risks, availability of accurate local transmission parameters is essential. One of the most important parameters to determine infection risk is the human-mosquito contact rate. However, this rate has rarely been characterized due to the lack of a feasible research method. In this study, human-mosquito contact rates were evaluated in two study sites within the Greater New Orleans Region by asking a group of survey participants to estimate mosquito bites they experienced in the past 24 hours. The fraction of the mosquito bites attributed to Ae. aegypti or Ae. albopictus was estimated by human landing sampling. The results showed a significantly higher outdoor mosquito bite exposure than indoor exposure. The number of reported mosquito bites was positively correlated with the time that study participants spent outside during at-risk periods. There was also a significant effect of the study site on outdoor bite exposure, possibly because of the difference in the numbers of host-seeking mosquitoes. We use a mathematical dengue virus transmission model to estimate the transmission risks in the study areas based on local conditions. This compartmental model demonstrated how the observed difference in the human-Aedes contact rates in the two study sites would result in differential dengue transmission risks. This study highlights the practicality of using a survey to estimate human-mosquito contact rates and serves as a basis for future evaluations. Combined with the use of mathematical modeling, this innovative method may lead to more effective mosquito-borne pathogen prevention and control.\n\nAuthor summaryEven though the human-mosquito contact rate is among the most important indicators of mosquito-borne viral transmission risk, it is rarely characterized in the field. Human Landing Capture is a gold standard method to quantify this rate, but it ignores variables such as human behaviors and lifestyles. In this study, we tested the feasibility of using surveys to quantify mosquito bite exposure in the Southern United States. The survey results, combined with mosquito species proportion data, were used to estimate the contact rate. These rates are key parameters used in mathematical models to determine transmission risks. We found that bite exposure occurred more often outside homes and people who spent more time outdoors in the evening and night had a higher exposure. Our model analysis shows that the human-mosquito contact rate is one of the most important parameters determining outbreak potential. Disease control programs should focus their efforts on reducing this rate in addition to the mosquito density. Future studies should test if the entomological contact rates described by surveys correlate with disease incidences or other entomological indices. This study highlights the importance of characterizing how vector-human contact rates may respond to changing human behaviors and environments.

Source connections

Explore related subjects

ecologyPreprint

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Thongsripong, P., Qu, Z., Yukich, J. O., Hyman, J. M., Wesson, D. M.. 2019-10-28. Quantification of human-mosquito contact rate using surveys and its application in determining dengue viral transmission risk. https://doi.org/10.1101/821819

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

bioRxiv2026

Beyond Single-Metric Assessments: Uncovering Masked Butterfly Declines via Multi-Scalar Analysis in Central Alberta

1. This study analyzed 21 years (2000-2025) of butterfly count data from Central Alberta, integrated with intensive 5-year (2021-2025) high-resolution intra-seasonal sampling. 2. Long-term macro-scale analysis revealed a significant decline in Shannon Diversity, a change that remained obscured when relying solely on traditional metrics of species richness and evenness. 3. This diversity decline was primarily driven by the severe, long-term collapse of the native Common Ringlet (Coenonympha tullia). 4. Four other dominant species--Cabbage White (Pieris rapae), Clouded Sulphur (Colias eriphyle), European Skipper (Thymelicus lineola), and Common Wood Nymph (Cercyonis pegala)--maintained long-term population stability, though their abundances were significantly constrained by extreme winter minimum temperatures and rapid spring warming. 5. High-resolution intra-seasonal analysis (2021-2025) demonstrated that community indices and species-specific abundances were strongly limited by daily weather, particularly wind velocity and temperature. 6. These findings illustrate that while traditional metrics like richness and evenness are fundamental to community ecology, they provide incomplete insights when applied in isolation; they are most effective when utilized as part of a complementary, multi-scalar framework. 7. This study highlights the necessity of coupling multi-decadal historical datasets with high-frequency, fine-scale sampling to accurately identify the mechanisms of community turnover that simpler metrics may overlook. 8. The results underscore the critical importance of standardized citizen science monitoring in quantifying environmental impacts and establishing conservation priorities for terrestrial insect groups.

ecology↗
bioRxiv2026

From concentration to export: resource contrasts and bee traits shape pollinator spillover to crops

Floral plantings can either concentrate bees or export them to adjacent crops, yet the ecological conditions influencing these outcomes remain unclear. Here, we develop a mathematical model as proof of concept for our previous integrative hypothesis: concentrator and exporter outcomes can arise as alternative, context-dependent outcomes of the same underlying resource-selection process. Using bees as a model and focusing specifically on spillover from floral plantings to crops, we identified resource-specific thresholds separating concentration- and export-favoring conditions. Our model translates differences in relative patch attractiveness into context-dependent concentration and export outcomes and generates resource-specific, testable predictions about the conditions favoring pollinator movement into crops. In our simulations, the concentrator-exporter transition occurred at a lower flowering-intensity contrast than at pollen or nectar contrasts, which suggests that flowering intensity may provide an initial cue for bee movement, whereas nectar and pollen rewards refine or sustain bee responses once crops are perceived as attractive. Spillover thresholds differed among resource contrasts, whereas response steepness varied across bee-trait and community scenarios. Under the model's trait-sensitivity formulation, predicted spillover probability responded more strongly to flowering contrast for specialists than for generalists; colony size amplified this response, whereas bee richness dampened it. Together, these patterns show how flowering and resource contrasts interact with bee traits and community context to shape predicted spillover. Our results confirm that the concentrator and exporter hypotheses can be understood as context-dependent outcomes of the same ecological process rather than as mutually exclusive alternatives. Experimental tests of the predicted thresholds conducted in the field could reveal when and where floral plantings are most likely to promote bee spillover to crops, potentially supporting crop pollination.

ecology↗
bioRxiv2026

A Computational Re-evaluation of Spatial Trials for Zoonotic Tuberculosis Control: Model Misspecification, Diagnostic Miss-classification, and the Illusion of Wildlife Culling Efficacy

1. Wildlife reservoir management frequently relies on the Randomised Badger Culling Trial's (RBCT) trade-off hypothesis, which posits that reductions in cattle herd infections are offset by a perturbation effect driven by disrupted host dispersal. This paper evaluates the computational and epidemiological robustness of this historical trial, which serves as the foundational empirical experiment guiding zoonotic tuberculosis (Mycobacterium bovis) control policies. 2. Using generalized linear mixed models with a generalized Poisson error distribution to explicitly address historical data overdispersion, this study contrasts traditional parametric inference against exact cluster-constrained permutation tests across distinct operational definitions of disease incidence. 3. Non-parametric diagnostics reveal that previously reported treatment and perturbation effects render as statistical artifacts under exact non-parametric permutation. Inside culling zones, parametric significance fails to withstand exact permutation verification due to extreme data leverage in localized cluster blocks. 4. Crucially, when diagnostic misclassification biases are eliminated by analysing total reactor datasets, all apparent culling effects disappear, and information criteria overwhelmingly favour nested null architectures. Unconfirmed reactors likely represent true biological infections missed by low-sensitivity post-mortem macro-necropsy, proving that host removal tracks observation noise rather than genuine zoonotic transmission pathways. 5. Finally, empirical scaling conducted in this study identifies a novel mathematical saturation effect, demonstrating that this sub-linear scaling is an operational artifact of unmodelled herd-level disease recurrence over time. 6. Policy implications. Because current zoonotic tuberculosis intervention frameworks are built upon a structurally misspecified statistical model, they have driven large-scale veterinary policies resulting in substantial, unevidenced ecological and economic interventions while failing to provide genuine public health, animal health, or disease control benefits.

ecology↗