Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 3, Number 3—September 1997

Aedes albopictus in the United States: Ten-Year Presence and Public Health Implications

Chester G. MooreComments to Author  and Carl J. Mitchell
Author affiliations: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA

Cite This Article


Since its discovery in Houston, Texas, in 1987, the Asian "tiger mosquito" Aedes albopictus has spread to 678 counties in 25 states. This species, which readily colonizes container habitats in the peridomestic environment, was probably introduced into the continental United States in shipments of scrap tires from northern Asia. The early pattern of dispersal followed the interstate highway system, which suggests further dispersal by human activities. The Public Health Service Act of 1988 requires shipments of used tires from countries with Ae. albopictus to be treated to prevent further importations. Given the extensive spread of the mosquito in the United States, it is questionable whether such a requirement is still justified. Ae. albopictus, a major biting pest throughout much of its range, is a competent laboratory vector of at least 22 arboviruses, including many viruses of public health importance. Cache Valley and eastern equine encephalomyelitis viruses are the only human pathogens isolated from U.S. populations of Ae. albopictus. There is no evidence that this mosquito is the vector of human disease in the United States.

Established populations of Aedes albopictus, the Asian "tiger mosquito," (1) were first discovered in the continental United States in Harris County, Texas, in August 1985 (2). (Ae. albopictus was introduced into Hawaii sometime before 1902 [3]). This mosquito may have become established in the region even earlier since an adult female was collected in Memphis, Tennessee, in 1983 (4). Ae. albopictus probably entered the United States in shipments of used tires from northern Asia, where the species is widely distributed (5-7). Beginning January 1, 1988, the U.S. Public Health Service required that all used tires arriving at U.S. ports from areas known to be infested with Ae. albopictus be dry, clean, and fumigated or otherwise "disinsected" (8). However, by the time the disinsection requirement was put in place, existing populations had become established in 15 states.

Ae. albopictus is both a nuisance and a potential disease vector. Anecdotal reports from local mosquito control agencies suggest that it has become a major pest mosquito problem in many communities in the southeastern United States. Laboratory studies show that this species is susceptible to and can transmit many arboviruses of public health importance (9-12). In this article, we summarize the reported distribution and dispersal of Ae. albopictus in the past 10 years and review surveillance for infection and transmission of arboviruses.

Distribution and Dispersal of Aedes albopictus

A national database of the distribution of Aedes albopictus is maintained as a passive surveillance system (13); the system is periodically stimulated by letters and telephone calls to mosquito and vector control professionals throughout the United States, as well as by articles in professional journals and newsletters and presentations at professional meetings. Data obtained from a standardized reporting form sent to potential collaborators to ensure standardization of the data are entered into a computerized database written in EpiInfo (14). Summary data are extracted from the database for reports or for transfer to a desktop mapping program.

Temporal Patterns

Figure 1

Thumbnail of Reported distribution of Aedes albopictus, the Asian "tiger mosquito," in the continental United States, 1985-1996. Maps were generated by merging the EpiInfo database into the Atlas geographic information system.

Figure 1. Reported distribution of Aedes albopictus, the Asian "tiger mosquito," in the continental United States, 1985-1996. Maps were generated by merging the EpiInfo database into the Atlas geographic information system.

Figure 1 shows the changing distribution of Ae. albopictus over time. The mosquito is widely distributed in the southeastern United States. Established infestations are less common northward and westward, presumably because of less hospitable environments. The absence of reports from some states may reflect lack of surveillance rather than absence of the mosquito. This species may have been present in some areas for many years before discovery (particularly true in areas without active mosquito surveillance or control programs). In certain states, such as South Carolina and Kentucky, the abrupt discovery of Ae. albopictus in a large number of counties was the result of university graduate students' research.

Possible Dispersal Routes

Figure 2

Thumbnail of Apparent relationship between the early dispersal of Aedes albopictus and the U.S. interstate highway system, 1985-1987. Map generated by merging EpiInfo database into the Atlas geographic information system.

Figure 2. Apparent relationship between the early dispersal of Aedes albopictus and the U.S. interstate highway system, 1985-1987. Map generated by merging EpiInfo database into the Atlas geographic information system.

During the early period of dispersal, the presence of Ae. albopictus appeared to be related to the proximity of a county to interstate highways (Figure 2). In December 1987, 92 counties in 15 states were infested with this mosquito. Of the 1,511 counties in states where Ae. albopictus was present, 582 (38.5%) had interstate highways passing through them. Were the spread of Ae. albopictus not related to the interstate system, only 35 (38%) of the 92 mosquito-infested counties would be expected to lie on an interstate highway. In fact, 64 of the 92 infested counties were on an interstate (X2 = 25.29, df = 3, p < 0.001).

The postulated relationship between dispersal and major transportation routes would be expected for a species transported largely by human activities such as the commercial movement of scrap tires for retreading, recycling, or other purposes. Several of the 28 mosquito-infested sites not located on the interstate system were major tire retreading companies, other businesses that deal with large numbers of used or scrap tires, or illegal tire dumps.

Once populations of the mosquito become established, local transport and active migration should disperse the mosquito throughout the surrounding area. As would be expected if the original infestation were in Texas, the proportion of Ae. albopictus-infested counties on the interstate system in Texas had fallen from 1 (100%) of 1 in 1985, to 13 (65%) of 20 in 1986, and to 23 (58%) of 39 in 1987.

This distribution pattern can be explained in other ways. At least early on, searches might have been limited to Ae. albopictus in the major cities. Since most major cities are connected by interstates, it is impossible to separate these two possibilities. Moreover, most of the active vector control programs and other activities that would involve surveys for this mosquito are probably located in larger cities, which are connected to the interstate highway system.

Ae. albopictus as a Disease Vector

Vector Competence Studies

Reviews of many vector competence studies involving Ae. albopictus (9-12) provide information for 23 arboviruses and for Nodamura virus (probably not an arbovirus). In addition, Ae. albopictus has been recently found to be a competent experimental vector of Sindbis virus (15). A list of viruses included in vector competence experiments involving Ae. albopictus is shown in Table 1.

Ae. albopictus is a competent experimental vector of seven Alphaviruses: Chikungunya, eastern equine encephalitis (EEE), Mayaro, Ross River, western equine encephalitis, Venezuelan equine encephalitis, and Sindbis viruses. Only EEE virus has been isolated from Ae. albopictus collected in nature.

Ae. albopictus is also a competent experimental vector of the following Flaviviruses: dengue (DEN) serotypes 1, 2, 3, and 4, Japanese encephalitis, West Nile, and yellow fever viruses. In the case of an additional Flavivirus, St. Louis encephalitis virus, the amount of circulating virus in naturally infected avian hosts is generally insufficient to infect the mosquito (16).

DEN and Japanese encephalitis viruses have been isolated from specimens of Ae. albopictus collected outside the United States, and these viruses can be transmitted vertically under experimental conditions (9). Recently, isolation of DEN-1 virus from Ae. albopictus larvae in Brazil has been reported (17). Ae. albopictus has been involved in the transmission of DEN viruses in southeast Asia, southern China, Japan, and the Seychelles (18). If DEN viruses were introduced into areas of the United States with dense populations of Ae. albopictus, this mosquito could conceivably act as a vector. However, the classic epidemic vector of DEN viruses, Ae. aegypti, is also present in many of the southeastern states; in areas where Ae. aegypti is abundant, this species might be expected to play a far more important role in DEN transmission than Ae. albopictus.

Vector competence tests show that eight Bunyaviridae (Jamestown Canyon, Keystone [KEY], LaCrosse, Oropouche, Potosi, Rift Valley fever, San Angelo, and trivittatus viruses) infect Ae. albopictus by the oral route. Only the KEY, Oropouche, and trivittatus viruses are not transmitted efficiently by bite. The KEY, LaCrosse, and San Angelo viruses can be transmitted vertically under experimental conditions.

Field Investigations

Since the discovery of Ae. albopictus in the United States, field-collected Ae. albopictus from several areas have been tested for arboviruses. From 1987 to 1995, 122,879 specimens were tested from 12 states (Table 2). Four viruses have been isolated: Potosi (19-22), EEE (23), KEY (23, 24 and R. Nasci, unpub. data), and Cache Valley (CV) virus (CDC, unpub. data). Tensaw virus was isolated by the Texas State Department of Health (23). The geographic and temporal distributions of these virus isolations are shown in Table 3.

Aside from EEE and CV viruses, the viruses isolated from Ae. albopictus in the United States are not of public health importance. The association of Ae. albopictus with EEE virus in nature has been restricted to a single incident in Polk County, Florida, in 1991. The presence of a large tire dump (ca. 1.5 million used tires) within a known enzootic focus of EEE virus (the Green Swamp) may have led to an unusual virus-vector association (23). Follow-up studies at the dump site in 1992, after the tires had been shredded, yielded fewer than 1,000 Ae. albopictus (none infected) (Mitchell and Niebylski, pers. comm.), and EEE virus has not been isolated from field-collected specimens of this species since the original episode. CV virus was isolated from a pool of Ae. albopictus collected in Jasper County, Illinois, in 1995 (CDC, unpub. data). During the same year, a case of human disease with diverse clinical manifestations due to CV virus was reported in a patient who presumably contracted the infection while deer hunting in Anson County, North Carolina (25). However, there is little reason to suspect that Ae. albopictus was involved in this incident. CV virus was isolated repeatedly from several other genera and species of mosquitoes before Ae. albopictus was present in the continental United States and, thus far, CV virus has been isolated from Ae. albopictus from only a single pool of specimens in Illinois.


Ae. albopictus is firmly established in the United States. In the 10 years since its discovery, this species has spread throughout much of the East. The species occurs in all counties in at least four states - Delaware, Florida (26), Georgia (27), and South Carolina. It probably occurs in all or most counties in Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana, but surveys from those states are incomplete. Ae. albopictus seems to be approaching the northern limit predicted by Nawrocki and Hawley (28). The westward dispersal of this mosquito has been very slow, perhaps because the drier environment of the Great Plains region inhibits westward movement of this species. Data suggest that the current practice of requiring the disinsection of used tires entering the United States from other countries with Ae. albopictus does not influence the dynamics and spread of this species within this country. If disinsection is to remain in force, other justification will be needed.

Observations on early dispersal of Ae. albopictus are consistent with the hypothesis of dispersal by human activities, probably movement of scrap tires through the interstate highway system. This information might be useful in designing monitoring programs for possible future introductions of mosquitoes.

Collectively, the above information indicates that Ae. albopictus is a competent vector for a wide variety of arboviruses under experimental conditions, has been found to be naturally infected with DEN, Japanese encephalitis, Potosi, KEY, Tensaw, CV, and EEE viruses, and can serve as an epidemic vector of DEN viruses. The capacity of Ae. albopictus to vertically transmit certain arboviruses may also enhance the possibility of establishing new enzootic and endemic foci of some viruses. Ae. albopictus is a major biting pest throughout much of its range and is of justifiable concern to mosquito control and public health agencies for this reason alone. Nonetheless, in terms of its role as an arbovirus vector, evidence is lacking to incriminate Ae. albopictus as the vector of even a single case of human disease in the United States.



  1. Robertson  RC, Hu  SMK. The tiger mosquito in Shanghai. China J. 1935;23:299306.
  2. Usinger  RL. Entomological phases of the recent dengue epidemic in Honolulu. Public Health Rep. 1944;59:42330.
  3. Sprenger  D, Wuithiranyagool  T. The discovery and distribution of Aedes albopictus in Harris County, Texas. J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 1986;2:2179.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Reiter  P, Darsie  RF Jr. Aedes albopictus in Memphis, Tennessee (U.S.A.): an achievement of modern transportation? Mosq News. 1984;44:3969.
  5. Hawley  WA, Reiter  P, Copeland  RW, Pumpuni  CB, Craig  GB Jr. Aedes albopictus in North America: probable introduction in used tires from northern Asia. Science. 1987;236:11146. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Reiter  P, Sprenger  D. The used tire trade: a mechanism for the worldwide dispersal of container breeding mosquitoes. J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 1987;3:494501.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Craven  RB, Eliason  DA, Francy  DB, Reiter  P, Campos  EG, Jakob  WL, Importation of Aedes albopictus and other exotic mosquito species into the United States in used tires from Asia. J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 1988;4:13842.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Centers for Disease Control. Requirement of certification of used tire casings from Asia prior to entry into the United States. Fed Regist. 1987;52:44646.
  9. Shroyer  DA. Aedes albopictus and arboviruses: a concise review of the literature. J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 1986;2:4248.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Mitchell  CJ. Vector competence of North and South American strains of Aedes albopictus for certain arboviruses. J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 1991;7:44651.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Mitchell  CJ. Geographic spread of Aedes albopictus and potential for involvement in arbovirus cycles in the Mediterranean basin. J Vector Ecol. 1995;20:4458.
  12. Mitchell  CJ. The role of Aedes albopictus as an arbovirus vector. Proceedings of the Workshop on the Geographic Spread of Aedes albopictus in Europe and the Concern among Public Health Authorities; 1990 Dec 19-20; Rome, Italy. Parassitologia; 1995;37:109-13.
  13. Teutsch  SM. 1994. Considerations in planning a surveillance system. In: Teutsch SM, Churchill RE, editors. Principles and practice of public health surveillance. New York: Oxford University Press; 1994. p. 18-30.
  14. Dean  AG, Dean  JA, Coulombier  D, Brendel  KA, Smith  DC, Burton  AH, Epi Info, Version 6: a word processing, database, and statistics program for epidemiology on microcomputers. Atlanta (GA): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: 1994.
  15. Dohm  DJ, Logan  TM, Barth  JF, Turell  MJ. Laboratory transmission of Sindbis virus by Aedes albopictus, Ae. aegypti, and Culex pipiens (Diptera: Culicidae). J Med Entomol. 1995;32:81821.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Savage  HM, Smith  GC, Mitchell  CJ, McLean  RG, Meisch  MV. Vector competence of Aedes albopictus from Pine Bluff, Arkansas, for a St. Louis encephalitis virus strain isolated during the 1991 epidemic. J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 1994;10:5016.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Serufo  JC, Montes de Oca  H, Tavares  VA, Souza  AM, Rosa  RV, Jamal  MC, Isolation of dengue virus type 1 from larvae of Aedes albopictus in Campos Altos City, State of Minas Gerais, Brazil. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 1993;88:5034.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Hawley  WA. The biology of Aedes albopictus. J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 1988;4(Suppl. 1):140.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Francy  DB, Karabatsos  N, Wesson  DM, Moore  CG Jr, Lazuick  JS, Niebylski  ML, A new arbovirus from Aedes albopictus, an Asian mosquito established in the United States. Science. 1990;250:173840.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Mitchell  CJ, Smith  GC, Miller  BR. Vector competence of Aedes albopictus for a newly recognized Bunyavirus from mosquitoes collected in Potosi, Missouri. J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 1990;6:5237.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Mitchell  CJ, Smith  GC, Karabatdsos  N, Moore  CG, Francy  DB, Nasci  RS. Isolations of Potosi virus from mosquitoes collected in the United States, 1989-1994. J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 1996;12:17.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Harrison  BA, Mitchell  CJ, Apperson  CS, Smith  GC, Karabatsos  N, Engber  BR, Isolation of Potosi virus from Aedes albopictus in North Carolina. J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 1995;11:2259.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Mitchell  CJ, Niebylski  ML, Smith  GC, Karabatsos  N, Martin  D, Mutebi  J-P, Isolation of eastern equine encephalitis from Aedes albopictus
  24. Mitchell  CJ, Morris  CD, Smith  GC, Karabatsos  N, Vanlandingham  D, Cody  E. Arboviruses associated with mosquitoes from nine Florida counties during 1993. J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 1996;12:25562.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Sexton  DJ, Rollin  PE, Breitschwerdt  EB, Corey  GR, Myers  SA, Hegarty  BC, Brief report: severe multi-organ failure following Cache Valley virus infection. N Engl J Med. 1997;336:547.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. O'Meara  GF, Evans  LF Jr, Gettman  AD, Cuda  JP. Spread of J Med Entomol. 1995;32:55462.
  27. Womack  ML, Thuma  TS, Evans  BR.
  28. Nawrocki  SJ, Hawley  WA. Estima. J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 1987;3:3147.PubMedGoogle Scholar




Cite This Article

DOI: 10.3201/eid0303.970309

Table of Contents – Volume 3, Number 3—September 1997

EID Search Options
presentation_01 Advanced Article Search – Search articles by author and/or keyword.
presentation_01 Articles by Country Search – Search articles by the topic country.
presentation_01 Article Type Search – Search articles by article type and issue.



Please use the form below to submit correspondence to the authors or contact them at the following address:

Chester G. Moore, Ph.D., Division of Vector-Borne Infectious Diseases, National Center for Infectious Diseases, CDC, P.O. Box 2087, Fort Collins, CO 80522-2087, USA; fax: 970-221-6476

Send To

10000 character(s) remaining.


Page created: December 21, 2010
Page updated: December 21, 2010
Page reviewed: December 21, 2010
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.