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 8, Number 12—December 2002
Research

Vector Competence of California Mosquitoes for West Nile virus

Laura B. Goddard*Comments to Author , Amy E. Roth*, William K. Reisen*, and Thomas W. Scott*
Author affiliations: *University of California, Davis, California, USA;

Main Article

Table 3

Infection and transmission rates for California mosquito species orally infected with 104.9±0.1 PFU/mL of West Nile virus (WNV)

Species Source by county Day transmission attempted No. tested Infection ratea Transmission rateb
Culex tarsalis Yolo 7 25 8 0
14 11 36 82
Kern 7 10 30 10
14 45 7 0
Riverside 7 40 13 0
14 10 0 0
Cx. pipiens quinquefasciatus Kern 7 50 58 0
14 50 10 0
Riverside 7 50 0 0
14 55 0 0
Cx. p. pipiens Shasta 7 25 36 0
14 35 23 60
Cx. stigmatosoma San Bernardino 14 29 69 34
Cx. erythrothorax Orange 7 47 15 0
Riverside 7 12 67 0
14 20 65 30
Ochlerotatus dorsalis San Luis Obispo 7 29 3 0
14 25 4 4
Oc. melanimon Kern 7 50 0 0
14 60 3 2
Oc. sierrensis Lake 7 25 4 0
14 30 0 0

aPercent of mosquito bodies positive for WNV.
bPercent of transmission attempts positive for WNV.

Main Article

Page created: July 19, 2010
Page updated: July 19, 2010
Page reviewed: July 19, 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.
file_external