On 6 June 2017, the World Health Organization (WHO) published updates to its ‘Essential Medicines List’ (EML). Read more here.

Eurosurveillance is on the updated list of the Directory of Open Access Journals and in the SHERPA/RoMEO database. Read more here.

Follow Eurosurveillance on Twitter: @Eurosurveillanc

In this issue

Home Eurosurveillance Edition  2016: Volume 21/ Issue 18 Article 2
Back to Table of Contents
Previous Download (pdf)

Eurosurveillance, Volume 21, Issue 18, 05 May 2016
Rapid communication
Di Luca, Severini, Toma, Boccolini, Romi, Remoli, Sabbatucci, Rizzo, Venturi, Rezza, and Fortuna: Experimental studies of susceptibility of Italian Aedes albopictus to Zika virus

+ Author affiliations

Citation style for this article: Di Luca M, Severini F, Toma L, Boccolini D, Romi R, Remoli ME, Sabbatucci M, Rizzo C, Venturi G, Rezza G, Fortuna C. Experimental studies of susceptibility of Italian Aedes albopictus to Zika virus. Euro Surveill. 2016;21(18):pii=30223. DOI:

Received:22 April 2016; Accepted:04 May 2016

Zika virus (ZIKV) is an emerging mosquito-borne virus (Flaviviridae family) isolated from different Aedes species in the past. In the recent outbreaks that occurred in Latin America, Aedes aegypti is believed to be the main vector. The isolation of ZIKV from this mosquito species in Malaysia [1], and early experimental studies [2,3] appear to confirm this hypothesis. Recent vector competence studies have also shown that the American Ae. albopictus exhibits similar transmission potential as the American Ae. aegypti [4].

Ae. albopictus is widespread in Mediterranean countries, in particular in Italy where it caused an outbreak of Chikungunya virus (CHIKV) (Togaviridae family, Alphavirus genus) in 2007 [5]. To assess the risk of ZIKV transmission, we evaluated the vector competence of an Italian Ae. albopictus population for the virus. Potential vertical (transovarial) transmission of ZIKV was also evaluated.

Experimental infection by membrane feeding technique

Oral infection was performed in a BSL-3 laboratory using a ZIKV strain of the Asian genotype (kindly provided by Dr Isabelle Leparc-Goffart of the French National Reference Centre for Arboviruses in Marseille​) isolated from a patient returning from French Polynesia in 2013 [6]. Ten-day-old mosquito females from an Italian Ae. albopictus population (collected in Scalea town, Calabria region, in the late summer of 2015) and from a long-established colony of Ae. aegypti (collected in Reynosa, Mexico, in 1998) were allowed to feed for 1 hour through a membrane feeding apparatus. The virus was diluted in rabbit blood (final virus concentration: 6.46 log10 plaque-forming units (PFU)/mL) and maintained at 37 °C by a warm water circulation system. After the blood meal, fully engorged females were transferred to cages and maintained on a 10% sucrose solution in a climatic chamber (26 ± 1 °C; 70% relative humidity; 14 h:10 h light/dark cycle) for 21 days. Ten mosquitoes from either species were individually processed at 0, 3, 4, 7, 11, 14, 18 and 21 days post infection (dpi). To evaluate viral infection, dissemination and transmission, body (head, thorax and abdomen), legs plus wings, and saliva were analysed, as previously described [7]. ZIKV titre was evaluated by quantitative reverse transcription PCR (qRT-PCR). Specific primers ZIKV 1086 and ZIKV 1162c were used, with 5-FAM as the reporter dye for the probe (ZIKV 1107-FAM) [8]. Crossing point values were compared with a standard curve obtained from 10-fold serial dilutions of virus stock of known concentration [8-10].

Mosquito bodies were analysed in order to evaluate the infection rate (IR), calculated as the number of ZIKV-positive bodies with respect to the total number of fed females. Legs plus wings were tested to assess the dissemination rate (DR), calculated as the number of the specimens with ZIKV-positive legs plus wings among the number of specimens with ZIKV-positive bodies. The saliva of the potentially infected females was processed to assess the transmission rate (TR), defined as the number of mosquitoes with ZIKV-positive saliva among the number of specimens with ZIKV-positive bodies [7]. The potential vector competence was expressed as population transmission rate (PTR), calculated as the number of specimens with ZIKV-positive saliva with respect to the total number of fed mosquitoes [9,11].

Vector competence analysis

Mean viral titres and IR, DR, and TR values are shown in Figures 1 and 2.

Figure 1

Mean Zika virus titres in different body parts of Aedes albopictus and Ae. aegypti colonies, at different times post infection, Italy, 2016


PFU: plaque-forming units.

Figure 2

Infection, dissemination and transmission rates in Aedes albopictus and Ae. aegypti colonies, at different times post infection with Zika virus, Italy, 2016


Infection rate: number of positive bodies/number of tested fed females; dissemination rate: number of positive legs plus wings/number of positive bodies; transmission rate: number of positive saliva/number of positive bodies.

All of the Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus bodies analysed immediately after the infectious blood meal (day 0) showed positive results, with mean viral titres of 3.85 ± 0.44 log10 PFU/mL and 3.57 ± 0.28 log10 PFU/mL, respectively, confirming the ingestion of infectious viral particles. The viral titres detected in the bodies increased gradually in both mosquito colonies, reaching 5.18 ± 0.16 log10 PFU/mL in Ae. aegypti and 4.88 ± 0.21 log10 PFU/mL in Ae. albopictus at 18 and 14 dpi (Figure 1A). As expected, differences in IR values between the two species were observed (Figure 2A). In particular, Ae. albopictus showed lower IR values than Ae. aegypti at all collection times. Whereas an IR of 40% was already detected at 3 dpi for Ae. aegypti, infected Ae. albopictus specimens were observed starting from 7 dpi, with an IR value of 20%. Cumulative IR values were 43% for Ae. aegypti and 10% for Ae. albopictus (Table).


Cumulative infection, dissemination, transmission and population transmission rates of Aedes albopictus and Ae. aegypti experimentally infected with Zika virus, Italy, 2016

Aedes aegypti Aedes albopictus
Infection rate 43% 10%
Dissemination rate 73% 29%
Transmission rate 60% 29%
Population transmission rate 26% 3%

Infection rate: number of positive bodies/number of tested fed females; dissemination rate: number of positive legs plus wings/number of positive bodies; transmission rate: number of positive saliva/number of positive bodies; population transmission rate: number of positive saliva/number of tested fed females.

Disseminated infection was observed in Ae. aegypti starting from 3 dpi, with a mean viral titre of 2.74 ± 0.06 log10 PFU/mL (DR 50%), while in Ae. albopictus, the presence of the virus in legs and wings was detected from 11 dpi, with a lower viral titre (1.62 log10 PFU/mL) and an equal value of DR (50%) (Figures 1B and 2B). Starting from 4 dpi, the saliva of Ae. aegypti showed ZIKV particles (titre of 1.99 log10 PFU/mL and TR of 17%) and remained positive throughout all collection times. In particular, the viral titres increased reaching the highest levels after 11 dpi (2.64 ± 0.50 log10 PFU/mL). In contrast, virus was detected in the saliva of Ae. albopictus at 11 and 14 dpi, with TR values of 50% at both collection points, showing a longer extrinsic incubation period (EIP). Cumulative DR and TR values were 73% and 60% for Ae. aegypti and 29% and 29% for Ae. albopictus. Finally, PTR values were 26% for Ae. aegypti and 3% for Ae. albopictus (Table).

After the infectious blood meal, 40 to 50 engorged mosquitoes from each species were kept separate in different cages, under the same laboratory conditions as the ones analysed above, and were allowed to lay eggs (first gonotrophic cycle). Two weeks after the infectious blood meal, a second uninfected blood meal was provided to obtain a second gonotrophic cycle. Pools of 15 to 30 specimens (males and females) from the first and second gonotrophic cycles of both species were processed by qRT-PCR and were negative for ZIKV.


Little is known on ZIKV despite its significant epidemic potential [12]. The introduction and dissemination of this previously neglected flavivirus in Latin America, raised concern in temperate climate countries with established Ae. albopictus populations [3]. In light of the spread of this mosquito species in Italy, proven vector in the 2007 outbreak of CHIK [5], it is particularly important to evaluate its vector competence for ZIKV and to assess the potential risk transmission in Italy as well as in other Mediterranean countries. Our study shows that the Italian Ae. albopictus population is susceptible to ZIKV, allowing viral replication and dissemination also in the salivary glands. The short persistence of the virus in the mosquito’s saliva, the PTR value of 3% and the long EIP indicate a low transmission efficiency compared with that of Ae. aegypti. In addition, it should be noted that despite the use of a long-established mosquito colony, not representative of a wild population, the vector competence of Ae. aegypti for ZIKV was significant in our experiment. A recent modelling study [13] that was based on parameters of susceptibility to infection of the Ae. albopictus derived from mosquito populations from the United States and Singapore [4,14], also estimated a low risk of sustained autochthonous transmission of ZIKV in northern Italy. Our results are similar to the above results on American Ae. albopictus and substantially confirm the low epidemic potential of ZIKV in Italy. However, the epidemic potential and the capacity to cause long chains of transmission depends on a series of factors such as the abundance of the mosquito population, the density of the human population, feeding host preferences, biting rates and environmental conditions. High mosquito density, day-biting activity, opportunistic feeding behaviour and climatic and environmental adaptability can affect the efficiency of Ae. albopictus as a vector, favouring its primary role in epidemics, also in the presence of a limited vector competence [15].

Our results also have important public health implications for preparedness. In fact, the extended EIP, which is consistent with the results of studies using American Ae. albopictus mosquitoes [4], would allow the implementation of mosquito control measures that are likely to be more efficient than those implemented in areas infested by the tropical mosquito Ae. aegypti. Moreover, our analysis of offspring of both species from the first and second gonotrophic cycle showed no evidence of transovarial transmission of ZIKV; this finding adds knowledge on the bionomics of this vector and may aid the optimisation of vector control management. Finally, ZIKV appears to be less well adapted to the Italian Ae. albopictus than the A226V variant of CHIKV (data not shown), which caused more than 250 cases in Italy after a single introduction from Kerala, India [5,16].

In conclusion, this experimentally infected Italian Ae. albopictus population appeared to be a competent vector for ZIKV, albeit less efficient than the primary vector Ae. aegypti. However, we should not forget the risk posed by CHIKV and dengue virus that remains high in southern European countries, where small outbreaks and clusters of autochthonous cases have been already documented [17,18].


We would like to acknowledge Dr Raniero Guerra (MoH) for fruitful discussion.

Conflict of interest

None declared.

Authors’ contributions

DLM, SF, TL, BD, RME, SM, VG and FC performed the experiments; DLM, SF, TL, BD, VG and FC analysed the data; DLM, SF, TL, BD, VG, RR, RC, RG and FC wrote the manuscript.


  1. Marchette NJ, Garcia R, Rudnick A. Isolation of Zika virus from Aedes aegypti mosquitoes in Malaysia.Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1969;18(3):411-5.PMID: 4976739

  2. Boorman JP, Porterfield JS. A simple technique for infection of mosquitoes with viruses; transmission of Zika virus.Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1956;50(3):238-42. DOI: 10.1016/0035-9203(56)90029-3 PMID: 13337908

  3. Cornet M, Robin Y, Adam C, Valade M, Calvo MA. Transmission expérimentale comparée du virus amaril et du virus Zika chez Aedes aegypti. [Comparative experimental transmission of yellow fever virus and of Zika virus in Aedes aegypti]. Cah. O.R.S.T.O.M. ser. Ent. med et Parasitol. 1979;17:47-53. French.

  4. Chouin-Carneiro T, Vega-Rua A, Vazeille M, Yebakima A, Girod R, Goindin D,  et al.  Differential Susceptibilities of Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus from the Americas to Zika Virus. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10(3):e0004543. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004543 PMID: 26938868

  5. Rezza G, Nicoletti L, Angelini R, Romi R, Finarelli AC, Panning M,  et al.  Infection with chikungunya virus in Italy: an outbreak in a temperate region. Lancet. 2007;370(9602):1840-6. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61779-6 PMID: 18061059

  6. Baronti C, Piorkowski G, Charrel RN, Boubis L, Leparc-Goffart I, de Lamballerie X. Complete coding sequence of zika virus from a French polynesia outbreak in 2013.Genome Announc. 2014;2(3):e00500-14. DOI: 10.1128/genomeA.00500-14 PMID: 24903869

  7. Fortuna C, Remoli ME, Di Luca M, Severini F, Toma L, Benedetti E,  et al.  Experimental studies on comparison of the vector competence of four Italian Culex pipiens populations for West Nile virus. Parasit Vectors. 2015;8(1):463. DOI: 10.1186/s13071-015-1067-z PMID: 26383834

  8. Lanciotti RS, Kosoy OL, Laven JJ, Velez JO, Lambert AJ, Johnson AJ,  et al.  Genetic and serologic properties of Zika virus associated with an epidemic, Yap State, Micronesia, 2007. Emerg Infect Dis. 2008;14(8):1232-9. DOI: 10.3201/eid1408.080287 PMID: 18680646

  9. Richards SL, Mores CN, Lord CC, Tabachnick WJ. Impact of extrinsic incubation temperature and virus exposure on vector competence of Culex pipiens quinquefasciatus Say (Diptera: Culicidae) for West Nile virus.Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2007;7(4):629-36. DOI: 10.1089/vbz.2007.0101 PMID: 18021028

  10. Lanciotti RS, Kerst AJ, Nasci RS, Godsey MS, Mitchell CJ, Savage HM,  et al.  Rapid detection of west nile virus from human clinical specimens, field-collected mosquitoes, and avian samples by a TaqMan reverse transcriptase-PCR assay. J Clin Microbiol. 2000;38(11):4066-71.PMID: 11060069

  11. Richards SL, Anderson SL, Lord CC, Smartt CT, Tabachnick WJ. Relationships between infection, dissemination, and transmission of West Nile virus RNA in Culex pipiens quinquefasciatus (Diptera: Culicidae).J Med Entomol. 2012;49(1):132-42. DOI: 10.1603/ME10280 PMID: 22308781

  12. Powers AM. Overview of emerging arboviruses.Future Virol. 2009;4(4):391-401. DOI: 10.2217/fvl.09.19

  13. Guzzetta G, Poletti P, Montarsi F, Baldacchino F, Capelli G, Rizzoli A,  et al.  Assessing the potential risk of Zika virus epidemics in temperate areas with established Aedes albopictus populations. Euro Surveill. 2016;21(15):30199. DOI: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2016.21.15.30199 PMID: 27104366

  14. Wong PS, Li MZ, Chong CS, Ng LC, Tan CH. Aedes (Stegomyia) albopictus (Skuse): a potential vector of Zika virus in Singapore.PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2013;7(8):e2348. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0002348 PMID: 23936579

  15. Bonizzoni M, Gasperi G, Chen X, James AA. The invasive mosquito species Aedes albopictus: current knowledge and future perspectives.Trends Parasitol. 2013;29(9):460-8. DOI: 10.1016/ PMID: 23916878

  16. Talbalaghi A, Moutailler S, Vazeille M, Failloux AB. Are Aedes albopictus or other mosquito species from northern Italy competent to sustain new arboviral outbreaks?Med Vet Entomol. 2010;24(1):83-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2915.2009.00853.x PMID: 20377735

  17. Grandadam M, Caro V, Plumet S, Thiberge JM, Souarès Y, Failloux AB,  et al.  Chikungunya virus, southeastern France. Emerg Infect Dis. 2011;17(5):910-3. DOI: 10.3201/eid1705.101873 PMID: 21529410

  18. Marchand E, Prat C, Jeannin C, Lafont E, Bergmann T, Flusin O,  et al.  Autochthonous case of dengue in France, October 2013. Euro Surveill. 2013;18(50):20661. DOI: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES2013.18.50.20661 PMID: 24342514

Back to Table of Contents
Previous Download (pdf)

The publisher’s policy on data collection and use of cookies.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by authors contributing to Eurosurveillance do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) or the editorial team or the institutions with which the authors are affiliated. Neither ECDC nor any person acting on behalf of ECDC is responsible for the use that might be made of the information in this journal. The information provided on the Eurosurveillance site is designed to support, not replace, the relationship that exists between a patient/site visitor and his/her physician. Our website does not host any form of commercial advertisement. Except where otherwise stated, all manuscripts published after 1 January 2016 will be published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence. You are free to share and adapt the material, but you must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the licence, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.

Eurosurveillance [ISSN] - ©2007-2016. All rights reserved

This website is certified by Health On the Net Foundation. Click to verify. This site complies with the HONcode standard for trustworthy health information:
verify here.