Vector Burden of Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus Populations in Residential Versus Non-Residential Areas of the Urban Environment in Tapachula, Chiapas, Southeastern Mexico
Authors:
- José Genaro Ordóñez-GonzálezJOJosé Genaro Ordóñez-González
- Kenia Mayela Valdez-DelgadoKenia Mayela Valdez-Delgado
- Farah Zamira Vera-MaloofFVFarah Zamira Vera-Maloof
- Luis Alberto Cisneros-VázquezLCLuis Alberto Cisneros-Vázquez
- David A. Moo-LlanesDavid A. Moo-Llanes
- Jana Celina Ríos-DelgadoJRJana Celina Ríos-Delgado
- Rosa María Sánchez-CasasRSRosa María Sánchez-Casas
- Ildefonso Fernández-SalasIFIldefonso Fernández-Salas
- Cuauhtémoc Villarreal-TreviñoCVCuauhtémoc Villarreal-Treviño
Preprint
- 11 December 2025
- preprint
- Published by MDPI AG in Preprints.org
Abstract
Dengue outbreaks highlight the need to quantify how environments sustain populations of the mosquito vectors Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus. Most control activities focus on households, while non-residential premises receive little attention. We conducted a cross-sectional ovitraps survey in August 2025 in Tapachula, Chiapas, Mexico, deploying 593 ovitraps: 297 in residential neighborhoods and 293 in non-residential sites. We collected 42,758 eggs; 61.5% (n = 26,316) came from residential areas and 38.5% (n = 16,442) from non-residential areas. Ovitrap positivity was higher in residential versus in non-residential areas (92.6% vs. 87.0%; p = 0.025), and the mean number of eggs per ovitrap (88.6 ± 5.1 vs. 56.1 ± 3.3 eggs; p < 0.001), yielding 298.0 vs. 175.3 eggs/ha, respectively. From a subsample of 16,965 eggs, 7,543 adults emerged (44.5%), dominated by Ae. aegypti in residential areas (83.3%) and Ae. albopictus in non-residential areas (80.0%). Vector burden differed by species: Ae. aegypti densities were higher in residential areas (51.0 vs. 4.5 adults/ha), whereas Ae. albopictus densities were higher in non-residential sites (18.2 vs. 10.2 adults/ha). These patterns show that both residential and non-residential premises are important sources of dengue vectors and should be included in integrated surveillance and control strategies.Keywords
All Related Versions
This publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- Ovitrap surveillance of dengue vector mosquitoes in Bandung City, West Java Province, IndonesiaPLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, 2021
- Insecticide resistance in Aedes aegypti from Tapachula, Mexico: Spatial variation and response to historical insecticide usePLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, 2021
- Permethrin Resistance Status and Associated Mechanisms inAedes albopictus(Diptera: Culicidae) From Chiapas, MexicoJournal of Medical Entomology, 2021
- Parallel evolution of vgsc mutations at domains IS6, IIS6 and IIIS6 in pyrethroid resistant Aedes aegypti from MexicoScientific Reports, 2018
- Is Dengue Vector Control Deficient in Effectiveness or Evidence?: Systematic Review and Meta-analysisPLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, 2016
- Climate change influences on global distributions of dengue and chikungunya virus vectorsPhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2015
- Vacant Lots: Productive Sites forAedes(Stegomyia)aegypti(Diptera: Culicidae) in Mérida City, MéxicoJournal of Medical Entomology, 2014
- Relevance of differentiating between residential and non-residential premises for surveillance and control of Aedes aegypti in Rio de Janeiro, BrazilActa Tropica, 2010
- Aedes aegypti(Diptera: Culicidae) production from non-residential sites in the Amazonian city of Iquitos, PeruPathogens and Global Health, 2006
- Risk factors for Plasmodium vivax infection in the Lacandon forest, southern MexicoEpidemiology and Infection, 1999