Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 64 references

Multistage spatial model for informing release of Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes as disease control

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that Wolbachia establishment in a two-dimensional mosquito population is governed by a spatial critical-bubble threshold, with infection waves propagating only beyond it.

desk verdict A solid, genuinely useful extension of the authors' spatial Wolbachia work; the new 8-PDE model supports qualitative strategy rankings, but the single-Gaussian-diffusion assumption deserves a robustness check before the adult-over-aquatic recommendation is taken as robust. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.18792 v1 pith:7TH63HNR submitted 2024-11-27 q-bio.PE

Zhuolin Qu , Tong Wu This is my paper · ORCID
classification q-bio.PE MSC 92D2592D3035K57
keywords WolbachiaAedesaegyptireaction-diffusionmodelcriticalbubblepopulationreplacementreleasestrategyseasonality
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that whether a local release of Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes establishes a self-sustaining infection is governed by a spatial threshold it calls the critical bubble: a bubble-shaped profile of infection fraction that must be exceeded near the release center. Above that bubble the infection spreads as a traveling wave through the two-dimensional landscape; below it the infection collapses. The paper builds this conclusion from an eight-equation reaction-diffusion model that tracks eggs, larvae and pupae, males, and females for infected and uninfected mosquitoes, with adult dispersal modeled as diffusion. It then uses the model to rank release strategies, concluding that adult-stage pre-release mitigation, dry-region release, and release just before the wet season each lower the required release number, while reducing breeding sites can raise it.

What carries the argument

The machinery is an 8-PDE reaction-diffusion system with state variables for eggs, larvae and pupae, males, and females, each split into uninfected and Wolbachia-infected cohorts. Maternal transmission and cytoplasmic incompatibility couple the cohorts: uninfected females mating with infected males produce no viable offspring, while infected females pass the infection to a fraction vw of their eggs. Adult males and females move by isotropic diffusion with coefficient D = 200 $m^{2}$/day calibrated to mark-release-recapture data; aquatic stages do not move. The critical bubble is computed by a root-finding functional J(c) that detects, for each candidate initial release level c, whether the infection fraction at the release center rises to the endemic steady state, collapses to zero, or passes through a stagnant bifurcation plateau. That functional pins the threshold release profile.

What would settle it

A field measurement of the daily mosquito displacement distribution at a candidate release site would test the Gaussian-equal-diffusion kernel; if the measured kernel is fat-tailed or the sexes differ in mean distance, the predicted critical bubble and wave speed would not match the model. A controlled release just above the predicted 60%-at-center threshold in a site with larval carrying capacity near one per square meter should show the infection fraction rising to the endemic steady state; if it decays instead, the critical-bubble claim is contradicted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that in a spatially explicit, life-stage-resolved model of Aedes aegypti with wMel Wolbachia, the invasion threshold is not a single infection fraction but a spatially varying critical bubble. At baseline parameterization the model finds a threshold of about 60% infection at the release center, with the required fraction falling with distance from the release center. Releasing beyond the bubble produces a self-sustaining infection that propagates outward as a wave, while releasing below it lets the infection die out. The paper also claims that this model changes practical guidance: adult-stage pre-release mitigation reduces the threshold release number much more than aquatic-stage mitigation, reducing breeding sites can increase the threshold, releases in dry areas lower the threshold (though waves may stall at dry-wet interfaces), and release timing just before the wet season minimizes the threshold.

Load-bearing premise

The model assumes adult mosquitoes spread by simple random diffusion with the same average step size for males and females, a step size estimated from marked mosquitoes in one Australian town; if real movement is long-distance-jumpy or differs between sexes, the critical bubble and strategy advice could change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A local release whose infection fraction sits below the critical bubble at the release center dies out even if the same fraction would persist in a spatially uniform model; release programs should be designed around the bubble profile, not a single threshold fraction.
  • Pre-release spraying that removes adult mosquitoes lowers the required release number substantially more than larviciding, with a consistent optimal release radius near 200 meters under baseline parameters.
  • Habitat modification that removes breeding sites and lowers larval carrying capacity can raise the threshold for Wolbachia establishment, in some parameter ranges making establishment essentially unachievable.
  • Releasing in the drier side of a dry-wet landscape lowers the release threshold, but the infection wave can slow or stop at the interface when carrying capacity contrast is large, for instance at a 1:5 ratio.
  • Seasonal timing matters: releasing just before the wet season, when wild mosquito abundance is low, minimizes the required release threshold in both tropical case-study sites.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper, measuring the actual daily displacement distribution at a candidate release site would directly test the Gaussian-equal-diffusion assumption; if the kernel is fat-tailed or males and females differ in flight distance, the critical bubble and strategy rankings could shift.
  • Beyond the paper, the model implies a potential tension between suppression and replacement strategies: habitat modifications that reduce wild mosquito abundance by removing breeding sites may make Wolbachia establishment harder, so programs should fix their control objective before choosing pre-release actions.
  • Beyond the paper, because maternal transmission rate dominates every threshold and wave metric, field monitoring that detects even small reductions in transmission below 100% would materially change release requirements; this is a prioritized parameter to measure.
  • Beyond the paper, the same modeling framework could be parameterized for other Wolbachia strains or for Anopheles mosquitoes, where fitness costs and cytoplasmic incompatibility strength differ, to check whether the qualitative rankings of release strategies persist.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops an 8-component reaction-diffusion PDE model for Wolbachia spread in Aedes aegypti, tracking eggs, larvae/pupae, males, and females in infected and uninfected cohorts, with diffusion acting on adult stages only. The authors numerically identify a 'critical bubble'—the threshold release profile for self-sustaining infection—and then use the model to compare pre-release mitigation strategies (adult vs aquatic), habitat modification, release in dry vs wet regions, and seasonal timing. The manuscript is carefully parameterized from laboratory and field data and includes a global sensitivity analysis via LHS/PRCC, as well as a comparison with the earlier 2-PDE model of the authors.

Significance. The paper's contribution is a spatially explicit, stage-structured model that bridges ODE threshold theory and 2-D release strategies for Wolbachia-based population replacement. If the results are robust, the findings on adult-targeting mitigation and seasonal timing could inform actual release programs. Strengths include transparent parameter tables, a sensitivity analysis, and explicit acknowledgment of modeling limitations. However, the central quantitative claims rest on a heuristic threshold definition whose convergence is not documented, and on a single mark-release-recapture study for the diffusion coefficient under a Gaussian assumption—a parameter that the paper's own sensitivity analysis shows to be highly influential.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 2.2.2 (Eqs. 3-4)] The threshold 'critical bubble' is identified by the root-finding function J(c) defined in Eq. (3), but the text states that 'J(c)=0 has no exact root' and that the critical bubble is determined from the 'plateau in the time series of Fig 2C around t=1000'. This is a heuristic; the manuscript does not specify the plateau-detection tolerance, the final time T, or the time step Δt used in the reported thresholds, nor does it provide a convergence study. Because all subsequent results (e.g., the threshold release numbers X≈6.6/m² in Section 3.3 and the mitigation comparisons in Fig. 5) are computed relative to this c*, an ill-defined threshold could alter the qualitative rankings. Please provide a precise algorithmic definition, a convergence check in T and Δt, and an uncertainty estimate for c*.
  2. [Section 5.2 and Section 3.2.2] The baseline diffusion coefficient D=200 m²/day is derived from one mark-release-recapture study (Pentland) via the Gaussian mean-absolute-deviation relation E1=√(πD)=25, and the model assumes isotropic Gaussian diffusion with equal D for both sexes and all adult life stages. This assumption is load-bearing: Fig. 4C,E shows that D dominates the bubble and wave widths, and Section 3.2.2 explicitly attributes the ranking 'adult-stage mitigation better than aquatic-stage mitigation' to 'spatial diffusion dynamics among adults'. The Discussion admits that fat-tailed kernels and sex-dependent dispersal can change wave velocity, but no alternative-kernel or alternative-D simulations are presented. The paper should test whether the strategy rankings in Sections 3.2-3.4 survive (i) non-Gaussian kernels, (ii) sex-specific diffusion coefficients, and (iii) D values near the ends of the Table 1 range (100 and 300 m²/day).
  3. [Table 1 vs. Table B.1] Table 1 states the diffusion coefficient range as 100-300 m²/day, but the sensitivity analysis in Table B.1 restricts D to 150-250 m²/day (a ±25% band around the baseline). Since the global SA identifies D as a dominant parameter for the width of the critical bubble and the infection wave, the PRCC results do not cover the full stated uncertainty. The analysis should be repeated over the full range (or the narrower range must be justified), and the qualitative conclusions should be checked for robustness.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Table 2] The fitted rainfall functions contain ambiguous notation, e.g., '0.03((1.47 sin(2π(t/365 + 0.17)) + 1.47)2.54 + 1)' and '−0.34 sin(2π1.88(t/365 + 0.08)) + 25.93'; please clarify the intended exponents and frequencies (the superscript '2.54' appears to be lost).
  2. [Section 2.3] The statement that all codes will be made available on GitHub upon acceptance is helpful, but for a numerical study, providing the code at the time of review would greatly aid verification of the threshold algorithm and the reported results.
  3. [Section 2.3] The 2-D simulation setup, including domain size, grid spacing, and boundary condition implementation, is not fully described; specifying these would improve reproducibility.
  4. [Fig 5] The heatmaps in panels A, D, E, G, and H are difficult to read quantitatively; consider adding contour labels or a table of threshold release numbers for the headline scenarios.
  5. [Section 5.2] The derivation of D from the Cairns weekly MDT values uses E_Δt = √(πD Δt) but the text should explicitly state that Δt is measured in days; additionally, the choice to prefer the Pentland daily estimate over the Cairns estimates (D≈120-570) could use a brief justification beyond 'daily dispersal gives a more reliable characterization'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: thresholds are computed numerically from PDE dynamics, and ODE-based reference states are analytic inputs rather than fitted targets.

full rationale

The paper's central claims—the critical bubble threshold, the dependency of bubble/wave geometry on diffusion, the relative efficacy of adult versus aquatic pre-release mitigation, dry/wet release behavior, and optimal release timing—are all emergent outputs of numerical simulations of the PDE system (1), with baseline parameters taken from external laboratory and field studies (Table 1). The threshold identification algorithm (Eq. 3) iterates on the initial release level c using the PDE time series, classifying outcomes by whether the infected-female fraction approaches zero or the ODE endemic steady state; it does not fit the critical bubble to any pre-specified target bubble. The ODE quantities R0 (Eq. 2) and pEE/pODE (Appendix B) are analytic formulas from the authors' prior ODE models [22, 34], cited with stated assumptions, and serve only as reference levels for classifying infection persistence and defining QOI metrics such as threshold width and wave width. They do not encode the spatially dependent threshold profile, so the sensitivity findings and strategy rankings are not forced by those formulas. The dry-region threshold scaling with carrying capacity follows structurally from the model's equilibrium abundance being proportional to Kl, but this is a model consequence, not a fitted prediction. The acknowledged limitation concerning Gaussian dispersal kernels is a robustness caveat, not evidence of circularity. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained with respect to its stated spatial predictions.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central threshold and strategy results rest on the parameterization and modeling choices listed. Most baseline rates come from external lab and field studies, but diffusion, seasonal rescaling, and carrying capacity involve assumptions or calibrations made in this paper. The critical bubble determination also depends on a numerical heuristic rather than a proof.

free parameters (4)
  • D, adult mosquito diffusion coefficient = 200 m2/day (range 100-300)
    Calibrated in Section 5.2 by equating the Gaussian kernel mean absolute deviation to MDT = 25 m/day from the Pentland mark-release-recapture study; weekly MDT gives 160, Cairns estimates range 120-570. This parameter strongly shapes the critical bubble and wave width in sensitivity analysis.
  • Seasonal rescaling constants for temperature-dependent traits = phi_u x0.5, phi_w x0.47, delta x1.41, psi x0.75, mu_eu x4.47, mu_ew x9.40, mu_l x1.35, mu_fu x1.59, mu_fw x1.76, mu_mu…
    Table 3: literature temperature functions are multiplied by constants so that at 26 C they reproduce Table 1 baselines. These hand-chosen scalings determine the seasonality results in Section 3.4.
  • Fitted climate curve coefficients (Cairns and Yogyakarta) = See Table 2 (sine and exponent functions for temperature, rainfall, carrying capacity)
    Nonlinear least squares (fminsearch) fit to NOAA and CCKP monthly climate data; these time-dependent forcing functions drive the seasonal release-timing results.
  • Larval carrying capacity Kl baseline = 1 /m2 (assumed)
    Table 1 lists Kl as 'Assumed'. Absolute release numbers such as X about 6.6/m2 scale with this value; dry/wet scenarios use ratios, but the reported absolute threshold density depends on this choice.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Bistability of the nonspatial ODE system with an unstable threshold equilibrium
    Section 2.2.1 invokes prior ODE analyses [22] and uses endemic steady state pEE from [34, Eq. (9)] to define the PDE threshold conditions; the PDE is assumed to inherit a unique threshold separatrix.
  • domain assumption Gaussian diffusion with equal, constant male and female coefficients
    Section 2.1 and 5.2; diffusion terms D1-D4 with equal baseline values are modeled as heat kernels, with no fat tails or sex or environment dependence.
  • domain assumption No Wolbachia effect on juvenile development and survival (delta, psi, mu_l identical across infection status)
    Section 2.1 states equal progression rates for infected and uninfected cohorts based on [4]; this suppresses life-stage fitness costs at juvenile stages.
  • domain assumption Perfect maternal transmission and complete cytoplasmic incompatibility at baseline (vw = 1)
    Table 1 and Section 5.1; sensitivity analysis still samples vw in 0.89 to 1, and Fig 4 shows vw dominates all thresholds, so this baseline choice is consequential.
  • domain assumption Density dependence acts only on larvae and pupae hatching via the logistic term (1 - (Lu+Lw)/Kl)
    Equation (1); eggs and adults are unregulated except through juvenile carrying capacity; habitat modification is modeled only by changing Kl.
  • ad hoc to paper The numerical root-finding J(c) = 0 and plateau detection identify the true critical bubble
    Section 2.2.2 states J(c) = 0 has no exact root and the bubble is inferred from the stagnant transition phase; this is a numerical heuristic, not a proven characterization.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Multistage spatial model for informing release of Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes as disease control." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7TH63HNR

@misc{pith2026241118792,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Multistage spatial model for informing release of Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes as disease control},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7TH63HNR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.18792}
}
read the original abstract

Wolbachia is a naturally occurring bacterium that can infect Aedes mosquitoes and reduce the transmission of mosquito-borne diseases, including dengue fever, Zika, and chikungunya. Field trials have been conducted worldwide to suppress local epidemics. We introduce a novel partial differential equation model to simulate the spread of Wolbachia infection in mosquito populations. Our model incorporates the intricate Wolbachia maternal transmission cycle and detailed mosquito life stages, while also accounting for the spatial heterogeneity induced by mosquito dispersion across a two-dimensional domain. Prior modeling studies and field data indicate that a critical threshold of Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes is necessary for infection to persist among the mosquito population. Through our spatial model, we identify a threshold condition, termed the ``critical bubble'', for having a self-sustainable Wolbachia infection in the field. When releasing beyond this threshold, the model predicts a spatial wave of Wolbachia infection. We further quantify how this threshold and infection wave velocity depend on the diffusion process and other parameters. We numerically study various intervention scenarios to inform efficient Wolbachia release strategies. Our findings suggest that: (1) integrating Wolbachia release with pre-release mitigations targeting the adult mosquitoes, rather than the aquatic stages, better reduces the threshold for Wolbachia establishment; Habitats modification before the release may increase the threshold; (2) releases in the dry regions lower the threshold, though the infection waves may slow down or stall at the dry-wet interfaces due to the difference in carrying capacities; and (3) initiating releases just before the wet season further reduces the release threshold.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.18792 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Flow diagram for the Wolbachia-maternal transmission routes among mosquitoes, including the mating process between males and females (dashed arrows), females reproduction of eggs (dash-dotted arrows), and mosquito transitions through different life stages and deaths (solid arrows). Maternal transmission depends on the infection status of the parental male and female mosquitoes. Uninfected females (Fu) produce only u… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Capturing the threshold for Wolbachia establishment. (A) The infection is established when a step-shaped initial release is above the threshold level. (B) The infection collapses when the release level is below the threshold level. (C) The time series of the infection fraction at the release center, (x, y) = (0, 0), for simulations in panels A and B, demonstrating the bifurcating dynamics of the system. 2.2.2 Captur… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Threshold condition for sustainable Wolbachia releases. (A) Critical bubble, plotted as the fraction of infection in female mosquitoes, in a two-dimensional spatial field with the release center at (x, y) = (0, 0). (B) Comparison of the critical bubble (cross-sectional view from panel A) with the threshold identified using the 2-PDE model in [23] and the current model with a one-dimensional spatial field. For biolog… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Global sensitivity analysis using PRCC on measurements of critical bubble profile and Wolbachia infection wave. QOI = quantity of interest. The colors of the bars indicate the categories of parameters, as shown in the legend, and a dummy parameter is included as a null…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Impact of pre-release mitigation on threshold release number for Wolbachia establishment. (A)–(C) Mitigation by removing 80% of adult mosquitoes (males and females): (A) Heatmap showing release number as a function of mitigation radius and Wolbachia release radius. (B)…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Simulations of releasing infections in dry vs. wet regions. The dry-wet carrying capacity ratio is 1 : 2.5. (A, B, C): release in the dry region, using threshold release level (X ≈ 6.6/m2 for both females and males) at point (0,0) with radius 100. (D, E): release in th…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Impact of seasonality on Wolbachia population replacement threshold. Top row: seasonal profiles for Cairns, Australia (left) and Yogyakarta, Indonesia (right). Bottom row: Given the climate profile above, Wolbachia threshold when being deployed at different times of th…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Fitted seasonal rainfall and temperature curves for Cairns, Australia (left) and Yogyakarta, Indonesia (right). The corresponding fitted functions are provided in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Temperature-dependent mosquito life traits. (A) Female fitness: lifespan in days (1/µfu) and number of eggs reproduced per female (ϕu/µfu). (B) Egg survivorship: proportion of eggs that eclose ( δ δ+µeu ), and proportion of eggs surviving to adulthood ( δψ (δ+µeu)(ψ+µl…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 60 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Alternative Strategies for Mosquito-Borne Arbovirus Control

    Achee NL, Grieco JP, Vatandoost H, Seixas G, Pinto J, Ching-NG L, et al. Alternative Strategies for Mosquito-Borne Arbovirus Control. PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases. 2019;13(1):e0006822. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0006822

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0006822 2019

  2. [2]

    Eradication of Culex Pipiens Fatigans through Cytoplasmic Incompatibility

    Laven H. Eradication of Culex Pipiens Fatigans through Cytoplasmic Incompatibility. Nature. 1967;216(5113):383–384. doi:10.1038/216383a0

    work page doi:10.1038/216383a0 1967

  3. [3]

    Stable Introduction of a Life-Shortening Wolbachia Infection into the Mosquito Aedes Aegypti

    McMeniman CJ, Lane R V, Cass BN, Fong A WC, Sidhu M, Wang YF, et al. Stable Introduction of a Life-Shortening Wolbachia Infection into the Mosquito Aedes Aegypti. Science. 2009;323(5910):141–144. doi:10.1126/science.1165326

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1165326 2009

  4. [4]

    The wMel Wolbachia Strain Blocks Dengue and Invades Caged Aedes Aegypti Populations

    Walker T, Johnson PH, Moreira LA, Iturbe-Ormaetxe I, Frentiu FD, McMeniman CJ, et al. The wMel Wolbachia Strain Blocks Dengue and Invades Caged Aedes Aegypti Populations. Nature. 2011;476(7361):450–453. doi:10.1038/nature10355

    work page doi:10.1038/nature10355 2011

  5. [5]

    Sterile-Insect Methods for Control of Mosquito-Borne Diseases: An Analysis

    Alphey L, Benedict M, Bellini R, Clark GG, Dame DA, Service MW, et al. Sterile-Insect Methods for Control of Mosquito-Borne Diseases: An Analysis. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2010;10(3):295–311. doi:10.1089/vbz.2009.0014

    work page arXiv 2010

  6. [6]

    Suppression and Elimination of an Island Population of Culex Pipiens Quinquefasciatus with Sterile Males

    Patterson RS, Weidhaas DE, Ford HR, Lofgren CS. Suppression and Elimination of an Island Population of Culex Pipiens Quinquefasciatus with Sterile Males. Science. 1970;168(3937):1368–1370. doi:10.1126/science.168.3937.1368

    work page arXiv 1970

  7. [7]

    Release of Chemosterilized Males for the Control of Anopheles Albimanus in El Salvador: III

    Lofgren CS, Dame DA, Breeland SG, Weidhaas DE, Jeffery G, Kaiser R, et al. Release of Chemosterilized Males for the Control of Anopheles Albimanus in El Salvador: III. Field Methods and Population Control. The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. 1974;23(2):288–297. doi:10.4269/ajtmh.1974.23.288

    work page doi:10.4269/ajtmh.1974.23.288 1974

  8. [8]

    Genetic Control of Mosquitoes

    Alphey L. Genetic Control of Mosquitoes. Annual Review of Entomology. 2014;59(1):205–224. doi:10.1146/annurev-ento-011613-162002

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-ento-011613-162002 2014

Show all 64 references
  1. [9]

    A CRISPR–Cas9 Gene Drive Targeting Doublesex Causes Complete Population Suppression in Caged Anopheles Gambiae Mosquitoes

    Kyrou K, Hammond AM, Galizi R, Kranjc N, Burt A, Beaghton AK, et al. A CRISPR–Cas9 Gene Drive Targeting Doublesex Causes Complete Population Suppression in Caged Anopheles Gambiae Mosquitoes. Nature Biotechnology. 2018;36(11):1062–1066. doi:10.1038/nbt.4245

    2018 doi

  2. [10]

    Successful Establishment of Wolbachia in Aedes Populations to Suppress Dengue Transmission

    Hoffmann AA, Montgomery BL, Popovici J, Iturbe-Ormaetxe I, Johnson PH, Muzzi F, et al. Successful Establishment of Wolbachia in Aedes Populations to Suppress Dengue Transmission. Nature. 2011;476(7361):454–457. doi:10.1038/nature10356

    2011 doi

  3. [11]

    Stability of the wMel Wolbachia Infection Following Invasion into Aedes Aegypti Populations

    Hoffmann AA, Iturbe-Ormaetxe I, Callahan AG, Phillips BL, Billington K, Axford JK, et al. Stability of the wMel Wolbachia Infection Following Invasion into Aedes Aegypti Populations. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2014;8(9):e3115. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0003115. December 2, 2024 22/30

    2014 doi

  4. [12]

    Ryan PA, Turley AP, Wilson G, Hurst TP, Retzki K, Brown-Kenyon J, et al. Establishment of wMel Wolbachia in Aedes Aegypti Mosquitoes and Reduction of Local Dengue Transmission in Cairns and Surrounding Locations in Northern Queensland, Australia [Version 2; Peer Review: 2 Appr...

    2020 doi

  5. [13]

    Indriani C, Tantowijoyo W, Ranc` es E, Andari B, Prabowo E, Yusdi D, et al. Reduced Dengue Incidence Following Deployments of Wolbachia-infected Aedes Aegypti in Yogyakarta, Indonesia: A Quasi-Experimental Trial Using Controlled Interrupted Time Series Analysis. Gates Open Res...

    2020 doi

  6. [14]

    Large-Scale Deployment and Establishment of Wolbachia Into the Aedes Aegypti Population in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

    Gesto JSM, Pinto SB, Dias FBS, Peixoto J, Costa G, Kutcher S, et al. Large-Scale Deployment and Establishment of Wolbachia Into the Aedes Aegypti Population in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2021;12:711107. doi:10/gmhdqr

    2021

  7. [15]

    Efficacy of Wolbachia-Infected Mosquito Deployments for the Control of Dengue

    Utarini A, Indriani C, Ahmad RA, Tantowijoyo W, Arguni E, Ansari MR, et al. Efficacy of Wolbachia-Infected Mosquito Deployments for the Control of Dengue. The New England Journal of Medicine. 2021; p. 10. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2030243

    2021 doi

  8. [16]

    Wolbachia Invades Anopheles Stephensi Populations and Induces Refractoriness to Plasmodium Infection

    Bian G, Joshi D, Dong Y, Lu P, Zhou G, Pan X, et al. Wolbachia Invades Anopheles Stephensi Populations and Induces Refractoriness to Plasmodium Infection. Science. 2013;340(6133):748–751. doi:10.1126/science.1236192

    2013 doi

  9. [17]

    Wolbachia Strain w AlbB Confers Both Fitness Costs and Benefit on Anopheles Stephensi

    Joshi D, McFadden MJ, Bevins D, Zhang F, Xi Z. Wolbachia Strain w AlbB Confers Both Fitness Costs and Benefit on Anopheles Stephensi. Parasites & Vectors. 2014;7(1):336. doi:10.1186/1756-3305-7-336

    2014 doi

  10. [18]

    Infection of Anopheline Mosquitoes with Wolbachia: Implications for Malaria Control

    Gomes FM, Barillas-Mury C. Infection of Anopheline Mosquitoes with Wolbachia: Implications for Malaria Control. PLOS Pathogens. 2018;14(11):e1007333. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1007333

    2018 doi

  11. [19]

    Fitness of wAlbB Wolbachia Infection in Aedes Aegypti: Parameter Estimates in an Outcrossed Background and Potential for Population Invasion

    Axford JK, Ross PA, Yeap HL, Callahan AG, Hoffmann AA. Fitness of wAlbB Wolbachia Infection in Aedes Aegypti: Parameter Estimates in an Outcrossed Background and Potential for Population Invasion. The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. 2016;94(3):507–516. doi:1...

    2016 doi

  12. [20]

    The Spread of Wolbachia through Mosquito Populations

    Jiggins FM. The Spread of Wolbachia through Mosquito Populations. PLOS Biology. 2017;15(6):e2002780. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.2002780

    2017 doi

  13. [21]

    Aedes, Wolbachia and Dengue

    Koiller J, Da Silva M, Souza M, Code¸ co C, Iggidr A, Sallet G. Aedes, Wolbachia and Dengue. Inria Nancy-Grand Est, Villers-l` es-Nancy, France; 2014. RR-8462

    2014

  14. [22]

    Modeling the Transmission of Wolbachia in Mosquitoes for Controlling Mosquito-Borne Diseases

    Qu Z, Xue L, Hyman JM. Modeling the Transmission of Wolbachia in Mosquitoes for Controlling Mosquito-Borne Diseases. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics. 2018;78(2):826–852. doi:10.1137/17M1130800

    2018 doi

  15. [23]

    Modeling Spatial Waves of Wolbachia Invasion for Controlling Mosquito-Borne Diseases

    Qu Z, Wu T, Hyman JM. Modeling Spatial Waves of Wolbachia Invasion for Controlling Mosquito-Borne Diseases. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics. 2022

    2022

  16. [24]

    Two-Sex Mosquito Model for the Persistence of Wolbachia

    Xue L, Manore CA, Thongsripong P, Hyman JM. Two-Sex Mosquito Model for the Persistence of Wolbachia. Journal of Biological Dynamics. 2016;11(sup1):216–237. doi:10.1080/17513758.2016.1229051. December 2, 2024 23/30

    2016

  17. [25]

    Mathematical Model as a Tool for the Control of Vector-Borne Diseases: Wolbachia Example

    Ndii MZ, Wiraningsih ED, Anggriani N, Supriatna AK. Mathematical Model as a Tool for the Control of Vector-Borne Diseases: Wolbachia Example. In: Dengue Fever-A Resilient Threat in the Face of Innovation; 2018

    2018

  18. [26]

    Deploying Dengue-Suppressing Wolbachia : Robust Models Predict Slow but Effective Spatial Spread in Aedes Aegypti

    Turelli M, Barton NH. Deploying Dengue-Suppressing Wolbachia : Robust Models Predict Slow but Effective Spatial Spread in Aedes Aegypti. Theoretical Population Biology. 2017;115:45–60. doi:10.1016/j.tpb.2017.03.003

    2017 doi

  19. [27]

    Modeling the Impact on Virus Transmission of Wolbachia-mediated Blocking of Dengue Virus Infection of Aedes Aegypti

    Ferguson NM, Hue Kien DT, Clapham H, Aguas R, Trung VT, Bich Chau TN, et al. Modeling the Impact on Virus Transmission of Wolbachia-mediated Blocking of Dengue Virus Infection of Aedes Aegypti. Science Translational Medicine. 2015;7(279). doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3010370

    2015 doi

  20. [28]

    The Role of Increased Gonotrophic Cycles in the Establishment of Wolbachia in Anopheles Populations

    Childs LM, Hughes R, Blackwood JC. The Role of Increased Gonotrophic Cycles in the Establishment of Wolbachia in Anopheles Populations. Theoretical Ecology. 2020;13(3):349–369. doi:10.1007/s12080-020-00457-8

    2020 doi

  21. [29]

    Models to Assess How Best to Replace Dengue Virus Vectors with Wolbachia -Infected Mosquito Populations

    Zhang X, Tang S, Cheke RA. Models to Assess How Best to Replace Dengue Virus Vectors with Wolbachia -Infected Mosquito Populations. Mathematical Biosciences. 2015;269:164–177. doi:10.1016/j.mbs.2015.09.004

    2015 doi

  22. [30]

    Spatial Waves of Advance with Bistable Dynamics: Cytoplasmic and Genetic Analogues of Allee Effects

    Barton NH, Turelli M. Spatial Waves of Advance with Bistable Dynamics: Cytoplasmic and Genetic Analogues of Allee Effects. The American Naturalist. 2011;178(3):E48–E75. doi:10.1086/661246

    2011 doi

  23. [31]

    Spatially Explicit Models of Turelli-Hoffmann Wolbachia Invasive Wave Fronts

    Schofield P. Spatially Explicit Models of Turelli-Hoffmann Wolbachia Invasive Wave Fronts. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 2002;215(1):121–131. doi:10.1006/jtbi.2001.2493

    2002

  24. [32]

    Wolbachia Infection Dynamics by Reaction-Diffusion Equations

    Huang M, Tang M, Yu J. Wolbachia Infection Dynamics by Reaction-Diffusion Equations. Science China Mathematics. 2015;58(1):77–96. doi:10.1007/s11425-014-4934-8

    2015 doi

  25. [33]

    Optimization of Spatial Control Strategies for Population Replacement, Application to Wolbachia

    Duprez M, H´ elie R, Privat Y, Vauchelet N. Optimization of Spatial Control Strategies for Population Replacement, Application to Wolbachia. ESAIM: Control, Optimisation and Calculus of Variations. 2021;27:74. doi:10.1051/cocv/2021070

    2021

  26. [34]

    Modeling Sustained Transmission of Wolbachia among Anopheles Mosquitoes: Implications for Malaria Control in Haiti

    Florez D, Young AJ, Bernab´ e KJ, Hyman JM, Qu Z. Modeling Sustained Transmission of Wolbachia among Anopheles Mosquitoes: Implications for Malaria Control in Haiti. Tropical Medicine and Infectious Disease. 2023;8(3):162. doi:10.3390/tropicalmed8030162

    2023 doi

  27. [35]

    The Effect of Virus-Blocking Wolbachia on Male Competitiveness of the Dengue Vector Mosquito, Aedes Aegypti

    Segoli M, Hoffmann AA, Lloyd J, Omodei GJ, Ritchie SA. The Effect of Virus-Blocking Wolbachia on Male Competitiveness of the Dengue Vector Mosquito, Aedes Aegypti. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2014;8(12):e3294. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0003294

    2014 doi

  28. [36]

    Mathematical Models for the Dispersal Dynamics: Travelling Waves by Wing and Wind

    Takahashi L, Maidana N, Ferreirajr W, Pulino P, Yang H. Mathematical Models for the Dispersal Dynamics: Travelling Waves by Wing and Wind. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology. 2005;67(3):509–528. doi:10.1016/j.bulm.2004.08.005

    2005 doi

  29. [37]

    Mortality and Reproductive Dynamics of Aedes Aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) Fed Human Blood

    Styer LM, Minnick SL, Sun AK, Scott TW. Mortality and Reproductive Dynamics of Aedes Aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) Fed Human Blood. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2007;7(1):86–98. December 2, 2024 24/30

    2007

  30. [38]

    Follow up Estimation of Aedes Aegypti Entomological Parameters and Mathematical Modellings

    Yang HM, Macoris MdLdG, Galvani KC, Andrighetti MTM. Follow up Estimation of Aedes Aegypti Entomological Parameters and Mathematical Modellings. Biosystems. 2011;103(3):360–371. doi:10.1016/j.biosystems.2010.11.002

    2011 doi

  31. [39]

    Eggs Viability of Aedes Aegypti Linnaeus (Diptera, Culicidae) under Different Environmental and Storage Conditions in Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil

    Soares-Pinheiro VC, Dasso-Pinheiro W, Trindade-Bezerra JM, Tadei WP. Eggs Viability of Aedes Aegypti Linnaeus (Diptera, Culicidae) under Different Environmental and Storage Conditions in Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Biology. 2016;77(2):396–401. doi:10.1590/15...

    2016

  32. [40]

    Mosquitoes (Culicidae)

    Foster W, Walker E. Mosquitoes (Culicidae). In: Medical and Veterinary Entomolgy. Amsterdam: Academic Press; 2002. p. 203–262

    2002

  33. [41]

    Yellow Fever Mosquito Aedes Aegypti (Linnaeus) (Insecta: Diptera: Culicidae): EENY-434/IN792, 2/2009

    Zettel C, Kaufman P. Yellow Fever Mosquito Aedes Aegypti (Linnaeus) (Insecta: Diptera: Culicidae): EENY-434/IN792, 2/2009. EDIS. 2009;2009(2). doi:10.32473/edis-in792-2009

    2009 doi

  34. [42]

    Aedes Mosquito; 2020

    National Environment Agency. Aedes Mosquito; 2020. https://www.nea.gov.sg/dengue-zika/prevent-aedes-mosquito-breeding/aedes- mosquito

    2020

  35. [43]

    Aedes Aegypti Survival and Dispersal Estimated by Mark-Release-Recapture in Northern Australia

    Kay BH, Muir LE. Aedes Aegypti Survival and Dispersal Estimated by Mark-Release-Recapture in Northern Australia. The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. 1998;58(3):277–282. doi:10.4269/ajtmh.1998.58.277

    1998 doi

  36. [44]

    Mark-Release-Recapture Study to Measure Dispersal of the Mosquito Aedes Aegypti in Cairns, Queensland, Australia

    Russell RC, Webb CE, Williams CR, Ritchie SA. Mark-Release-Recapture Study to Measure Dispersal of the Mosquito Aedes Aegypti in Cairns, Queensland, Australia. Medical and Veterinary Entomology. 2005;19(4):451–457. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2915.2005.00589.x

    2005

  37. [45]

    Effects of the Environmental Temperature on Aedes Aegypti and Aedes Albopictus Mosquitoes: A Review

    Reinhold J, Lazzari C, Lahond` ere C. Effects of the Environmental Temperature on Aedes Aegypti and Aedes Albopictus Mosquitoes: A Review. Insects. 2018;9(4):158. doi:10.3390/insects9040158

    2018 doi

  38. [46]

    Dispersal of the Dengue Vector Aedes Aegypti within and between Rural Communities

    HARRINGTON LC, SCOTT TW, LERDTHUSNEE K, COLEMAN RC, COSTERO A, CLARK GG, et al. Dispersal of the Dengue Vector Aedes Aegypti within and between Rural Communities. The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene,. 2005;72(2):209–220

    2005

  39. [47]

    Movement of Aedes Aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) Released in a Small Isolated Village on Hainan Island, China

    Tsuda Y, Takagi M, Wang S, Wang Z, Tang L. Movement of Aedes Aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) Released in a Small Isolated Village on Hainan Island, China. Journal of Medical Entomology. 2001;38(1):93–98. doi:10.1603/0022-2585-38.1.93

    2001 doi

  40. [48]

    Dispersal of Female and Male Aedes Aegypti from Discarded Container Habitats Using a Stable Isotope Mark-Capture Study Design in South Texas

    Juarez JG, Garcia-Luna S, Chaves LF, Carbajal E, Valdez E, Avila C, et al. Dispersal of Female and Male Aedes Aegypti from Discarded Container Habitats Using a Stable Isotope Mark-Capture Study Design in South Texas. Scientific Reports. 2020;10(1):6803. doi:10.1038/s41598-020-63670-9

    2020 doi

  41. [49]

    A Dispersion of Mosquitoes by Wind

    Garrett-Jones C. A Dispersion of Mosquitoes by Wind. Nature. 1950;165(4190):285–285. doi:10.1038/165285a0

    1950 doi

  42. [50]

    Localized Control of Aedes Aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) in Miami, FL, via Inundative Releases of Wolbachia-Infected Male Mosquitoes

    Mains JW, Kelly PH, Dobson KL, Petrie WD, Dobson SL. Localized Control of Aedes Aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) in Miami, FL, via Inundative Releases of Wolbachia-Infected Male Mosquitoes. Journal of Medical Entomology. 2019;56(5):1296–1303. doi:10.1093/jme/tjz051. December 2, 2024 25/30

    2019 doi

  43. [51]

    Modelling a Wolbachia Invasion Using a Slow-Fast Dispersal Reaction-Diffusion Approach

    Chan MHT, Kim PS. Modelling a Wolbachia Invasion Using a Slow-Fast Dispersal Reaction-Diffusion Approach. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology. 2013;75(9):1501–1523. doi:10.1007/s11538-013-9857-y

    2013 doi

  44. [52]

    Modeling and Simulation of the Spatial Population Dynamics of the Aedes Aegypti Mosquito with an Insecticide Application

    Silva MR, Lug˜ ao PHG, Chapiro G. Modeling and Simulation of the Spatial Population Dynamics of the Aedes Aegypti Mosquito with an Insecticide Application. Parasites & Vectors. 2020;13(1):550. doi:10.1186/s13071-020-04426-2

    2020 doi

  45. [53]

    Measuring Mosquito Dispersal for Control Programs

    Morris CD, Larson VL, Lounibos LP. Measuring Mosquito Dispersal for Control Programs. Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association. 1991;7(4):608–615

    1991

  46. [54]

    NOAA Climate Data Online

    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). NOAA Climate Data Online;. https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/cdo-web/

  47. [55]

    Climate Change Knowledge Portal; 2021

    World Bank Group. Climate Change Knowledge Portal; 2021. https://climateknowledgeportal.worldbank.org/

    2021

  48. [56]

    Detecting the Impact of Temperature on Transmission of Zika, Dengue, and Chikungunya Using Mechanistic Models

    Mordecai EA, Cohen JM, Evans MV, Gudapati P, Johnson LR, Lippi CA, et al. Detecting the Impact of Temperature on Transmission of Zika, Dengue, and Chikungunya Using Mechanistic Models. PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases. 2017;11(4):e0005568. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0005568

    2017 doi

  49. [57]

    Embryonic Development of Aedes Aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae): Influence of Different Constant Temperatures

    Farnesi LC, Martins AJ, Valle D, Rezende GL. Embryonic Development of Aedes Aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae): Influence of Different Constant Temperatures. Mem´ orias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. 2009;104(1):124–126. doi:10.1590/S0074-02762009000100020

    2009 doi

  50. [58]

    Impact of Rainfall on Aedes Aegypti Populations

    Valdez LD, Sibona GJ, Condat CA. Impact of Rainfall on Aedes Aegypti Populations. Ecological Modelling. 2018;385:96–105. doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2018.07.003

    2018 doi

  51. [59]

    A Rainfall- and Temperature-Driven Abundance Model for Aedes Albopictus Populations

    Tran A, L’Ambert G, Lacour G, Beno ˆ ıt R, Demarchi M, Cros M, et al. A Rainfall- and Temperature-Driven Abundance Model for Aedes Albopictus Populations. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2013;10(5):1698–1719. doi:10.3390/ijerph10051698. Decem...

    2013 doi

  52. [60]

    Threshold total infection: This measures the overall fraction of infection within the bubble’s coverage, Ω ∈ R2: QOI = Z Ω p∗(x, y)dxdy

  53. [61]

    Threshold level: The fraction of infection at the release center of the critical bubble, QOI = p∗(0, 0)

  54. [62]

    It is calculated as the radial distance from the release center, (0, 0), to the inflection point of the bubble front (Fig B.2A)

    Threshold width: This measures the spread of the critical bubble. It is calculated as the radial distance from the release center, (0, 0), to the inflection point of the bubble front (Fig B.2A). At the infection point, the fraction of infection matches the ODE threshold level ...

  55. [63]

    We use the asymptotic wave velocity as a proxy and define wave velocity as QOI = c(xinf )

    Wave velocity: This is the velocity of wave propagation (assuming expanding coverage, c >0, and radial symmetry): c(xinf ) ≈ −p∗∗ t (xinf , 0) p∗∗x (xinf , 0) , where xinf is the inflection point calculated as in the threshold width, pt is evaluated based on the right-hand sid...

  56. [64]

    The ODE endemic infection level is determined using Eq

    Wave width: This measures how spread out the wavefront is, calculated as the horizontal distance between 99.5% of the ODE endemic infection rate and 0.5% infection (Fig B.2B). The ODE endemic infection level is determined using Eq. (B.1), where rwu is the larger root of Eq. (B...

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.