Figure 6.

The impact of barcode input frequency on infection and transmission probability

All points correspond to unique barcodes not mosquitoes.

(A) The input frequency of all barcodes detected in all saliva samples from each species were plotted and compared by Kruskal-Wallis with Dunn’s multiple comparisons test. Dashed lines represent the highest and lowest barcode frequencies in the input. Solid lines denote median.

(B) Relationship between barcode proportion in the input and proportion of successful transmission events (number of saliva samples that contained the barcode/total positive saliva samples) for all species was determined using Pearson’s correlation – Pearson’s r values and significance values are displayed on plots, with splines added for visualization.

(C) Midgut infection probabilities for Cx. tarsalis (orange), Cx. quinquefasciatus (blue), and Ae. aegypti (green) by abundance in the input population.

(D) Salivary gland infection probabilities for Cx. tarsalis (orange), Cx. quinquefasciatus (blue), and Ae. aegypti (green) by abundance in the input population.

(E) Transmission probabilities for Cx. tarsalis (orange), Cx. quinquefasciatus (blue), and Ae. aegypti (green) by abundance in the input population. All error bars denote ±SEM. Significance between mosquito species for infection/transmission probabilities was determined using Kruskal-Wallis with Dunn’s multiple comparisons test. ∗ = p < 0.05, ∗∗ = p < 0.005, ∗∗∗ = p < 0.0005, ∗∗∗∗ = p < 0.0001. Only significant comparisons shown.