Skip to main content
PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases logoLink to PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
. 2026 Mar 2;20(3):e0014050. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0014050

First whole-genome detection of dengue virus in urban Aedes aegypti from Southern Brazil

Amanda Cupertino de Freitas 1,2,#, Sara Cândida Ferreira dos Santos 1,3,4,#, Luiz Marcelo R Tomé 4, Vagner Fonseca 5, Talita Émile Ribeiro Adelino 1,4, Natália R Guimarães 1,4, Felipe C M Iani 4, Keldenn Moreno 1,3,4, Bruna Regina Diniz Souza 2, Victor Augusto Isidoro Maia 2, Getúlio Dornelles Souza 6, Ellen Caroline Nobre Santos 1, Lívia Victória Rodrigues Baldon 1, Rafaela Luiza Moreira 1, Maria Eduarda Calazans Rodrigues 1, Isaque João da Silva de Faria 7, João Paulo Pereira de Almeida 7, Luiz Carlos Junior Alcantara 1, Marta Giovanetti 8,9,‡,*,#, Álvaro Gil Araujo Ferreira 1,‡,#
Editor: Kinley Wangdi10
PMCID: PMC12965692  PMID: 41770737

Abstract

Dengue virus (DENV) is a major global health threat whose expansion into temperate regions has been facilitated by climate change and vector adaptation. Despite recurrent epidemics in Brazil, genomic surveillance in mosquito vectors remains limited, particularly in southern regions, constraining our understanding of local transmission dynamics and viral evolution. Here, we aimed to investigate dengue virus circulation, serotype co-circulation, and genomic signals of viral adaptation through vector-based genomic surveillance in southern Brazil. Using this approach, we provide genomic evidence of dengue virus circulation in southern Brazil during 2023. Whole-genome sequencing revealed active circulation of both DENV-1 (Genotype V) and DENV-2 (Genotype II), with the detection of mosquito pools harboring both serotypes, indicating their simultaneous circulation and raising concerns about increased transmission complexity and sequential infection risk in humans. Phylogenetic analyses supported sustained local transmission alongside multiple viral introductions. Moreover, recurrent mutations, particularly in non-structural proteins (NS1, NS2A, and NS5), suggest ongoing viral adaptation. These findings represent the first vector-derived genomic data for dengue in southern Brazil and highlight the critical role of mosquito-based genomic surveillance in detecting co-circulating serotypes, monitoring viral evolution, and strengthening preparedness in emerging transmission settings.

Author summary

Dengue virus (DENV) continues to expand into new regions, driven by climate change and mosquito adaptation. In Brazil, dengue epidemics are recurrent, but genomic surveillance of mosquitoes is still scarce, particularly in the southern states. To fill this gap, we implemented an urban mosquito-trapping strategy designed for low-density and peri-domestic environments in Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul. From April to July 2023, we collected 4,768 Aedes aegypti samples across 16 neighborhoods, generating 2,022 pools. Among these, 41 pools tested positive for DENV, of which 33 pools exhibited RNA integrity suitable for sequencing. The analysis revealed circulation of DENV-1 (Genotype V) and DENV-2 (Genotype II), with two pools showing co-circulation of both serotypes, raising concern for sequential infections in humans. Phylogenetic analysis revealed sustained local transmission combined with multiple virus introductions, and mutations in viral proteins suggested ongoing viral adaptation. Our findings provide the first mosquito-based genomic data for dengue in southern Brazil and highlight how mosquito genomics can strengthen early outbreak detection, serotype monitoring, and epidemic preparedness.

Introduction

Dengue fever is a mosquito-borne disease caused by Orthoflavivirus denguei (DENV), a single-stranded, positive-sense RNA virus in the Flaviviridae family. The viral genome is approximately 10.7 kb in length and encodes three structural proteins (C, prM/M, and E) and seven nonstructural proteins (NS1–NS5). It comprises four serotypes (DENV-1 to DENV-4), each with multiple genotypes. Transmission occurs via infected Aedes mosquitoes—primarily Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus—and can lead to a wide range of clinical outcomes, from mild febrile illness to severe disease and death [1,2]. Environmental and anthropogenic factors such as climate change, urbanization, deforestation, and human mobility have facilitated the global expansion of dengue [1,2]. Temperature, in particular, plays a central role in viral transmission and vector competence. Optimal transmission occurs between 32°C and 33°C, although infection can persist at lower thresholds [1,2]. Elevated temperatures can enhance mosquito activity, modify morphology, and improve viral replication by affecting structural proteins such as the envelope (E) protein. Studies have also shown that increasing temperatures improve Aedes albopictus ability to transmit DENV-2 by facilitating viral dissemination from the midgut to the salivary glands [1,2]. In recent years, vector-based genomic surveillance has emerged as a valuable approach to directly investigate dengue virus circulation and evolution within mosquito populations. Studies conducted in dengue-endemic regions of Southeast Asia and Central America have demonstrated that mosquito-derived genomic data can reveal cryptic transmission, co-circulation of serotypes, and early signals of viral diversification that are not always captured through clinical surveillance alone (6–9). However, such approaches remain unevenly implemented globally and are largely absent from temperate or transitional regions experiencing recent dengue emergence. DENV was first reported in Brazil during epidemics in 1846–1848 and 1851–1853, with additional outbreaks in 1916 and 1923 [3,4]. After re-emerging in 1982 in Roraima, major outbreaks followed, notably in Rio de Janeiro in 1986 with the introduction of DENV-1 and the first detection of Aedes albopictus in the country [3]. Subsequent introductions included DENV-2 in 1990, DENV-3 in 2000, and DENV-4 in 2012–2013. In 2019, Brazil reported over 1.5 million cases and 782 deaths [4]. While the Southeast, Northeast, and Central-West regions are hyperendemic, the South—particularly Rio Grande do Sul (RS)—was historically less affected due to its temperate climate. However, climate change and vector adaptation have driven dengue expansion in the region [5]. Aedes aegypti was first detected in RS in 1995, and the first autochthonous case was reported in 2007. The virus subsequently spread to 453 of 497 municipalities by 2022 [5]. From 2021–2022, RS recorded 101,481 cases and 121 deaths [5]. In 2023, 38,176 cases and 54 deaths were confirmed [6,7]. By 2024, RS experienced its largest recorded outbreak, with 207,465 confirmed cases, a 9.2% case-fatality rate, and Aedes aegypti detected in 94.9% of municipalities [6,7]. Despite this rapid epidemiological expansion, genomic surveillance in southern Brazil remains largely restricted to human cases, with a marked scarcity of vector-derived genomic data. This lack of mosquito-based genomic information limits our ability to resolve local serotype circulation, transmission dynamics, and viral evolutionary processes in a region transitioning from low to sustained dengue transmission. The aim of this study was therefore to characterize circulating dengue virus serotypes and investigate genomic signatures of viral transmission and adaptation in southern Brazil using vector-based genomic surveillance, given its intrinsic link to viral transmission cycles and evolution. To achieve this, we applied an urban mosquito-trapping strategy optimized for low-density and peri-domestic environments.

Results and methods

Between April and July 2023, we collected 4,768 Aedes aegypti mosquitoes across 16 neighborhoods of Porto Alegre, spanning five macro-regions defined by the city’s epidemiological planning framework: East Zone (Partenon, Jardim Botânico, Santa Rosa de Lima), North Zone (Sarandi, São Sebastião, Passo das Pedras), South Zone (Tristeza, Nonoai), Central-East Zone (Santa Tereza), and Northeast Zone (Vila João Pessoa, Vila São José, Mário Quintana, Bom Jesus, Costa e Silva, Vila Ipiranga) (Fig 1a). Our sampling strategy prioritized ecological and socio-spatial diversity and was designed to capture urban areas typically underrepresented in routine entomological surveillance. Adult Aedes aegypti were collected using Mosquitrap devices (Ecovec, Brazil) deployed at 250-m intervals across urban areas and checked weekly. Mosquitoes from each trap were pooled (males and females combined [8]) into tubes containing 250 µL of lysis buffer with ten 0.1-mm zirconium beads for mechanical homogenization, yielding a total of 2,022 pools according to collection site and date (S1 Table). Total RNA was extracted from homogenized samples using the BioGene Viral DNA/RNA Extraction Kit (Bioclin, Brazil), following the manufacturer’s silica-column purification protocol. RNA was eluted in 20 µL of RNase-free water and screened by RT-qPCR for dengue virus (DENV) serotypes 1–4 to identify candidates for genome sequencing [911]. Following screening, 41 pools tested positive for DENV, and 33 exhibited RNA integrity suitable for sequencing (S1 Table). High-throughput whole-genome sequencing was then performed to assess DENV presence, determine serotype distribution, and characterize viral genetic diversity within local mosquito populations.

Fig 1. Phylogenetic and spatial analysis of DENV from Aedes mosquitoes in Porto Alegre, Brazil.

Fig 1

A) Maps showing the spatial area under investigation. Red dots indicate mosquito collection sites. The base layer (administrative boundaries) was obtained using the geobr R package, which provides official Brazilian territorial boundary datasets (“Malhas Territoriais”) from the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE).; B) Maximum likelihood (ML) phylogenetic tree of 29 complete DENV-1 genome sequences generated in this study, analyzed alongside 5,635 reference sequences from GISAID and GenBank. Colors indicate sampling locations by global region and Brazilian macroregion; C) ML phylogenetic tree of 4 complete DENV-2 genome sequences generated in this study, analyzed with 1,830 reference sequences from GISAID and GenBank. Colors indicate sampling locations. For the base layer (administrative boundaries), we used the geobr R package, which downloads official Brazilian territorial boundary datasets (“Malhas territoriais”) from IBGE. Base layer source: geobr package (CRAN/ project page) https://cran.rproject.org/web/packages/geobr/geobr.pdf and IBGE Malhas Territoriais https://www.ibge.gov.br/geociencias/organizacao-do-territorio/malhas-territoriais.html.

Complementary DNA (cDNA) was synthesized using SuperScript IV Reverse Transcriptase (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA), followed by amplification multiplex PCR with Q5 High-Fidelity Hot-Start DNA Polymerase (New England Biolabs, Ipswich, MA, USA) and serotype-specific primer sets designed by the CADDE project (https://www.caddecentre.org/) for sequencing the complete genomes of DENV-1 and DENV-2 [4,9,10]. Amplicons were purified using 1 × AMPure XP beads (Beckman Coulter, Brea, CA, USA) and quantified with a Qubit 3.0 fluorometer and Qubit dsDNA HS Assay Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific) [9,11]. Sequencing libraries were prepared using the Illumina COVIDSeq Test, following the manufacturer’s protocol, and sequenced on the MiSeq platform with a 300-cycle MiSeq Reagent Kit v2. Raw reads were trimmed using Trimmomatic 0.39 and mapped to the reference genome (GISAID: EPI_ISL_17983078 and EPI_ISL_19609373) with Minimap2 2.30-r1287 Subsequent processing included sorting and indexing with Samtools 1.22, indel correction with Pilon 1.24. Low-depth positions (<5×) were masked as ‘N’, and only genomes with >60% coverage were retained for phylogenetic analysis [12]. Sequences were aligned using MAFFT v7.505 and manually inspected in AliView v1.30 to ensure alignment quality [4]. A maximum likelihood tree was inferred using IQ-TREE3 with the GTR + G4 + F model. Temporal signal was assessed with TempEst v41, and outlier sequences showing clear deviations from the expected linear relationship between genetic divergence and sampling time were removed to improve dating accuracy. The final time-scaled phylogeny was reconstructed with TreeTime using a constant rate model, and a discrete trait analysis was performed to infer viral movements across Brazilian regions and globally [4,12].

Of the 41 mosquito pools positive in the screening, each represented the total number of mosquitoes collected from a single trap over a 7-day period, ranging from 1 to 12 individuals, with a total of 149 mosquitoes. Thirty-three yielded sufficient RNA for whole-genome sequencing and tested positive for DENV, 29 for DENV-1 and 4 for DENV-2. This marks the first genomic detection of dengue virus in field-caught mosquitoes from southern Brazil. Two pools (ID_LAB: 4542341, 4539959) showed co-detection of both serotypes, indicating simultaneous circulation of DENV-1 and DENV-2 within the same vector population. While this does not confirm co-infection at the individual mosquito level, it has epidemiological relevance due to the risk of sequential infections in humans. Positive samples showed Ct values ranging from 19.79 to 37, with most below 25, reflecting high viral loads. Sequencing depth ranged from 54× to 2,081 × , with read counts between 8,090 and 222,964 for each sequenced sample. Genome coverage ranged from 61.6% to 93.0%, with over 75% of samples achieving >85% coverage, supporting reliable genotyping and phylogenetic analysis (S1 Table).

All DENV-1 genomes were classified as Genotype V (lineages E.1 and D.1.1) and all DENV-2 genomes as Genotype II (lineage F.1.1.2), both previously reported in Brazil [13,14]. DENV-1 was widely distributed across Porto Alegre’s five macro-regions, while DENV-2 was geographically limited to the East and Northeast zones (Fig 1a). Phylogenetic analysis revealed that DENV-1 sequences from this study clustered into four distinct clades (Fig 1b). Most grouped with sequences from southern Brazil, consistent with ongoing local transmission, while others clustered with viruses from different regions, suggesting multiple introductions and regional viral exchange. DENV-2 sequences were nested among those previously sampled from the South, preceding the 2024 outbreak across southern and southeastern Brazil (Fig 1c).

Additionally, all generated genomes were screened for mutations and annotated using SnpEff to predict potential functional impacts. Most mutations in DENV-1 and DENV-2 genomes were synonymous, with low predicted impact as they do not alter the amino acid sequence of viral proteins. Missense mutations, which can have a moderate impact through amino acid substitutions, were identified in both serotypes. In DENV-1, these were restricted to non-structural proteins—NS1 (n = 4), NS2A (n = 3), NS3 (n = 1), NS4B (n = 1), and NS5 (n = 1)—with NS1 and NS2A most frequently affected (S2 Table). In DENV-2, missense mutations occurred in both structural (E, n = 3) and non-structural proteins—NS1 (n = 1), NS2A (n = 1), NS3 (n = 2), NS4B (n = 1), and NS5 (n = 5)—with the highest frequency observed in NS5 (S2 Table). Many of these mutations, however, were not unique to our dataset; they have been reported in Brazilian genomes from both current and past epidemics, suggesting a long-standing trend toward viral adaptation. Although their precise functional implications remain to be determined, the recurrent occurrence of changes in proteins involved in replication and immune evasion may reflect selective pressures acting on dengue viruses in Brazil—a hypothesis that warrants further investigation [15].

Discussion

Genomic surveillance of mosquito-borne arboviruses remains substantially less developed than surveillance based on human cases, creating a persistent blind spot in our understanding of viral circulation, evolution, and persistence within vector populations. This imbalance is particularly relevant given that mosquitoes constitute the ecological interface where viral maintenance, diversification, and onward transmission occur [1,2,58,1315]. Technical constraints—most notably low viral loads and heterogeneous infection rates in field-collected mosquitoes—have historically limited the routine integration of vector genomics into surveillance frameworks, leaving key transmission processes largely inferred rather than directly observed [1,3,13].

Within this context, our findings illustrate how vector-based genomic surveillance can refine the interpretation of dengue transmission dynamics in regions undergoing epidemiological transition. Southern Brazil has traditionally been considered peripheral to sustained dengue transmission; however, recent climatic and ecological changes have altered vector suitability and epidemic potential [25]. The genomic evidence presented here indicates that dengue transmission in this region is not sporadic or incidental but instead embedded within broader national transmission networks. The observed phylogenetic patterns are consistent with continuous viral connectivity across Brazilian regions rather than isolated spillover events, reinforcing the notion that geographic and climatic boundaries provide diminishing barriers to arbovirus spread [15].

Beyond documenting viral presence, vector-derived genomic data provide insights into viral evolutionary processes that are difficult to capture through human case surveillance alone [2,6,8]. In this study, the majority of detected mutations in DENV-1 and DENV-2 genomes were synonymous, consistent with strong purifying selection acting on dengue virus populations. Missense substitutions were less frequent and primarily involved non-structural proteins (NS) associated with viral replication and host immune interactions. Notably, many of these amino acid changes have been previously reported in Brazilian genomes from both recent and historical outbreaks, suggesting persistent selective pressures rather than the emergence of novel, lineage-specific mutations [15]. Although the functional consequences of these substitutions remain to be determined, their recurrent detection underscores the potential value of vector-based genomics as an early indicator of viral diversification with epidemiological relevance.

Our results highlight the strategic importance of incorporating vector-based genomics into dengue monitoring frameworks, particularly in regions where human case surveillance may lag true transmission dynamics. As dengue continues to expand into temperate and previously low-risk regions, integrating mosquito-derived genomic data will be essential for improving early detection, refining risk assessment, and informing adaptive public health and vector control strategies in an evolving climatic and epidemiological landscape [25].

Limitations

This study has some limitations. The use of pooled mosquito samples limits the ability to infer individual infection rates and may reduce sensitivity for detecting low-prevalence infections. In addition, the cross-sectional design and restriction to a four-month sampling window preclude the assessment of seasonal patterns or temporal changes in dengue virus circulation. Finally, sequencing success was dependent on RNA integrity, resulting in fewer complete genomes than the total number of DENV-positive pools. Despite these limitations, our study provides important strengths. It represents the first vector-based whole-genome characterization of dengue virus in southern Brazil and demonstrates the feasibility and value of mosquito-based genomic surveillance in a region undergoing rapid epidemiological transition. The integration of entomological sampling with high-throughput sequencing enabled the direct detection of co-circulating serotypes and the identification of genomic signals relevant to transmission dynamics. Together, these data establish a robust foundation for future longitudinal, spatially expanded surveillance efforts and support the inclusion of vector genomics as a complementary component of dengue monitoring frameworks.

Supporting information

S1 Table. Metadata of the samples analyzed in this study, including information on the collections performed, PCR and sequencing results, and the accession numbers of the sequences deposited in GenBank.

(XLSX)

pntd.0014050.s001.xlsx (72.7KB, xlsx)
S2 Table. Information on mutations found according to the reference used, specifying the nucleotide substitution, effect, impact, amino acid change, the protein affected by the mutation, and the number of target genomes (from mosquitoes) in which these detections were grouped.

(XLSX)

pntd.0014050.s002.xlsx (9.1KB, xlsx)

Data Availability

Newly generated data have been submitted on NCBI under accession numbers: PX118979-PX119007.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by the Novo Nordisk Foundation (NNF24OC0094346 to MG). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. No authors received a salary from the funder for this work.

References

  • 1.Branda F. Dengue virus transmission in Italy: historical trends up to 2023 and a data repository into the future. Scientific Data. 2024;11(1):1–11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Liu Z, Zhang Q, Li L, He J, Guo J, Wang Z, et al. The effect of temperature on dengue virus transmission by Aedes mosquitoes. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2023;13:1242173. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2023.1242173 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Pinheiro F. Re-emergence of dengue and emergence of dengue haemorrhagic fever in the Americas. 1997.
  • 4.Adelino TÉR, Giovanetti M, Fonseca V, Xavier J, de Abreu ÁS, do Nascimento VA, et al. Field and classroom initiatives for portable sequence-based monitoring of dengue virus in Brazil. Nat Commun. 2021;12(1):2296. doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-22607-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Baes Pereira S, Conrad Bohm B, Dos Reis Gomes A, Aguiar Gonçalves G, Campos Pereira Bruhn N, Silva Belo V, et al. Emergence and spatiotemporal incidence of dengue in Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. Sci Rep. 2025;15(1):18933. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-02548-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Lequime S, Richard V, Cao-Lormeau V-M, Lambrechts L. Full-genome dengue virus sequencing in mosquito saliva shows lack of convergent positive selection during transmission by Aedes aegypti. Virus Evol. 2017;3(2):vex031. doi: 10.1093/ve/vex031 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Grubaugh ND, Ladner JT, Kraemer MUG, Dudas G, Tan AL, Gangavarapu K, et al. Genomic epidemiology reveals multiple introductions of Zika virus into the United States. Nature. 2017;546(7658):401–5. doi: 10.1038/nature22400 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Kirstein OD, Talavera GA, Wei Z, Ciau-Carrilo KJ, Koyoc-Cardeña E, Puerta-Guardo H, et al. Natural Aedes-Borne Virus Infection Detected in Male Adult Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) Collected From Urban Settings in Mérida, Yucatán, México. J Med Entomol. 2022;59(4):1336–46. doi: 10.1093/jme/tjac048 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Aksamentov I, Roemer C, Hodcroft E, Neher R. Nextclade: clade assignment, mutation calling and quality control for viral genomes. JOSS. 2021;6(67):3773. doi: 10.21105/joss.03773 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Vilsker M, Moosa Y, Nooij S, Fonseca V, Ghysens Y, Dumon K, et al. Genome Detective: an automated system for virus identification from high-throughput sequencing data. Bioinformatics. 2019;35(5):871–3. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bty695 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Centro Estadual de Vigilância em Saúde. Informativo epidemiológico de arboviroses: ano de 2023 – semanas epidemiológicas 01 a 52. CEVS/SES-RS. 2024. https://www.cevs.rs.gov.br/arboviroses-informativo-epidemiologico [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Centro Estadual de Vigilância em Saúde. Informativo epidemiológico semestral: Dengue e outras arboviroses – SE 01 a 52/2024. CEVS/SES-RS. 2025. https://www.cevs.rs.gov.br/arboviroses-informativo-epidemiologico [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Phadungsombat J, Nakayama EE, Shioda T. Unraveling Dengue Virus Diversity in Asia: An Epidemiological Study through Genetic Sequences and Phylogenetic Analysis. Viruses. 2024;16(7):1046. doi: 10.3390/v16071046 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Carrazco-Montalvo A, Gutiérrez-Pallo D, Arévalo V, Ponce P, Rodríguez-Polit C, Alarcón D. Whole genome sequencing of DENV-2 isolated from Aedes aegypti mosquitoes in Esmeraldas, Ecuador: genomic epidemiology of genotype III Southern Asian-American in the country. bioRxiv. 2024. https://www.biorxiv.org/ [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Li Q, Kang C. Structures and Dynamics of Dengue Virus Nonstructural Membrane Proteins. Membranes (Basel). 2022;12(2):231. doi: 10.3390/membranes12020231 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0014050.r001

Decision Letter 0

Michael R Holbrook, Kinley Wangdi

14 Nov 2025

Short report: First whole-genome evidence of dengue virus in field-caught mosquitoes from southern Brazil

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Dear Dr. Giovanetti,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases's publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript within by Jan 13 2026 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosntds@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pntd/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

* A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'. This file does not need to include responses to any formatting updates and technical items listed in the 'Journal Requirements' section below.

* A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

* An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, competing interests statement, or data availability statement, please make these updates within the submission form at the time of resubmission. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Kinley Wangdi, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Michael Holbrook

Section Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Shaden Kamhawi

co-Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

orcid.org/0000-0003-4304-636XX

Paul Brindley

co-Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

orcid.org/0000-0003-1765-0002

Additional Editor Comments:

Abstract

The aim should be made clear.

Introduction

The aim is not clear; it should be made clear. Is the aim mosquito-trapping or quantify the circulating dengue virus serotypes.

The study

1. The process of sampling is very detailed, summarize the process.

2. Limitation of study is needed.

Journal Requirements:

1) Please ensure that the CRediT author contributions listed for every co-author are completed accurately and in full.

At this stage, the following Authors/Authors require contributions: Maria Eduarda Calazans Rodrigues, and Isaque João da Silva de Faria. Please ensure that the full contributions of each author are acknowledged in the "Add/Edit/Remove Authors" section of our submission form.

The list of CRediT author contributions may be found here: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/s/authorship#loc-author-contributions

2) We do not publish any copyright or trademark symbols that usually accompany proprietary names, eg ©,  ®, or TM  (e.g. next to drug or reagent names). Therefore please remove all instances of trademark/copyright symbols throughout the text, including:

- ® on page: 4.

3) Please upload all main figures as separate Figure files in .tif or .eps format. For more information about how to convert and format your figure files please see our guidelines:

https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/s/figures

4) We notice that your supplementary figures are uploaded with the file type 'Table'. Please amend the file type to 'Supporting Information'. Please ensure that each Supporting Information file has a legend listed in the manuscript after the references list.

5) Some material included in your submission may be copyrighted. According to PLOSu2019s copyright policy, authors who use figures or other material (e.g., graphics, clipart, maps) from another author or copyright holder must demonstrate or obtain permission to publish this material under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) License used by PLOS journals. Please closely review the details of PLOSu2019s copyright requirements here: PLOS Licenses and Copyright. If you need to request permissions from a copyright holder, you may use PLOS's Copyright Content Permission form.

Please respond directly to this email and provide any known details concerning your material's license terms and permissions required for reuse, even if you have not yet obtained copyright permissions or are unsure of your material's copyright compatibility. Once you have responded and addressed all other outstanding technical requirements, you may resubmit your manuscript within Editorial Manager.

Potential Copyright Issues:

- Figure 1. Please (a) provide a direct link to the base layer of the map (i.e., the country or region border shape) and ensure this is also included in the figure legend; and (b) provide a link to the terms of use / license information for the base layer image or shapefile. We cannot publish proprietary or copyrighted maps (e.g. Google Maps, Mapquest) and the terms of use for your map base layer must be compatible with our CC BY 4.0 license.

Note: if you created the map in a software program like R or ArcGIS, please locate and indicate the source of the basemap shapefile onto which data has been plotted.

If your map was obtained from a copyrighted source please amend the figure so that the base map used is from an openly available source. Alternatively, please provide explicit written permission from the copyright holder granting you the right to publish the material under our CC BY 4.0 license.

If you are unsure whether you can use a map or not, please do reach out and we will be able to help you. The following websites are good examples of where you can source open access or public domain maps:

* U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) - All maps are in the public domain. (http://www.usgs.gov)

* PlaniGlobe - All maps are published under a Creative Commons license so please cite u201cPlaniGlobe, http://www.planiglobe.com, CC BY 2.0u201d in the image credit after the caption. (http://www.planiglobe.com/?lang=enl)

* Natural Earth - All maps are public domain. (http://www.naturalearthdata.com/about/terms-of-use/).

6) Please amend your detailed Financial Disclosure statement. This is published with the article. It must therefore be completed in full sentences and contain the exact wording you wish to be published.

- State the initials, alongside each funding source, of each author to receive each grant. For example: "This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (####### to AM; ###### to CJ) and the National Science Foundation (###### to AM)."

- State what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role in your study, please state: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.".

If you did not receive any funding for this study, please simply state: u201cThe authors received no specific funding for this work.u201d

Reviewers' Comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Key Review Criteria Required for Acceptance?

As you describe the new analyses required for acceptance, please consider the following:

Methods

-Are the objectives of the study clearly articulated with a clear testable hypothesis stated?

-Is the study design appropriate to address the stated objectives?

-Is the population clearly described and appropriate for the hypothesis being tested?

-Is the sample size sufficient to ensure adequate power to address the hypothesis being tested?

-Were correct statistical analysis used to support conclusions?

-Are there concerns about ethical or regulatory requirements being met?

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: The manuscript demonstrated the whole-genome evidence of dengue virus in field-caught mosquitoes from southern Brazil. The method is precise; however, some issues need to be clarified.

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

**********

Results

-Does the analysis presented match the analysis plan?

-Are the results clearly and completely presented?

-Are the figures (Tables, Images) of sufficient quality for clarity?

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: The results presented is not clear and insufficient.

The figure 1, is not informative and very busy to comprehend. The authors should reconstruct the phylogenetic tree with the concise needed information (fewer reference sequences from the Genbank) and outgroup. The authors should also describe each clade clearly for the readers.

Line 135 -140: Not clearly demonstrated in the Figure 1B-C, very difficult to follow.

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

**********

Conclusions

-Are the conclusions supported by the data presented?

-Are the limitations of analysis clearly described?

-Do the authors discuss how these data can be helpful to advance our understanding of the topic under study?

-Is public health relevance addressed?

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: * The manuscript currently does not include a clearly defined Discussion section. Adding this section would help contextualize the findings and relate them to existing literature.

* The manuscript would also benefit from the inclusion of a brief statement addressing the limitations of the study. Highlighting these limitations will provide a more balanced interpretation of the results and strengthen the overall presentation.

**********

Editorial and Data Presentation Modifications?

Use this section for editorial suggestions as well as relatively minor modifications of existing data that would enhance clarity. If the only modifications needed are minor and/or editorial, you may wish to recommend “Minor Revision” or “Accept”.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: * In the Background section, it would be helpful to include additional general information about the virus, such as the approximate size of its genome.

* The abbreviation “NS” should be formally defined at first mention.

* The manuscript presents genomes sequenced from specimens collected in 2023 and shown on a phylogenetic tree spanning isolates from 1991 to 2023 (Figure 1B). However, the compressed time scale makes it appear that the 2023 genomes are closer to the August 2021 time point, which may cause confusion. It would be useful to clearly mark or label the 2023 point on the timeline.

* The formatting of the Supplemental Tables needs correction. Several tables contain truncated text, overlapping content across pages, and columns that are too narrow—causing numerical values to appear as “###.” Please adjust the layout to ensure all text and data are clearly visible.

* The manuscript aims to address an important knowledge gap regarding DENV strains circulating in underrepresented regions of Brazil. While the methods used for genomic sequencing appear generally adequate, the methodological details are interspersed with the results and discussion. This formatting choice makes it difficult to clearly and critically evaluate the methods. The authors are encouraged to present the Methods section separately to improve clarity and reproducibility.

* Line 117: The authors state that “outliers were removed to improve dating accuracy.” Please provide additional detail on the parameters or criteria used to identify and remove these outliers, as this information is essential for evaluating the validity of the temporal analysis.d

**********

Summary and General Comments

Use this section to provide overall comments, discuss strengths/weaknesses of the study, novelty, significance, general execution and scholarship. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. If requesting major revision, please articulate the new experiments that are needed.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: The manuscript demonstrated the whole-genome evidence of dengue virus in field-caught mosquitoes from southern Brazil. The method is precise; however, some issues need to be clarified and more discussed as follows.

The authors should provide citations to their statements below:

Line 58-59 “Environmental and anthropogenic factors……….”

Line 75-76 “ In 2023, 38,176 cases………”

The authors mentioned they pooled both males and females into tubes. What is the essence of including males in the study?

How long did the authors preserved the samples without significant RNA degradation and what is the medium of preservation (solution?)?

Line 103: typo “for” “for” delete one.

Regarding the RNA extraction, it can be found that the genomic DNA, if not digested, can be present in the eluted RNA, resulting possible positive amplification of the gene of interest in tested specimens. Did the authors decontaminate the DNA before amplification?

The authors should provide the serotype-specific primers used in the study?

The pooling method described in the study is inappropriately described. Most samples in the tubes analyzed were individual (1) samples, yet the authors mentioned they are pools. Pool samples indicates combination of more than 1 sample together in a tube.

Also, the one (1) sample in a tubes, is it male or female?

From the Table_S1, the study has unequal sample pools from 2-15 pools per tube, and individual (1) sample tubes.

What is the total number of males and females’ flies included in the study?

The 2 pools the author mentioned that were positive for both DENV I and 2, how many samples in each pool? All males or females?

The authors claimed that they had 33 positive samples out of 41 pools for DENV: 29 for DENV-1 and 4 for DENV-2. How accurate is this high infection rate? Does the author understand the epidemiological implication of this claim. The chance of possible transmission is very high in the study areas. These results are discussable.

How did the authors avoid contaminations amongst sample analyzed?

Line 127: Were the CT values analyzed by the comparative threshold cycle method, and normalized to the endogenous/reference control?

The figure 1, is not informative and very busy to comprehend. The authors should reconstruct the phylogenetic tree with the concise needed information (fewer reference sequences from the Genbank) and outgroup. The authors should also describe each clade clearly for the readers.

Line 135 -140: Not clearly demonstrated in the Figure 1B-C, very difficult to follow.

Overall, the observed results needs more discussion.

Reviewer #3: * There could be substantial additional value to the findings reported in this manuscript if the authors extended their analysis. While they allude to the importance of understanding the impact of the variants identified in the sequenced DENV genomes, they do not perform the bioinformatic analyses necessary to address this knowledge gap. With the availability of advanced structural modeling tools (e.g., AlphaFold3), it would be feasible to assess the potential structural or functional implications of the identified variants using a reference DENV strain as a model template. Including such analyses would considerably strengthen the study’s impact and interpretive depth.

**********

PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy .

Reviewer #1: Yes: Jian-Wei Shao

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

Figure resubmission:

Reproducibility:

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that authors of applicable studies deposit laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option to publish peer-reviewed clinical study protocols. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols

Attachment

Submitted filename: Comments for PNTD-D-25-01609.docx

pntd.0014050.s003.docx (16.4KB, docx)
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0014050.r003

Decision Letter 1

Michael R Holbrook, Kinley Wangdi

11 Feb 2026

Response to Reviewers Revised Manuscript with Track Changes Manuscript

Shaden Kamhawi

co-Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

orcid.org/0000-0003-4304-636XX

Paul Brindley

co-Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

orcid.org/0000-0003-1765-0002

Additional Editor Comments: Journal Requirements:

1) Please ensure that the CRediT author contributions listed for every co-author are completed accurately and in full.

At this stage, the following Authors/Authors require contributions: Maria Eduarda Calazans Rodrigues. Please ensure that the full contributions of each author are acknowledged in the "Add/Edit/Remove Authors" section of our submission form.

The list of CRediT author contributions may be found here: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/s/authorship#loc-author-contributions

2) Please upload all main figures as separate Figure files in .tif or .eps format. For more information about how to convert and format your figure files please see our guidelines:

https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/s/figures

3) Tables should not be uploaded as individual files. Please remove these files and include the Tables in your manuscript file as editable, cell-based objects. For more information about how to format tables, see our guidelines:

https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/s/tables

4) Please amend your detailed Financial Disclosure statement. This is published with the article. It must therefore be completed in full sentences and contain the exact wording you wish to be published.

- State the initials, alongside each funding source, of each author to receive each grant. For example: "This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (####### to AM; ###### to CJ) and the National Science Foundation (###### to AM)."

- State what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role in your study, please state: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.".

If you did not receive any funding for this study, please simply state: u201cThe authors received no specific funding for this work.u201d

Reviewers' comments:

Key Review Criteria Required for Acceptance?

As you describe the new analyses required for acceptance, please consider the following:

Methods

-Are the objectives of the study clearly articulated with a clear testable hypothesis stated?

-Is the study design appropriate to address the stated objectives?

-Is the population clearly described and appropriate for the hypothesis being tested?

-Is the sample size sufficient to ensure adequate power to address the hypothesis being tested?

-Were correct statistical analysis used to support conclusions?

-Are there concerns about ethical or regulatory requirements being met?

Reviewer #1: The objectives of the study clearly articulated with a clear testable hypothesis stated

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

**********

Results

-Does the analysis presented match the analysis plan?

-Are the results clearly and completely presented?

-Are the figures (Tables, Images) of sufficient quality for clarity?

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

**********

Conclusions

-Are the conclusions supported by the data presented?

-Are the limitations of analysis clearly described?

-Do the authors discuss how these data can be helpful to advance our understanding of the topic under study?

-Is public health relevance addressed?

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

**********

Editorial and Data Presentation Modifications?

Use this section for editorial suggestions as well as relatively minor modifications of existing data that would enhance clarity. If the only modifications needed are minor and/or editorial, you may wish to recommend “Minor Revision” or “Accept”.

Reviewer #1: Having reviewed the authors' responses to my previous concerns, I find that all issues have been satisfactorily addressed. I now recommend that the manuscript be accepted for publication.

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: (No Response)

**********

Summary and General Comments

Use this section to provide overall comments, discuss strengths/weaknesses of the study, novelty, significance, general execution and scholarship. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. If requesting major revision, please articulate the new experiments that are needed.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: The manuscript has improved considerably with the current revision. The authors have done a commendable job expanding the discussion and acknowledging the study’s shortcomings through the addition of a limitations section. However, a few minor issues remain that should be addressed prior to acceptance.

On lines 155–157, the authors state that the distributions of DENV-1 and DENV-2 occur in different geographic locations, as shown in Figure 1A. However, all data points appear in the same color, preventing the reader from distinguishing between DENV-1 and DENV-2 by region as suggested in the text.

Additionally, many values in Supplemental Table 1 are still displayed as “####” in the CT values, total reads, and Deep columns. The authors indicated that this issue was corrected during revision, but it does not appear to have been fully resolved.

Finally, there are multiple instances throughout the manuscript of extra spaces and an occasional additional period. The manuscript would benefit from another careful proofreading to address these minor typographical issues and to ensure consistent use of abbreviations throughout.

**********

PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy .

Reviewer #1: Yes: Jian-Wei Shao

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

Figure resubmission:

Reproducibility:--> -->-->To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that authors of applicable studies deposit laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option to publish peer-reviewed clinical study protocols. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols-->?>

PLoS Negl Trop Dis. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0014050.r005

Decision Letter 2

Michael R Holbrook, Kinley Wangdi

17 Feb 2026

Dear Dr. Giovanetti,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript 'First Whole-Genome Detection of Dengue Virus in Urban Aedes aegypti from Southern Brazil' has been provisionally accepted for publication in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases.

Before your manuscript can be formally accepted you will need to complete some formatting changes, which you will receive in a follow up email. A member of our team will be in touch with a set of requests.

Please note that your manuscript will not be scheduled for publication until you have made the required changes, so a swift response is appreciated.

IMPORTANT: The editorial review process is now complete. PLOS will only permit corrections to spelling, formatting or significant scientific errors from this point onwards. Requests for major changes, or any which affect the scientific understanding of your work, will cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript.

Should you, your institution's press office or the journal office choose to press release your paper, you will automatically be opted out of early publication. We ask that you notify us now if you or your institution is planning to press release the article. All press must be co-ordinated with PLOS.

Thank you again for supporting Open Access publishing; we are looking forward to publishing your work in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases.

Best regards,

Kinley Wangdi, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Michael Holbrook

Section Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Shaden Kamhawi

co-Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

orcid.org/0000-0003-4304-636XX

Paul Brindley

co-Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

orcid.org/0000-0003-1765-0002

***********************************************************

p.p1 {margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; line-height: 16.0px; font: 14.0px Arial; color: #323333; -webkit-text-stroke: #323333}span.s1 {font-kerning: none

PLoS Negl Trop Dis. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0014050.r006

Acceptance letter

Michael R Holbrook, Kinley Wangdi

Dear Dr. Giovanetti,

We are delighted to inform you that your manuscript, "First Whole-Genome Detection of Dengue Virus in Urban Aedes aegypti from Southern Brazil," has been formally accepted for publication in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases.

We have now passed your article onto the PLOS Production Department who will complete the rest of the publication process. All authors will receive a confirmation email upon publication.

The corresponding author will soon be receiving a typeset proof for review, to ensure errors have not been introduced during production. Please review the PDF proof of your manuscript carefully, as this is the last chance to correct any scientific or type-setting errors. Please note that major changes, or those which affect the scientific understanding of the work, will likely cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript. Note: Proofs for Front Matter articles (Editorial, Viewpoint, Symposium, Review, etc...) are generated on a different schedule and may not be made available as quickly.

Soon after your final files are uploaded, the early version of your manuscript will be published online unless you opted out of this process. The date of the early version will be your article's publication date. The final article will be published to the same URL, and all versions of the paper will be accessible to readers.

For Research Articles, you will receive an invoice from PLOS for your publication fee after your manuscript has reached the completed accept phase. If you receive an email requesting payment before acceptance or for any other service, this may be a phishing scheme. Learn how to identify phishing emails and protect your accounts at https://explore.plos.org/phishing.

Thank you again for supporting open-access publishing; we are looking forward to publishing your work in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases.

Best regards,

Shaden Kamhawi

co-Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Paul Brindley

co-Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Table. Metadata of the samples analyzed in this study, including information on the collections performed, PCR and sequencing results, and the accession numbers of the sequences deposited in GenBank.

    (XLSX)

    pntd.0014050.s001.xlsx (72.7KB, xlsx)
    S2 Table. Information on mutations found according to the reference used, specifying the nucleotide substitution, effect, impact, amino acid change, the protein affected by the mutation, and the number of target genomes (from mosquitoes) in which these detections were grouped.

    (XLSX)

    pntd.0014050.s002.xlsx (9.1KB, xlsx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Comments for PNTD-D-25-01609.docx

    pntd.0014050.s003.docx (16.4KB, docx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    pntd.0014050.s004.docx (4.3MB, docx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers 2.docx

    pntd.0014050.s005.docx (2.8MB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    Newly generated data have been submitted on NCBI under accession numbers: PX118979-PX119007.


    Articles from PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES