Abstract
Zika virus (ZIKV; Genus Flavivirus, Family Flaviviridae) has recently emerged in Asia and the Americas to cause large outbreaks of human disease. The outbreak has been characterized by high attack rates, birth defects in infants and severe neurological complications in adults. ZIKV is transmitted to humans by Aedes mosquitoes, but recent evidence implicates sexual transmission as playing an important role as well. This review highlights the transmission of ZIKV in humans, with a focus on both mosquito and sexually-transmitted routes and their outcomes. We also discuss critical directions for future research.
Introduction
Zika virus (ZIKV) is currently causing a worldwide pandemic that likely began on the Micronesian island of Yap in 2007, but gained worldwide attention after spreading to Northeastern Brazil in 2013 or 2014 [1, 2]. ZIKV then rapidly spread through Brazil and subsequently throughout South and Central America, the Caribbean and caused a small outbreak in the United States [3]. ZIKV, like other human-infecting flaviviruses, normally exists in an arthropod to vertebrate host transmission cycle. Surprisingly, ZIKV has been shown to also be transmissible via the sexual route [4]. Infectious virus can be detected in semen and vaginal secretions, along with other body fluids [5–7]. ZIKV, therefore, has the unusual capacity (among arboviruses) to persist, in at least a limited manner, as a sexually transmitted infection (STI). This unique attribute of ZIKV, along with severe disease manifestations in infants and adults, has led to increased interest in understanding the virus and its transmission. ZIKV has been isolated from many species of mosquitoes, but Aedes aegypti appears to be the major vector for urban transmission in the Americas [8]. Outbreaks in urban areas of Oceania and Africa and sylvatic spread in Africa have been associated with other Aedes species [9, 10]. Sexual transmission of ZIKV has been reported in most affected countries and has been documented in animal models [4, 5, 11]. The contribution of each transmission cycle to virus perpetuation and disease will be discussed.
Mosquito Transmission of Zika virus
ZIKV Phylogeny
Flavivirus Phylogeny Relating to Transmission
Flaviviruses, including flavi-like viruses, include viruses that replicate in vertebrates only, arthropods only, plants only, and non-arthropod invertebrates in addition to those that replicate in a transmission cycle involving both vertebrates and arthropods (arboviruses) [12]. However, the main mode of transmission of disease-causing flaviviruses is via the bite of an infected arthropod. These viruses cluster phylogenetically according to the main vector [13]. In alignments of full-genome amino acid sequences of flaviviruses, ZIKV clusters within the mosquito-borne flaviviruses (MBFV) and more specifically within the group of Aedes-borne flaviviruses (ABFV) (reviewed in [14]), consistent with the historical literature on ZIKV that strongly suggested transmission by these mosquitoes.
Natural Transmission
Sylvatic Transmission
In the last ~70 years, ZIKV has been isolated from a wide array of mosquitoes during surveillance activities for mosquito-borne diseases. Consistent with its phylogenetic position within the ABFV group of flaviviruses, the first mosquito isolation of ZIKV was from a pool of Ae. (Stegomyia) africanus in the Zika forest in Uganda in 1948 [15]. Prior to this, ZIKV was isolated from a sentinel rhesus monkey in the same forest, suggesting mosquito transmission [15]. Ae. africanus are known to bite both at ground level and in the canopy of the Zika forest, and feed on both humans and monkeys and therefore represent a good sylvatic vector for ZIKV [16]. ZIKV was subsequently collected from this species in 1956 in Lunyo forest, Uganda, close to the Zika forest [17]; from Ae. (Stegomyia) luteocephalus in Nigeria [18] and Ae. africanus/Ae. (Stegomyia) apicoargenteus from Uganda, both in 1969 [19]. This study also identified several forest dwelling non-human primate (NHP) species that had serological evidence of ZIKV infection; including the red-tailed monkey (Cercopithecus ascunius schmidti), black mangabey (now the grey cheeked mangabey) (then: Cercocobus albigena johnstoni, now: Lophocebus albigena), and the lowland colobus (now the Western Guereza) (then: Colobus abyssinicus uellensis, now: Colobus guereza) [19]. A 1969 report also references “strong serologic evidence” of ZIKV in wild monkeys in Malaysia, although they do not provide specific details [20]. ZIKV was then isolated again from Ae. africanus and also Ae. (Stegomyia) opok in the Central African Republic (CAR) between 1976–80 [21]. In 1984, mosquito surveys in Senegal identified ZIKV in both Ae. africanus and Ae. (Diceromyia) taylori mosquitoes [22]. Later surveys in Senegal between 1988–1991 found several more species positive for ZIKV; Ae. (Diceromyia) furcifer, Ae. taylori, Ae. luteocephalus, Ae. (Stegomyia) aegypti, Ae. (Stegomyia) neoafricanus, Ae. (Aedimorphus) dalzieli, Ae. (Aedimorphus) fowleri, Ae. (Aedimorphus) minutus, and Ae. (Fredwardsius) vittatus. Serological studies referenced in several papers also suggest that high levels of antibodies against ZIKV were found in NHPs, although individual species were not mentioned [23, 24]. ZIKV was further isolated from Ae. vittatus, Ae. furcifer, and Ae. aegypti pools in the Ivory Coast in 1999 [25]. A large mosquito surveillance effort in Senegal in 2011 found many Aedes species positive for ZIKV, including; Ae. furcifer, Ae. luteocephalus, Ae. africanus, Ae. vittatus, Ae. taylori, Ae. dalzieli, Ae. (Aedimorphus) hirsutus and Ae. (Stegomyia) metallicus, Ae. aegypti, Ae. (Stegomyia) unilinaetus [26]. This survey also found other mosquitoes positive for ZIKV in the subfamily Culicinae, namely Mansonia (Mansonioides) uniformis, Culex (Culex) perfuscus. Finally, ZIKV was isolated from a single pool of Anopheles (Anopheles) coustani. It must be determined if these species are capable of transmission or whether these isolations merely represent exposure to ZIKV by ingesting a bloodmeal from an infected animal.
Observational surveys of mosquitoes have thus implicated several arboreal mosquitoes, mainly in the genus Aedes, that tend to be involved in transmission of primate-hosted arboviruses like ZIKV. Because the vast majority of isolations of ZIKV occurred in the subgenera Stegomyia, Aedimorphus, Diceromyia, and Fredwardsius, these should be of particular interest in future surveillance studies. Many of the most ubiquitous arboviruses can be transmitted in sylvatic cycles by the same mosquito species. For example, Ae. africanus, Ae. luteocephalus, Ae. furcifer, Ae. taylori, Ae. vittatus, and Ae. opok have all been found positive for ZIKV, chikungunya virus (CHIKV), dengue virus (DENV) and yellow fever virus (YFV) [21, 24, 26–32]. Therefore, it is essential to maintain surveillance efforts of these mosquitoes and their associated NHP hosts to assess potential future arboviral threats.
The possibility that sylvatic transmission cycles could become established as ZIKV undergoes globalization has been addressed by a handful of studies, with some evidence of sylvatic transmission in Asia [33] and the Americas [34] reported. The report from the Americas finds two species of NHPs (n=7, Sapajus libidinosus and Callithrix jacchus) qRT-PCR positive in the serum. However, since low levels of RNA and no infectious virus was recovered, there is no direct evidence for sylvatic transmission being maintained. More sampling of NHPs throughout the Americas should be undertaken to assess this possibility. Some NHPs that were previously shown to be susceptible to yellow fever virus (YFV) in the Americas include the common squirrel monkey (Saimiri sciureus), the spider monkey (Ateleus ater), the large-headed capuchin (Sapajus microcephalus) and to a lesser extent the brown woolly monkey (Lagothrix lagotricha) [35, 36]. These species in particular should be monitored for potential ZIKV infection given their relationship with YFV. The probability for a sustained sylvatic transmission cycle in the Americas remains unknown at this time and must be explored further. The closely related flaviviruses, DENV serotypes 1–4 and YFV have had very different success in establishing sylvatic cycles in the New World. The latter has a well-documented sylvatic transmission cycle involving mosquitoes in the genera Haemogogus, Sabethes, Psorophora and others (reviewed in [37]). In contrast, there is little evidence of a sylvatic DENV transmission cycle in the New World, despite some reports of infections in non-human primates and other animals [38–40]. Whether this is due to the host (either mosquito or NHP) or viral factors remains unknown. Studies should be undertaken to assess the possibility of ZIKV transmission by forest-dwelling mosquitoes of the New World and whether associated NHPs are susceptible to infection, including the possibility of ZIKV maintenance by sexual transmission among NHPs.
Non-Sylvatic Transmission
Similar to other ABFVs, ZIKV has been mainly associated with transmission in urban settings by the highly anthropophilic mosquito Aedes aegypti, however several other species are thought to play a significant role as well. ZIKV was first isolated from Ae. aegypti in Malaysia in 1969 [20]. Further isolations of ZIKV in Ae. aegypti were reported in 1988–91 (and again in 2011) and 1999 in Senegal and the Ivory Coast, respectively [24–26]. However, in each case only one pool was found to be positive so the role in transmission may have been small. While Ae. aegypti is accepted as the dominant vector during the current outbreak in the Americas, few published reports of virus isolations from these mosquitoes exist. The first isolations of ZIKV from Ae. aegypti in the Americas came in 2015–16 from Mexico [41, 42] and Brazil [8]. In Brazil, the percent of mosquito pools positive for ZIKV was only 1.5% (3/198), while in Mexico up to 27.3% of pools were found positive (15/55). It’s possible that surveillance done in Brazil, and previously in Malaysia, Senegal and Ivory Coast was done after the peak of the outbreak, thus underestimating the number of mosquitoes infected during peak transmission. In comparison, similar rates of DENV infection of Ae. aegypti have been observed both in Mexico (where multiple serotypes were circulating concurrently) and during an outbreak in Tanzania as were observed in Mexico for ZIKV [43, 44]. Therefore, infection rates of Ae. aegypti did not appear to be higher during the ZIKV outbreak than those previously observed for DENV.
Other Aedes species are thought to have been important for ZIKV epidemics, particularly recently. Ae. (Stegomyia) albopictus was the main vector for a ZIKV outbreak in Gabon in 2007 [10]. Ae. albopictus was also found naturally infected with ZIKV in Mexico [45]. Although not confirmed by virus isolation, Ae. (Stegomyia) polynesiensis/Ae. aegypti and Ae. (Stegomyia) hensilli were implicated as the predominant vectors in the outbreaks of French Polynesia and Yap Island, respectively [2].
Although ZIKV in Africa has been previously isolated from mosquitoes in the genera Culex and Anopheles, their role in transmission appears to be small based on previous field collections in which Aedes spp. are the predominant mosquitoes found infected [16, 26] and the lack of experimental evidence for their competence as vectors ([46, 47], see below). While no reports from the Americas have specifically looked for ZIKV in Anopheles mosquitoes, two reports have found no evidence for ZIKV in Culex mosquitoes in locations where Ae. aegypti have been found positive [8, 42]. Additional collections are necessary to determine the potential role of these mosquitoes in the transmission of ZIKV.
ZIKV Adaptation to Non-Sylvatic Transmission
Many previous arbovirus outbreaks have been associated with mutations that led to increased infectivity or transmission in mosquitoes that efficiently spread the arboviruses to humans. For example, the introduction of West Nile virus (WNV) into The United States in 1999 was associated with a valine to alanine change which resulted in a decreased extrinsic incubation period (EIP) in Cx. pipiens [48]. Similarly, an alanine to valine change in the E1 protein of CHIKV was previously shown to result in increased infectivity and transmission of Ae. albopictus which may have resulted in the large outbreak on the French island of La Reunion and subsequent spread [49, 50]. It has recently been shown that an alanine to valine change in the NS1 of post-American epidemic ZIKV strains may be responsible for increased infectivity in Ae. aegypti mosquitoes [51]. Liu et al. show that the A188V mutation in NS1 is present in epidemic Asian genotype and African strains of ZIKV but not pre-epidemic Asian genotype strains, resulting in an increased amount of NS1 secreted from infected mammalian cells and immune deficient mice. This mutation, found in the Asian genotype strains after 2013, was associated with increased numbers of mosquitoes being infected after bloodfeeding, although they did not directly show that this resulted in increased transmission rates. This is consistent with previous reports showing that African strains of ZIKV are more fit in Ae. aegypti mosquitoes than even epidemic Asian genotype strains [47], suggesting additional genomic sites are likely to influence mosquito infectivity. Further studies are needed to assess the role of viral genetics in the American outbreak.
Experimental Transmission and Potential for Novel Vectors
Experimental Infection of Different Mosquito Species for ZIKV
The first report of experimental transmission studies came in 1956, when it was shown that Ae. aegypti mosquitoes from Nigeria fed an artificial bloodmeal could infect mice and rhesus monkeys [52]. It was later shown that ZIKV exposed Ae. aegypti also from Nigeria that were allowed to feed on a viremic human volunteer were unable to transmit to mice and were not found to be infected, suggesting little to no infectious virus in the mosquito body or saliva [53]. Presence of infectious circulating virus in the volunteer was confirmed by infections of mice with acute phase serum, however levels were low, as diluted serum was not infectious to mice. Following the outbreaks in Oceania and now the Americas, studies on mosquitoes’ vector competence for ZIKV have risen sharply. Ae. aegypti from Singapore, French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Brazil, Martinique, Mexico, Australia, and Tahiti have all been shown to be capable of transmitting ZIKV after an artificial bloodmeal [47, 54–59]. In contrast, Senegalese Ae. aegypti from two locations were refractory to ZIKV transmission, as judged by lack of ZIKV RNA in the saliva [60]. The discrepancy between these studies is unclear, but may be due to differences in vector susceptibility in different locations. This highlights the importance of virus-mosquito interactions, even within the same species of mosquito. Most of the previous ZIKV isolations in Africa have been from species other than Ae. aegypti, suggesting that other Aedes vectors in that area may be more susceptible to ZIKV. Additional studies of ZIKV vector competence in African populations of Ae. aegypti with different ZIKV genotypes are required to examine the effect of virus genotype - mosquito population combinations on transmission outcome.
Various other Aedes species have been tested for their ability to transmit ZIKV. Those species that contained infectious virus in their saliva after ZIKV feeding include, Ae. (Aedimorphus) vexans [61], Ae. albopictus [54, 62–64], Ae. vittatus, and Ae. luteocephalus [60]. Species that were refractory to transmission include, Ae. (Ochlerotatus) taeniorhynchus [65], Ae. (Stegomyia) unilineatus [60], Ae. (Ochlerotatus) triseriatus [62], Ae. (Finlaya) notoscriptus, and Ae. (Ochlerotatus) vigilax [56]. Ae. hensilii were found to be both body and head positive after ZIKV infection, but cannot be definitely called transmission positive as the head could represent solely a disseminated infection without transmission potential [66].
In contrast to Aedes, most attempts at observing transmission or even infection in Culex and Anopheles mosquitoes have been unsuccessful. Both An. (Cellia) gambiae and An. (Cellia) stephensi were completely refractory to infection with ZIKV [46]. The overwhelming majority of attempts at infecting various species of Culex have proven unsuccessful. Species tested and found transmission negative include Cx. (Culex) quinquefasciatus [46, 47, 56, 65, 67–71], Cx. (Culex) pipiens [47, 62, 64, 67, 70, 72], Cx. (Culex) tarsalis [47], Cx. (Culex) torrentium [64], Cx.(Culex) annulirostris and Cx. (Culex) sitiens [56]. In contrast, a lone report of Cx. quinquefasciatus from China revealed high transmission rates as early as 8 days post-exposure [73]. The reasons for this discrepancy are unclear, but may be due to genetic factors associated with this species from the region. Studies should be repeated with mosquitoes from this region of China in order to validate this result. Additionally, since mosquitoes from only one subgenus for both Anopheles and Culex have been tested, additional species should be investigated as potential vectors.
Vertical Transmission of ZIKV
Two reports have confirmed the possibility of vertical transmission in Ae. aegypti mosquitoes [74, 75]. However, only one of these reports found Ae. albopictus to be capable of vertically transmitting ZIKV. It is possible that this difference was due to one study using intrathoracic injection [75] and the other using an infectious bloodmeal [74]. As the latter is more representative of an actual mosquito infection, it seems possible that vertical transmission could be a factor in ZIKV maintenance. In fact, ZIKV RNA was detected in field collected Ae. albopictus eggs [76]. Sustained vertical transmission would allow ZIKV to be maintained in the mosquito population without active human transmission, constituting a major risk for future ZIKV outbreaks. Additional studies in both the laboratory and the field are required to assess the potential for ZIKV to be maintained vertically in mosquitoes.
Future Directions
As ZIKV and other arboviruses continue to expand their range, it is imperative that measures to predict their spread proactively are implemented. Very little is known about the factors involved in arbovirus emergence. Likely candidates are viral evolution (as shown by the A188V NS1 mutation), host evolution (particularly the arthropod host), mammalian host immunity to closely related viruses, broadened geographic range of vectors, increased global travel, population growth and increased urbanization, or other environmental factors. It is likely that some combination of these factors has allowed for increased transmission of arboviruses like ZIKV.
The explosive outbreaks of ZIKV in Yap and French Polynesia that occurred several years before the current pandemic should serve as a reminder that epidemics occurring anywhere have the capacity to spread globally at an alarmingly rapid pace. We also have a limited understanding of how multiple species of arboviruses circulating in the same area and spread by the same vectors (ZIKV, DENV, CHIKV and YFV) may interact in the mosquito hosts, the mammalian hosts, or both, to enhance or inhibit their transmission or the disease they cause. Recent work has shown that multiple arboviruses can be transmitted simultaneously without affecting vector competence [77, 78]. The effect co-infection has on virus emergence should be explored further. Finally, methods to control vectors or the ability to transmit pathogens must be followed through, such as traditional vector control methods involving insecticides and breeding site removal [79], as well as newer methods such use of Wolbachia [80, 81], genetically modified mosquitoes [82], and lethal mosquito traps [83], among others. It is unclear how effective these control measures will be, but action is needed in order to prevent the further spread of ZIKV as well as additional arboviruses.
Sexual transmission of Zika virus
History
From the discovery of ZIKV in Uganda in 1947 [15] until 2007, sporadic virological and serological evidence of non-epidemic ZIKV transmission among humans in endemic areas of Africa and Asia were reported [84–86]. The first documented ZIKV epidemic occurred in 2007 on Yap Island, in the Federated States of Micronesia [2, 87, 88], and another likely occurred in Libreville, Gabon the same year [10]. In all of these reports, mosquito bites were assumed to be the mode of virus transmission and spread. The first evidence suggesting sexual ZIKV transmission may occur was a self-case report by one of the authors of Zika virus disease after mosquito-borne infection in Senegal in 2008, and subsequent infection of the author’s wife following his return to Colorado, USA [4]. While virus was never recovered, serological evidence suggested direct virus transmission from husband to wife after condomless vaginal intercourse occurred upon his return home but prior to his Zika virus disease symptoms, which included hematospermia and prostatitis. This initial evidence of ZIKV sexual transmission and urogenital pathology was eventually supported in a second case report from the Tahiti ZIKV outbreak in 2013, where a patient presented with recurring Zika virus disease symptoms, including hematospermia which was recorded two weeks after his last clinical episode [5]. ZIKV RNA and viral particles were recovered from the patient’s semen and urine, but never from his blood. It was not until the spread of ZIKV to the Americas that multiple lines of evidence were obtained verifying sexual ZIKV transmission. A number of different case reports were published in the first four months of 2016 of travelers who were infected by mosquitoes in areas with known epidemic transmission, and then transmitted the virus to their sexual partners after they returned to countries where mosquito-borne ZIKV transmission was absent at that time [89–92]. The report by D’Ortenzio et al [90] was the first to isolate ZIKV viruses from both the index patient (from his semen) and his sexual partner (from her saliva) and match the genome sequences, which diverged by only four synonymous mutations. Following these have been numerous other reports, nearly all from traveler-associated cases [93]. To be clear, the speed and seasonality of ZIKV spread in the current pandemic strongly suggests that in non-sylvatic transmission cycles, mosquito-infectious viremia titers are readily reached in certain infected persons, and that this is the primary driver of ZIKV transmission. However, many questions remain regarding the nature, epidemiology and significance of sexual ZIKV transmission, particularly in areas where mosquito-borne transmission is prevalent.
ZIKV as a STI
Sexual ZIKV transmission is defined as transmission through vaginal, anal, and oral sex, including the sharing of sex toys [94]. The former two routes of transmission have been documented in many case reports. Transmission through oral sex has so far only been suggested as a possibility that cannot be ruled out, given that oral sex has been reported as having happened along with vaginal or anal sex in some case reports [90, 95]. We are not aware of documented ZIKV transmission from sharing of sex toys alone. Most reports providing evidence of sexual ZIKV transmission have documented an infected male as being the index case, but female-to-male transmission has also been reported [96]. Based on the evidence gathered from a multitude of studies, the World health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the United States have released recommendations to prevent sexual transmission of ZIKV [97, 98]. It should be noted that sexual transmission may be confounded in some rare cases by the possibility of direct, non-sexual transmission, which has been described from a moribund patient who had a very high level of viremia and eventually died, but apparently transmitted ZIKV to one of his family members who was serving as one of his caregivers [99].
Presence and persistence of ZIKV in body fluids of infected patients
ZIKV RNA has been detected in blood samples (serum, plasma and whole blood), male and female reproductive tract samples, urine, saliva, breast milk, conjunctival and other body fluids of infected humans [100]. Infectious virus has been recovered from most of these body fluids as well, but more rarely [101]. Recent reviews have detailed ZIKV kinetics and the range of titers in these different biological samples from the many published case reports [93, 102, 103] and from the prospective ZiPer study [6] which calculated the median time until ZIKV RNA clearance from the serum of 132 infected patients as 13.9 days [11.2–16.6]. While ZIKV RNA has now been reported to persist for up to 2–4 months in whole blood [104–106], infectious particles were not successfully cultured from these late-phase blood samples. Given the need for a threshold blood titer to infect mosquitoes [107], the ability of such late-phase samples to infect mosquitoes could be questioned. It is also not clear from these reports that viral kinetics or titer ranges in blood or saliva differs between males and females, and it remains to be seen if the route of infection (mosquito bite or sexual transmission) might influence these factors.
Presence and persistence of ZIKV in the male urogenital tract
In infected men, ZIKV RNA has now been detected in semen (defined as ejaculate or seminal fluid that may or may not contain spermatozoa) in more than a dozen case reports [5, 90, 95, 104, 108–117], and in over half of the infected, enrolled men in the ZiPer prospective study in Puerto Rico [6]. Many reports have documented high viral RNA copy number in semen relative to other infected body fluids [5, 90, 114], while other reports have not seen evidence of this [110]. The ZiPer study calculated the median time until ZIKV RNA clearance post onset of symptoms from infected patient urine and semen as 8.2 days [6.4–10.0] and 34.4 days [27.9–40.8], respectively; importantly, the estimate for urine was made from data combining both male and female patients. The detection of viral RNA in semen and urine of men has been reported for up to 188 and 91 days post onset of symptoms, respectively [115], and infectious virus has been isolated from semen more than two months after symptoms [108]. In total, these data indicate ZIKV tropism for tissues of the male urogenital tract and the potential for long-term shedding from urogenital tract fluids. Indeed, male-to-female sexual transmission has occurred more than 30 days post illness onset in an index case [118], and indications of urogenital pathology in several of the case reports from males, including hematuria [86], hematospermia and prostatitis [4], hematospermia [5], and microhematospermia [119] provides further evidence of this tropism. The exact cells or tissues infected by ZIKV in the male reproductive tract remains unclear, but several studies are beginning to answer this question. One or more tissues of the accessory genital glands (the seminal vesicles, the prostate gland and the bulbourethral glands) are likely infected given the several reports of hematospermia listed above, and which is often unnoticed and most commonly associated with trauma or infection of the prostate [120]. Importantly, ZIKV has been detected in the ejaculate of at least 2 vasectomized men [104, 108] and one man who had non-obstructive azoospermia [121], and sexual ZIKV transmission has occurred from two of these cases [108, 121]. We also can verify that one of the authors of this paper (who is the male patient from the first sexual transmission report in Colorado) had a vasectomy in 2007, approximately 1 year prior to the sexual transmission event; this information was not described in that initial report. However, this evidence does not preclude the possibility that cells and tissues of the testes are infected with ZIKV. In one publication, virus antigen was detected by immunohistochemistry in the head of spermatozoa obtained from an infected individual [122].
Presence and persistence of ZIKV in the female reproductive tract
As with men, ZIKV infections of female travelers to endemic regions, which were not linked to sexual infection, can be detected by the presence of viral RNA or virus in urine and vaginal swabs, suggesting urogenital tract tropism following infection from a mosquito bite occurs [123]. Persistence of ZIKV RNA in female urogenital fluids (genital and endocervical swabs or cervical mucus) has been recorded up to day 14 after symptoms onset [124] [125]. As would be expected, ZIKV RNA or virus can also be found in female urogenital fluids and/or tissues following documented sexual transmission events [90, 96, 108, 111, 113, 118, 126]. While seemingly likely, it is not clear yet whether sexual transmission more often leads to ZIKV urogenital infection of females relative to transmission from a mosquito bite. In the ZiPer prospective study [6], ZIKV RNA was detected in the vaginal secretions of only 1 of 50 women participants who provided vaginal swab samples, but these women were not stratified as to their suspected route of infection. Conversely, ZIKV RNA was detected in genital and endocervical swabs and cervical mucus from follow-up examinations of 5 out of 5 women who were enrolled in fertility program in Guadeloupe and found to have been infected with ZIKV [127]. Again, the suspected infection route was not determined. A finer study of infected tissues of the female urogenital tract in humans is necessary to determine which tissues are preferentially infected, and if differences in tissue tropism or viremia occur when infected by mosquito bite or sex.
Animal models of ZIKV sexual transmission and infection
Animals models of both male and female ZIKV infections of the urogenital tract and sexual ZIKV transmission will help understand tissue tropism and viral spread, but their relevance to human infection and disease must be critically evaluated. Immunocompetent mice are generally resistant to ZIKV and so to elicit infections, researchers typically must use immunocompromised mice strains (e.g. interferon receptor knockout strains) or immunocompromising experimental procedures, such as administering monoclonal antibodies against interferon receptors [128], or treating mice with immunosuppressing drugs [129].
Wild type male mice treated with antibody against the interferon receptor have testicular pathology when infected with ZIKV, and high levels of virus and ZIKV RNA in the testes (including Sertoli cells and spermatocytes), epididymis and epididymal fluid [130]. In Ifnar 1−/− mice, ZIKV can also be produced in high titers in the testes [131] and it infects the Leydig cells, leading to a decrease in testosterone production, testicular atrophy and hypofertility [132]. AG129 mice (mice lacking both the type I and type II interferon receptors) ultimately succumb to encephalitis when infected with ZIKV. In this model, testicular inflammation was apparent and immunostaining of ZIKV antigens occurred in the epididymides and testes of ZIKV-inoculated mice [11]. Frequent sexual ZIKV transmission was seen from these mice by examining the ejaculate deposited in the uteri of mated females, which could contain >5 log10 PFU. Furthermore, vasectomized and then infected males could still transfer virus in their ejaculate to the females. Immunocompromised male hamsters (knockouts of the STAT2 gene) are also susceptible to ZIKV infection with infectious viral particles being mostly found in the testes of infected animals when compared to the spinal cord, brain and kidney [133].
AG129 female mice that become pregnant when mated to infected AG129 males had higher mean ZIKV titers in their uteri, and placental and fetal infections occurred in some of the infected pregnant females [11]. Wild type female mice can be transiently infected in the lower reproductive tract following direct intravaginal inoculation of ZIKV and after the mice are induced into diestrus phase by an injection with medroxyprogesterone (Depo-Provera) [134, 135]. In immunocompromised hamsters, fetal infection occurs after pregnant females are infected subcutaneously [133].
Likely more relevant to humans, immunocompetent non-human primates infected with ZIKV produces viremias, virurias and clinical signs that resemble those in humans [136–140]. In one study, ZIKV RNA was detected in testes, but not in the prostate or epididymes, of two rhesus monkeys infected subcutaneously with the virus [138]. In the study by Hirsch et. al [137], ZIKV RNA could be found in the infected rhesus female vagina and uterus and the rhesus male prostate, seminal vesicles, urine and urethra, but not the testes. Osuna et. al [140] detected high viral loads and persistent shedding of ZIKV in the semen up to 3 weeks after viremias resolved, but only sporadic and a low level of ZIKV RNA shedding was detected from female vaginal swabs.
In the latest study, 50% and 75–100% of rhesus and cynomolgus macaques become viremic after intravaginal and intrarectal infections, respectively, and all seroconverted [141]. Importantly, viremia level in some of these animals was 10–100 fold higher than that expected to infect mosquito vectors. In their report, the authors mention that sexual transmission may help maintain an enzootic cycle among NHPs. It is notable that none of the animal model studies reported to date have infected the animals by mosquito bite, which may influence virus tropism or disease presentations.
Mosquito ZIKV transmission compared to sexual ZIKV transmission
In future studies, it will be very important to determine the potential differences in factors that influence relative transmission success and disease presentation between sexual and mosquito ZIKV transmission co-occurring in ZIKV endemic areas. These factors may include virus infection thresholds, disease risk, prevalence, incidence and outcome (especially between females and males), and viral tissue tropism and persistence in body fluids or tissues. Studying these potential differences is inherently confounded by the fact that adult Ae. aegypti rarely travels more than 30 m per day [142], suggesting that arboviruses in these vectors are more often transmitted within the area of a typical household. Indeed, epidemic DENV transmission in Peru has been linked to person movement between households [143]. Assuming sex between couples happens in the same households where ZIKV-infected vectors may be biting both partners, detailed pathological, serological and/or virological studies may be the only way to sort out infections arising from either route. For example, studies of ZIKV genetic sequences taken from urogenital tissues or suspected sexual transmission events [144] may uncover unique signatures compared to those from infected blood that are known to be from mosquito bite transmission.
Perhaps the most important question related to these issues is whether sexual ZIKV transmission, more often than mosquito transmission, leads to placental or fetal infection in pregnant women and may be more often linked with spontaneous abortions or Zika virus congenital syndrome. This largely remains unanswered at present, but no doubt is being actively pursued in the many epidemiological studies of pregnant women and those attempting to become pregnant and who reside in areas of active ZIKV transmission. The quantity of ZIKV transmitted between the mosquito and sexual routes, and locations of virus deposition from each, are primary factors driving this question. If male-to-female sexual ZIKV transmission occurs during pregnancy, more than 108 PFU of virus [90, 114], given an ejaculate volume of ~3.7 mL [145], can be deposited in very close proximity to the developing placenta and fetus and possibly be able to directly infect these tissues. Conversely, infectious mosquitoes inject saliva containing virus into skin (often on the extremities) when probing and blood feeding, most of which is deposited extravascularly (~103–106 PFU) and little of which is injected intravascularly (~102 PFU) [146]. Considering epidemiology, there is a relatively high prevalence of sexually transmitted infections among pregnant women, especially those from developing countries, including trichomoniasis, bacterial vaginosis and HIV [147, 148]. Spontaneous abortions and Zika congenital syndrome have been reported to occur more often when infection occurs in the first trimester [149]. While epidemiological studies have shown that the frequency of coitus tends to decline over the course of pregnancy [150–152], pregnant women, especially those in developing countries, more often report having sex without a condom compared to non-pregnant women [151, 153].
Another very important question is whether sexual transmission leads to different ZIKV disease symptoms, prevalences and/or incidences in female patients. As far back as the Yap Island outbreak, where an estimated 73% of the island’s population was infected, it was observed that 61% of the cases were female and the sex-specific disease attack rate was higher in females than males (17.9 per 1000 females vs. 11.4 per 1000 males), despite the evidence that males were more likely to have anti-ZIKV IgM than females (77% vs. 68%; relative risk = 1.1 [1.0–1.2]). In the US, the percentage of women among travel-associated ZIKV-infections (including ones involving sexual transmission) from January 2015 to February 2016 was 65% (75/115) [154], and a study in Rio de Janeiro found an 88% higher age-adjusted ZIKV incidence in women versus men within sexually active age groups and suggested the results may be due to sexual transmission [155]. This study also used dengue infections as a comparison, in which only a 30% higher age-adjusted DENV incidence in women was observed. In the largest study, Dos Santos et al. [156] examined more than 150,000 ZIKV disease cases across seven countries and observed that females had a 75% higher incidence rate over men (rate ratio = 1.74 [1.71–1.79]). It is important to note that these data may be confounded by differences in targeted enrollment procedures or differential behaviors exhibited by women compared to men, such as those that may influence mosquito-bite risk or health-care seeking frequency. Future studies should be controlled for these confounders and compared with ZIKV exposure measures, as was presented in the Yap Island study. For example, a large study in Puerto Rico found that 61% of females among the 29,345 ZIKV qRTPCR cases [157] were non-pregnant woman, which may at least remove the effect of frequent health-care seeking behavior among women due to pregnancy. Lastly, a prospective cohort of acute febrile cases who attended a health unit in the Recife Metropolitan Region, Brazil showed a female bias in patients infected with ZIKV, as opposed to CHIKV-infected patients and those not infected with ZIKV, CHIKV or DENV (Magalhaes T & Marques ETA, unpublished). Importantly, in this study gender distribution among all patients enrolled did not differ, and CHIKV-infected patients actually exhibited a male bias.
Similar to the above question of whether sexual transmission may more often lead to fetal infections, it is also important to understand whether infection by the different transmission routes might affect disease presentation or severity, such as examining whether certain neurological symptoms or long term sequela more often appear from known sexual transmission events. We are currently also lacking human data on whether sexual ZIKV transmission might be more prevalent with the Asian compared to the African lineage virus, however the first sexual transmission case described was from an infection occurring in Senegal, and so presumably was due to an African lineage virus. Regardless, knowledge of epidemiology of sexual transmission in endemic areas of Africa is non-existent and studies on this should be undertaken.
Lastly, while several important issues need to be addressed for each type of transmission, it is important to keep in mind that these modes of transmission may synergize to extend the ZIKV transmission cycle. For instance, the data from intravaginal and intrarectal inoculation of NHPs shows a delayed viremia [141], which suggests that, if this is also observed in humans, sexual transmission in the same household where mosquito biting is occurring might extend the time of effective mosquito infections from viremic individuals in that household. Although not yet demonstrated, there may also be differences in viremia titers between persons infected sexually compared to those infected by mosquitoes, which would potentially increase the persons in a household who would be infectious to mosquitoes.
Highlights.
Zika virus (ZIKV) is unusual among the mosquito-borne flaviviruses in that it is transmitted by mosquitoes and through sex, but much remains to be discovered about the relative influences of these two transmission routes in ZIKV ecology, infection and disease.
Mosquito-borne ZIKV transmission in both sylvatic and urban cycles seems to be mostly from Aedes species, and this is the likely driver of the rapid and widespread nature of the current pandemic.
Sexual ZIKV transmission is driven by a urogenital tissue tropism of the virus in males that can result in high and persistent viral titers in semen, and may be causing more frequent disease and severe pathology among women compared to men.
Acknowledgments
This publication was supported by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health under award numbers R01AI067380, R21AI125996 and R21AI129464. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
Footnotes
Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
References
- 1.Zanluca C, Melo VC, Mosimann AL, Santos GI, Santos CN, Luz K. First report of autochthonous transmission of Zika virus in Brazil. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 2015;110(4):569–572. doi: 10.1590/0074-02760150192. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Duffy MR, Chen TH, Hancock WT, Powers AM, Kool JL, Lanciotti RS, Pretrick M, Marfel M, Holzbauer S, Dubray C, et al. Zika virus outbreak on Yap Island, Federated States of Micronesia. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(24):2536–2543. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0805715. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Faria NR, Quick J, Claro IM, Theze J, de Jesus JG, Giovanetti M, Kraemer MUG, Hill SC, Black A, da Costa AC, et al. Establishment and cryptic transmission of Zika virus in Brazil and the Americas. Nature. 2017;546(7658):406–410. doi: 10.1038/nature22401. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Foy BD, Kobylinski KC, Chilson Foy JL, Blitvich BJ, Travassos da Rosa A, Haddow AD, Lanciotti RS, Tesh RB. Probable non-vector-borne transmission of Zika virus, Colorado, USA. Emerg Infect Dis. 2011;17(5):880–882. doi: 10.3201/eid1705.101939. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Musso D, Roche C, Robin E, Nhan T, Teissier A, Cao-Lormeau VM. Potential sexual transmission of Zika virus. Emerg Infect Dis. 2015;21(2):359–361. doi: 10.3201/eid2102.141363. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Paz-Bailey G, Rosenberg ES, Doyle K, Munoz-Jordan J, Santiago GA, Klein L, Perez-Padilla J, Medina FA, Waterman SH, Gubern CG, et al. Persistence of Zika Virus in Body Fluids - Preliminary Report. N Engl J Med. 2017 doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1613108. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Penot P, Brichler S, Guilleminot J, Lascoux-Combe C, Taulera O, Gordien E, Leparc-Goffart I, Molina JM. Infectious Zika virus in vaginal secretions from an HIV-infected woman, France, August 2016. Euro Surveill. 2017;22(3) doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2017.22.3.30444. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Ferreira-de-Brito A, Ribeiro IP, Miranda RM, Fernandes RS, Campos SS, Silva KA, Castro MG, Bonaldo MC, Brasil P, Lourenco-de-Oliveira R. First detection of natural infection of Aedes aegypti with Zika virus in Brazil and throughout South America. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 2016;111(10):655–658. doi: 10.1590/0074-02760160332. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Cao-Lormeau VM, Blake A, Mons S, Lastere S, Roche C, Vanhomwegen J, Dub T, Baudouin L, Teissier A, Larre P, et al. Guillain-Barre Syndrome outbreak associated with Zika virus infection in French Polynesia: a case-control study. Lancet. 2016;387(10027):1531–1539. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00562-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Grard G, Caron M, Mombo IM, Nkoghe D, Mboui Ondo S, Jiolle D, Fontenille D, Paupy C, Leroy EM. Zika virus in Gabon (Central Africa)--2007: a new threat from Aedes albopictus? PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2014;8(2):e2681. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0002681. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Duggal NK, Ritter JM, Pestorius SE, Zaki SR, Davis BS, Chang GJ, Bowen RA, Brault AC. Frequent Zika Virus Sexual Transmission and Prolonged Viral RNA Shedding in an Immunodeficient Mouse Model. Cell Rep. 2017;18(7):1751–1760. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2017.01.056. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Shi M, Lin XD, Vasilakis N, Tian JH, Li CX, Chen LJ, Eastwood G, Diao XN, Chen MH, Chen X, et al. Divergent Viruses Discovered in Arthropods and Vertebrates Revise the Evolutionary History of the Flaviviridae and Related Viruses. J Virol. 2015;90(2):659–669. doi: 10.1128/JVI.02036-15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Kuno G, Chang GJ, Tsuchiya KR, Karabatsos N, Cropp CB. Phylogeny of the genus Flavivirus. J Virol. 1998;72(1):73–83. doi: 10.1128/jvi.72.1.73-83.1998. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Moureau G, Cook S, Lemey P, Nougairede A, Forrester NL, Khasnatinov M, Charrel RN, Firth AE, Gould EA, de Lamballerie X. New insights into flavivirus evolution, taxonomy and biogeographic history, extended by analysis of canonical and alternative coding sequences. PLoS One. 2015;10(2):e0117849. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0117849. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Dick GW, Kitchen SF, Haddow AJ. Zika virus. I. Isolations and serological specificity. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1952;46(5):509–520. doi: 10.1016/0035-9203(52)90042-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Haddow AJ, Williams MC, Woodall JP, Simpson DI, Goma LK. Twelve Isolations of Zika Virus from Aedes (Stegomyia) Africanus (Theobald) Taken in and above a Uganda Forest. Bull World Health Organ. 1964;31:57–69. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Weinbren MP, Williams MC. Zika virus: further isolations in the Zika area, and some studies on the strains isolated. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1958;52(3):263–268. doi: 10.1016/0035-9203(58)90085-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Lee VH, Moore DL. Vectors of the 1969 yellow fever epidemic on the Jos Plateau, Nigeria. Bull World Health Organ. 1972;46(5):669–673. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.McCrae AW, Kirya BG. Yellow fever and Zika virus epizootics and enzootics in Uganda. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1982;76(4):552–562. doi: 10.1016/0035-9203(82)90161-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Marchette NJ, Garcia R, Rudnick A. Isolation of Zika virus from Aedes aegypti mosquitoes in Malaysia. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1969;18(3):411–415. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.1969.18.411. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Berthet N, Nakoune E, Kamgang B, Selekon B, Descorps-Declere S, Gessain A, Manuguerra JC, Kazanji M. Molecular characterization of three Zika flaviviruses obtained from sylvatic mosquitoes in the Central African Republic. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2014;14(12):862–865. doi: 10.1089/vbz.2014.1607. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Ladner JT, Wiley MR, Prieto K, Yasuda CY, Nagle E, Kasper MR, Reyes D, Vasilakis N, Heang V, Weaver SC, et al. Complete Genome Sequences of Five Zika Virus Isolates. Genome Announc. 2016;4(3) doi: 10.1128/genomeA.00377-16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Cornet M, Robin Y, Chateau R, Hème G, Adam C, Valade M, Le Gonidec G, Jan C, Renaudet J, Dieng PL, et al. Isolements d'arbovirus au Sénégal oriental à partir de moustiques (1972–1977) et notes sur l'épidémiologie des virus transmis par les Aedes, en particulier du virus amaril. Entomologie Médicale et Parasitologie. 1979;17(3):149–163. [Google Scholar]
- 24.Monlun E, Zeller H, Le Guenno B, Traore-Lamizana M, Hervy JP, Adam F, Ferrara L, Fontenille D, Sylla R, Mondo M, et al. Surveillance of the circulation of arbovirus of medical interest in the region of eastern Senegal. Bull Soc Pathol Exot. 1993;86(1):21–28. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Akoua-Koffi C, Diarrassouba S, Benie VB, Ngbichi JM, Bozoua T, Bosson A, Akran V, Carnevale P, Ehouman A. Investigation surrounding a fatal case of yellow fever in Cote d'Ivoire in 1999. Bull Soc Pathol Exot. 2001;94(3):227–230. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Diallo D, Sall AA, Diagne CT, Faye O, Faye O, Ba Y, Hanley KA, Buenemann M, Weaver SC, Diallo M. Zika virus emergence in mosquitoes in southeastern Senegal, 2011. PLoS One. 2014;9(10):e109442. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0109442. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Diallo D, Sall AA, Diagne CT, Faye O, Hanley KA, Buenemann M, Ba Y, Faye O, Weaver SC, Diallo M. Patterns of a sylvatic yellow fever virus amplification in southeastern Senegal, 2010. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2014;90(6):1003–1013. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.13-0404. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Diallo M, Ba Y, Sall AA, Diop OM, Ndione JA, Mondo M, Girault L, Mathiot C. Amplification of the sylvatic cycle of dengue virus type 2, Senegal, 1999–2000: entomologic findings and epidemiologic considerations. Emerg Infect Dis. 2003;9(3):362–367. doi: 10.3201/eid0903.020219. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Roche JC, Cordellier R, Hervy J, Digoutte JP, Monteny N. Isolement de 96 souches de virus dengue 2 à partir de moustiques capturés en cote-d'ivoire et Haute-Volta. Annales De l'Institut Pasteur Virology. 1983;134(2):233–244. [Google Scholar]
- 30.Saluzzo JF, Hervé J, Germain M, Geoffroy B, Huard M, Fabre J, Salaün JJ, Hème G, Robin Y, Poulougou MM. Seconde série d'isolement du virus de la fièvre jaune, à partir d'Aedes africanus (Theobald), dans une galerie forestière des savanes semi-humides du Sud de l'Empire Centrafricain. Série Entomologie Médicale et Parasitologie. 1979;17(1):19–24. [Google Scholar]
- 31.Smithburn KC, Haddow AJ, Lumsden WH. An outbreak of sylvan yellow fever in Uganda with Aedes (Stegomyia) africanus Theobald as principal vector and insect host of the virus. Ann Trop Med Parasitol. 1949;43(1):74–89. doi: 10.1080/00034983.1949.11685396. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Traore-Lamizana M, Fontenille D, Zeller HG, Mondo M, Diallo M, Adam F, Eyraud M, Maiga A, Digoutte JP. Surveillance for yellow fever virus in eastern Senegal during 1993. J Med Entomol. 1996;33(5):760–765. doi: 10.1093/jmedent/33.5.760. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Wolfe ND, Kilbourn AM, Karesh WB, Rahman HA, Bosi EJ, Cropp BC, Andau M, Spielman A, Gubler DJ. Sylvatic transmission of arboviruses among Bornean orangutans. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2001;64(5–6):310–316. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.2001.64.310. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Favoretto S, Araujo D, Oliveira D, Duarte N, Mesquita F, Zanotto P, Durigon E. First detection of Zika virus in neotropical primates in Brazil: a possible new reservoir. bioRxiv. 2016:1–3. Online: bioRxiv. [Google Scholar]
- 35.Davis NC. The Transmission of Yellow Fever : Experiments with the "Woolly Monkey" (Lagothrix Lago-Tricha Humboldt), the "Spider Monkey" (Ateleus Ater F. Cuvier), and the "Squirrel Monkey" (Saimiri Scireus Linnaeus) J Exp Med. 1930;51(5):703–720. doi: 10.1084/jem.51.5.703. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Davis NC, Shannon RC. Studies on South American Yellow Fever : Iii. Transmission of the Virus to Brazilian Monkeys Preliminary Observations. J Exp Med. 1929;50(1):81–85. doi: 10.1084/jem.50.1.81. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Hanley KA, Monath TP, Weaver SC, Rossi SL, Richman RL, Vasilakis N. Fever versus fever: the role of host and vector susceptibility and interspecific competition in shaping the current and future distributions of the sylvatic cycles of dengue virus and yellow fever virus. Infect Genet Evol. 2013;19:292–311. doi: 10.1016/j.meegid.2013.03.008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.de Thoisy B, Dussart P, Kazanji M. Wild terrestrial rainforest mammals as potential reservoirs for flaviviruses (yellow fever, dengue 2 and St Louis encephalitis viruses) in French Guiana. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2004;98(7):409–412. doi: 10.1016/j.trstmh.2003.12.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.de Thoisy B, Lacoste V, Germain A, Munoz-Jordan J, Colon C, Mauffrey JF, Delaval M, Catzeflis F, Kazanji M, Matheus S, et al. Dengue infection in neotropical forest mammals. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2009;9(2):157–170. doi: 10.1089/vbz.2007.0280. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Morales MA, Fabbri CM, Zunino GE, Kowalewski MM, Luppo VC, Enria DA, Levis SC, Calderon GE. Detection of the mosquito-borne flaviviruses, West Nile, Dengue, Saint Louis Encephalitis, Ilheus, Bussuquara, and Yellow Fever in free-ranging black howlers (Alouatta caraya) of Northeastern Argentina. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017;11(2):e0005351. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0005351. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Diaz-Quinonez JA, Lopez-Martinez I, Torres-Longoria B, Vazquez-Pichardo M, Cruz-Ramirez E, Ramirez-Gonzalez JE, Ruiz-Matus C, Kuri-Morales P. Evidence of the presence of the Zika virus in Mexico since early 2015. Virus Genes. 2016;52(6):855–857. doi: 10.1007/s11262-016-1384-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Guerbois M, Fernandez-Salas I, Azar SR, Danis-Lozano R, Alpuche-Aranda CM, Leal G, Garcia-Malo IR, Diaz-Gonzalez EE, Casas-Martinez M, Rossi SL, et al. Outbreak of Zika Virus Infection, Chiapas State, Mexico, 2015, and First Confirmed Transmission by Aedes aegypti Mosquitoes in the Americas. J Infect Dis. 2016;214(9):1349–1356. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jiw302. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Garcia-Rejon JE, Lorono-Pino MA, Farfan-Ale JA, Flores-Flores LF, Lopez-Uribe MP, Najera-Vazquez Mdel R, Nunez-Ayala G, Beaty BJ, Eisen L. Mosquito infestation and dengue virus infection in Aedes aegypti females in schools in Merida, Mexico. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2011;84(3):489–496. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.2011.10-0654. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Mboera LE, Mweya CN, Rumisha SF, Tungu PK, Stanley G, Makange MR, Misinzo G, De Nardo P, Vairo F, Oriyo NM. The Risk of Dengue Virus Transmission in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania during an Epidemic Period of 2014. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10(1):e0004313. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004313. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.PAHO/WHO, editor. Organization P-AHOWH. Zika - Epidemiological Update. Washington, D.C.: Pan-American Health Organization / World Health Organization; 2016. [Google Scholar]
- 46.Dodson BL, Rasgon JL. Vector competence of Anopheles and Culex mosquitoes for Zika virus. PeerJ. 2017;5:e3096. doi: 10.7717/peerj.3096. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Weger-Lucarelli J, Ruckert C, Chotiwan N, Nguyen C, Garcia Luna SM, Fauver JR, Foy BD, Perera R, Black WC, Kading RC, et al. Vector Competence of American Mosquitoes for Three Strains of Zika Virus. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10(10):e0005101. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0005101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Moudy RM, Meola MA, Morin LL, Ebel GD, Kramer LD. A newly emergent genotype of West Nile virus is transmitted earlier and more efficiently by Culex mosquitoes. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2007;77(2):365–370. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Schuffenecker I, Iteman I, Michault A, Murri S, Frangeul L, Vaney MC, Lavenir R, Pardigon N, Reynes JM, Pettinelli F, et al. Genome microevolution of chikungunya viruses causing the Indian Ocean outbreak. PLoS Med. 2006;3(7):e263. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0030263. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Tsetsarkin KA, Vanlandingham DL, McGee CE, Higgs S. A single mutation in chikungunya virus affects vector specificity and epidemic potential. PLoS Pathog. 2007;3(12):e201. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.0030201. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Liu Y, Liu J, Du S, Shan C, Nie K, Zhang R, Li XF, Zhang R, Wang T, Qin CF, et al. Evolutionary enhancement of Zika virus infectivity in Aedes aegypti mosquitoes. Nature. 2017;545(7655):482–486. doi: 10.1038/nature22365. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Boorman JP, Porterfield JS. A simple technique for infection of mosquitoes with viruses; transmission of Zika virus. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1956;50(3):238–242. doi: 10.1016/0035-9203(56)90029-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Bearcroft WG. Zika virus infection experimentally induced in a human volunteer. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1956;50(5):442–448. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Chouin-Carneiro T, Vega-Rua A, Vazeille M, Yebakima A, Girod R, Goindin D, Dupont-Rouzeyrol M, Lourenco-de-Oliveira R, Failloux AB. Differential Susceptibilities of Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus from the Americas to Zika Virus. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10(3):e0004543. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004543. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Costa-da-Silva AL, Ioshino RS, Araujo HR, Kojin BB, Zanotto PM, Oliveira DB, Melo SR, Durigon EL, Capurro ML. Laboratory strains of Aedes aegypti are competent to Brazilian Zika virus. PLoS One. 2017;12(2):e0171951. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0171951. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Hall-Mendelin S, Pyke AT, Moore PR, Mackay IM, McMahon JL, Ritchie SA, Taylor CT, Moore FA, van den Hurk AF. Assessment of Local Mosquito Species Incriminates Aedes aegypti as the Potential Vector of Zika Virus in Australia. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10(9):e0004959. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004959. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Li MI, Wong PS, Ng LC, Tan CH. Oral susceptibility of Singapore Aedes (Stegomyia) aegypti (Linnaeus) to Zika virus. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2012;6(8):e1792. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0001792. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Richard V, Paoaafaite T, Cao-Lormeau VM. Vector Competence of French Polynesian Aedes aegypti and Aedes polynesiensis for Zika Virus. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10(9):e0005024. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0005024. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Roundy CM, Azar SR, Rossi SL, Huang JH, Leal G, Yun R, Fernandez-Salas I, Vitek CJ, Paploski IA, Kitron U, et al. Variation in Aedes aegypti Mosquito Competence for Zika Virus Transmission. Emerg Infect Dis. 2017;23(4):625–632. doi: 10.3201/eid2304.161484. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Diagne CT, Diallo D, Faye O, Ba Y, Faye O, Gaye A, Dia I, Faye O, Weaver SC, Sall AA, et al. Potential of selected Senegalese Aedes spp. mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae) to transmit Zika virus. BMC Infect Dis. 2015;15:492. doi: 10.1186/s12879-015-1231-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Gendernalik A, Weger-Lucarelli J, Garcia-Luna SM, Fauver JR, Rückert C, Murrieta RA, Bergren N, Samaras D, Nguyen C, Kading RC, et al. American Aedes vexans Mosquitoes are Competent Vectors of Zika Virus. The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. 2017 doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.16-0963. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62.Aliota MT, Peinado SA, Osorio JE, Bartholomay LC. Culex pipiens and Aedes triseriatus Mosquito Susceptibility to Zika Virus. Emerg Infect Dis. 2016;22(10):1857–1859. doi: 10.3201/eid2210.161082. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63.Di Luca M, Severini F, Toma L, Boccolini D, Romi R, Remoli ME, Sabbatucci M, Rizzo C, Venturi G, Rezza G, et al. Experimental studies of susceptibility of Italian Aedes albopictus to Zika virus. Euro Surveill. 2016;21(18) doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2016.21.18.30223. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64.Heitmann A, Jansen S, Luhken R, Leggewie M, Badusche M, Pluskota B, Becker N, Vapalahti O, Schmidt-Chanasit J, Tannich E. Experimental transmission of Zika virus by mosquitoes from central Europe. Euro Surveill. 2017;22(2) doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2017.22.2.30437. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65.Hart CE, Roundy CM, Azar SR, Huang JH, Yun R, Reynolds E, Leal G, Nava MR, Vela J, Stark PM, et al. Zika Virus Vector Competency of Mosquitoes, Gulf Coast, United States. Emerg Infect Dis. 2017;23(3):559–560. doi: 10.3201/eid2303.161636. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66.Ledermann JP, Guillaumot L, Yug L, Saweyog SC, Tided M, Machieng P, Pretrick M, Marfel M, Griggs A, Bel M, et al. Aedes hensilli as a potential vector of Chikungunya and Zika viruses. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2014;8(10):e3188. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0003188. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67.Amraoui F, Atyame-Nten C, Vega-Rua A, Lourenco-de-Oliveira R, Vazeille M, Failloux AB. Culex mosquitoes are experimentally unable to transmit Zika virus. Euro Surveill. 2016;21(35) doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2016.21.35.30333. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68.Fernandes RS, Campos SS, Ferreira-de-Brito A, Miranda RM, Barbosa da Silva KA, Castro MG, Raphael LM, Brasil P, Failloux AB, Bonaldo MC, et al. Culex quinquefasciatus from Rio de Janeiro Is Not Competent to Transmit the Local Zika Virus. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10(9):e0004993. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004993. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69.Huang YJ, Ayers VB, Lyons AC, Unlu I, Alto BW, Cohnstaedt LW, Higgs S, Vanlandingham DL. Culex Species Mosquitoes and Zika Virus. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2016;16(10):673–676. doi: 10.1089/vbz.2016.2058. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70.Kenney JL, Romo H, Duggal NK, Tzeng WP, Burkhalter KL, Brault AC, Savage HM. Transmission Incompetence of Culex quinquefasciatus and Culex pipiens pipiens from North America for Zika Virus. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2017;96(5):1235–1240. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.16-0865. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71.Fernandes SSC Rosilainy Surubi, Ribeiro Paulino Siqueira, Raphael Lidiane MS, Bonaldo Myrna C, Lourenço-de-Oliveira Ricardo. Culex quinquefasciatus from areas with the highest incidence of microcephaly associated with Zika virus infections in the Northeast Region of Brazil are refractory to the virus. Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. 2017;112:1–3. doi: 10.1590/0074-02760170145. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72.Boccolini D, Toma L, Di Luca M, Severini F, Romi R, Remoli ME, Sabbatucci M, Venturi G, Rezza G, Fortuna C. Experimental investigation of the susceptibility of Italian Culex pipiens mosquitoes to Zika virus infection. Euro Surveill. 2016;21(35) doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2016.21.35.30328. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73.Guo XX, Li CX, Deng YQ, Xing D, Liu QM, Wu Q, Sun AJ, Dong YD, Cao WC, Qin CF, et al. Culex pipiens quinquefasciatus: a potential vector to transmit Zika virus. Emerg Microbes Infect. 2016;5(9):e102. doi: 10.1038/emi.2016.102. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74.Ciota AT, Bialosuknia SM, Ehrbar DJ, Kramer LD. Vertical Transmission of Zika Virus by Aedes aegypti and Ae. albopictus Mosquitoes. Emerg Infect Dis. 2017;23(5):880–882. doi: 10.3201/eid2305.162041. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75.Thangamani S, Huang J, Hart CE, Guzman H, Tesh RB. Vertical Transmission of Zika Virus in Aedes aegypti Mosquitoes. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2016;95(5):1169–1173. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.16-0448. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 76.Smartt CT, Stenn TMS, Chen TY, Teixeira MG, Queiroz EP, Souza Dos Santos L, Queiroz GAN, Ribeiro Souza K, Kalabric Silva L, Shin D, et al. Evidence of Zika Virus RNA Fragments in Aedes albopictus (Diptera: Culicidae) Field-Collected Eggs From Camacari, Bahia, Brazil. J Med Entomol. 2017 doi: 10.1093/jme/tjx058. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77.Goertz GP, Vogels CBF, Geertsema C, Koenraadt CJM, Pijlman GP. Mosquito co-infection with Zika and chikungunya virus allows simultaneous transmission without affecting vector competence of Aedes aegypti. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017;11(6):e0005654. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0005654. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78.Ruckert C, Weger-Lucarelli J, Garcia-Luna SM, Young MC, Byas AD, Murrieta RA, Fauver JR, Ebel GD. Impact of simultaneous exposure to arboviruses on infection and transmission by Aedes aegypti mosquitoes. Nat Commun. 2017;8:15412. doi: 10.1038/ncomms15412. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 79.Gubler DJ, Clark GG. Community involvement in the control of Aedes aegypti. Acta Trop. 1996;61(2):169–179. doi: 10.1016/0001-706x(95)00103-l. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 80.Aliota MT, Peinado SA, Velez ID, Osorio JE. The wMel strain of Wolbachia Reduces Transmission of Zika virus by Aedes aegypti. Sci Rep. 2016;6:28792. doi: 10.1038/srep28792. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 81.Dutra HL, Rocha MN, Dias FB, Mansur SB, Caragata EP, Moreira LA. Wolbachia Blocks Currently Circulating Zika Virus Isolates in Brazilian Aedes aegypti Mosquitoes. Cell Host Microbe. 2016;19(6):771–774. doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2016.04.021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 82.Waltz E. GM mosquitoes fire first salvo against Zika virus. Nat Biotechnol. 2016;34(3):221–222. doi: 10.1038/nbt0316-221. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83.Johnson BJ, Ritchie SA, Fonseca DM. The State of the Art of Lethal Oviposition Trap-Based Mass Interventions for Arboviral Control. Insects. 2017;8(1) doi: 10.3390/insects8010005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 84.Fagbami A. Epidemiological investigations on arbovirus infections at Igbo-Ora, Nigeria. Trop Geogr Med. 1977;29(2):187–191. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 85.Moore DL, Causey OR, Carey DE, Reddy S, Cooke AR, Akinkugbe FM, David-West TS, Kemp GE. Arthropod-borne viral infections of man in Nigeria, 1964–1970. Ann Trop Med Parasitol. 1975;69(1):49–64. doi: 10.1080/00034983.1975.11686983. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 86.Olson JG, Ksiazek TG, Suhandiman, Triwibowo Zika virus, a cause of fever in Central Java, Indonesia. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1981;75(3):389–393. doi: 10.1016/0035-9203(81)90100-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 87.Hayes EB. Zika virus outside Africa. Emerg Infect Dis. 2009;15(9):1347–1350. doi: 10.3201/eid1509.090442. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 88.Lanciotti RS, Kosoy OL, Laven JJ, Velez JO, Lambert AJ, Johnson AJ, Stanfield SM, Duffy MR. Genetic and serologic properties of Zika virus associated with an epidemic, Yap State, Micronesia, 2007. Emerg Infect Dis. 2008;14(8):1232–1239. doi: 10.3201/eid1408.080287. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 89.Deckard DT, Chung WM, Brooks JT, Smith JC, Woldai S, Hennessey M, Kwit N, Mead P. Male-to-Male Sexual Transmission of Zika Virus--Texas, January 2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2016;65(14):372–374. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6514a3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 90.D'Ortenzio E, Matheron S, Yazdanpanah Y, de Lamballerie X, Hubert B, Piorkowski G, Maquart M, Descamps D, Damond F, Leparc-Goffart I. Evidence of Sexual Transmission of Zika Virus. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(22):2195–2198. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1604449. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 91.Hills SL, Russell K, Hennessey M, Williams C, Oster AM, Fischer M, Mead P. Transmission of Zika Virus Through Sexual Contact with Travelers to Areas of Ongoing Transmission - Continental United States, 2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2016;65(8):215–216. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6508e2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 92.Venturi G, Zammarchi L, Fortuna C, Remoli ME, Benedetti E, Fiorentini C, Trotta M, Rizzo C, Mantella A, Rezza G, et al. An autochthonous case of Zika due to possible sexual transmission, Florence, Italy, 2014. Euro Surveill. 2016;21(8):30148. doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2016.21.8.30148. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 93.Hamer DH, Wilson ME, Jean J, Chen LH. Epidemiology, Prevention, and Potential Future Treatments of Sexually Transmitted Zika Virus Infection. Curr Infect Dis Rep. 2017;19(4):16. doi: 10.1007/s11908-017-0571-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 94.Petersen EE, Meaney-Delman D, Neblett-Fanfair R, Havers F, Oduyebo T, Hills SL, Rabe IB, Lambert A, Abercrombie J, Martin SW, et al. Update: Interim Guidance for Preconception Counseling and Prevention of Sexual Transmission of Zika Virus for Persons with Possible Zika Virus Exposure - United States, September 2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2016;65(39):1077–1081. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6539e1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 95.Russell K, Hills SL, Oster AM, Porse CC, Danyluk G, Cone M, Brooks R, Scotland S, Schiffman E, Fredette C, et al. Male-to-Female Sexual Transmission of Zika Virus-United States, January–April 2016. Clin Infect Dis. 2017;64(2):211–213. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciw692. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 96.Davidson A, Slavinski S, Komoto K, Rakeman J, Weiss D. Suspected Female-to-Male Sexual Transmission of Zika Virus - New York City, 2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2016;65(28):716–717. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6528e2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 97.Organization WH. Prevention of sexual transmission of Zika virus. Interim guidance update. Geneva: WHO Document Production Services; 2016. [Google Scholar]
- 98.Organization WH; Research DoRHa. Towards ending STIs. Geneva: WHO Document Production Services; 2016. Global Health Sector Strategy on Sexually Transmitted Infections 2016–2021. [Google Scholar]
- 99.Swaminathan S, Schlaberg R, Lewis J, Hanson KE, Couturier MR. Fatal Zika Virus Infection with Secondary Nonsexual Transmission. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(19):1907–1909. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1610613. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 100.Grischott F, Puhan M, Hatz C, Schlagenhauf P. Non-vector-borne transmission of Zika virus: A systematic review. Travel Med Infect Dis. 2016;14(4):313–330. doi: 10.1016/j.tmaid.2016.07.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 101.Blohm GM, Lednicky JA, Marquez M, White SK, Loeb JC, Pacheco CA, Nolan DJ, Paisie T, Salemi M, Rodriguez-Morales AJ, et al. Complete Genome Sequences of Identical Zika virus Isolates in a Nursing Mother and Her Infant. Genome Announc. 2017;5(17) doi: 10.1128/genomeA.00231-17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 102.Baud D, Musso D, Vouga M, Alves MP, Vulliemoz N. Zika virus: A new threat to human reproduction. Am J Reprod Immunol. 2017;77(2) doi: 10.1111/aji.12614. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 103.Moreira J, Peixoto TM, Siqueira AM, Lamas CC. Sexually acquired Zika virus: a systematic review. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2017 doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2016.12.027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 104.Froeschl G, Huber K, von Sonnenburg F, Nothdurft HD, Bretzel G, Hoelscher M, Zoeller L, Trottmann M, Pan-Montojo F, Dobler G, et al. Long-term kinetics of Zika virus RNA and antibodies in body fluids of a vasectomized traveller returning from Martinique: a case report. BMC Infect Dis. 2017;17(1):55. doi: 10.1186/s12879-016-2123-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 105.Lustig Y, Mendelson E, Paran N, Melamed S, Schwartz E. Detection of Zika virus RNA in whole blood of imported Zika virus disease cases up to 2 months after symptom onset, Israel, December 2015 to April 2016. Euro Surveill. 2016;21(26) doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2016.21.26.30269. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 106.Murray KO, Gorchakov R, Carlson AR, Berry R, Lai L, Natrajan M, Garcia MN, Correa A, Patel SM, Aagaard K, et al. Prolonged Detection of Zika Virus in Vaginal Secretions and Whole Blood. Emerg Infect Dis. 2017;23(1):99–101. doi: 10.3201/eid2301.161394. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 107.Carrington LB, Simmons CP. Human to mosquito transmission of dengue viruses. Front Immunol. 2014;5:290. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2014.00290. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 108.Arsuaga M, Bujalance SG, Diaz-Menendez M, Vazquez A, Arribas JR. Probable sexual transmission of Zika virus from a vasectomised man. Lancet Infect Dis. 2016;16(10):1107. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(16)30320-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 109.Atkinson B, Hearn P, Afrough B, Lumley S, Carter D, Aarons EJ, Simpson AJ, Brooks TJ, Hewson R. Detection of Zika Virus in Semen. Emerg Infect Dis. 2016;22(5):940. doi: 10.3201/eid2205.160107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 110.Barzon L, Pacenti M, Franchin E, Lavezzo E, Trevisan M, Sgarabotto D, Palu G. Infection dynamics in a traveller with persistent shedding of Zika virus RNA in semen for six months after returning from Haiti to Italy, January 2016. Euro Surveill. 2016;21(32) doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2016.21.32.30316. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 111.Frank C, Cadar D, Schlaphof A, Neddersen N, Gunther S, Schmidt-Chanasit J, Tappe D. Sexual transmission of Zika virus in Germany, April 2016. Euro Surveill. 2016;21(23) doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2016.21.23.30252. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 112.Gaskell KM, Houlihan C, Nastouli E, Checkley AM. Persistent Zika Virus Detection in Semen in a Traveler Returning to the United Kingdom from Brazil, 2016. Emerg Infect Dis. 2017;23(1):137–139. doi: 10.3201/eid2301.161300. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 113.Harrower J, Kiedrzynski T, Baker S, Upton A, Rahnama F, Sherwood J, Huang QS, Todd A, Pulford D. Sexual Transmission of Zika Virus and Persistence in Semen, New Zealand, 2016. Emerg Infect Dis. 2016;22(10):1855–1857. doi: 10.3201/eid2210.160951. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 114.Mansuy JM, Dutertre M, Mengelle C, Fourcade C, Marchou B, Delobel P, Izopet J, Martin-Blondel G. Zika virus: high infectious viral load in semen, a new sexually transmitted pathogen? Lancet Infect Dis. 2016;16(4):405. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(16)00138-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 115.Nicastri E, Castilletti C, Liuzzi G, Iannetta M, Capobianchi MR, Ippolito G. Persistent detection of Zika virus RNA in semen for six months after symptom onset in a traveller returning from Haiti to Italy, February 2016. Euro Surveill. 2016;21(32) doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2016.21.32.30314. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 116.Oliveira Souto I, Alejo-Cancho I, Gascon Brustenga J, Peiro Mestres A, Munoz Gutierrez J, Martinez Yoldi MJ. Persistence of Zika virus in semen 93 days after the onset of symptoms. Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin. 2016 doi: 10.1016/j.eimc.2016.10.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 117.Septfons A, Leparc-Goffart I, Couturier E, Franke F, Deniau J, Balestier A, Guinard A, Heuze G, Liebert AH, Mailles A, et al. Travel-associated and autochthonous Zika virus infection in mainland France, 1 January to 15 July 2016. Euro Surveill. 2016;21(32) doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2016.21.32.30315. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 118.Turmel JM, Abgueguen P, Hubert B, Vandamme YM, Maquart M, Le Guillou-Guillemette H, Leparc-Goffart I. Late sexual transmission of Zika virus related to persistence in the semen. Lancet. 2016;387(10037):2501. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30775-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 119.Torres JR, Martinez N, Moros Z. Microhematospermia in acute Zika virus infection. Int J Infect Dis. 2016;51:127. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2016.08.025. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 120.Mathers MJ, Degener S, Sperling H, Roth S. Hematospermia-a Symptom With Many Possible Causes. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2017;114(11):186–191. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2017.0186. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 121.Freour T, Mirallie S, Hubert B, Splingart C, Barriere P, Maquart M, Leparc-Goffart I. Sexual transmission of Zika virus in an entirely asymptomatic couple returning from a Zika epidemic area, France, April 2016. Euro Surveill. 2016;21(23) doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2016.21.23.30254. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 122.Mansuy JM, Suberbielle E, Chapuy-Regaud S, Mengelle C, Bujan L, Marchou B, Delobel P, Gonzalez-Dunia D, Malnou CE, Izopet J, et al. Zika virus in semen and spermatozoa. Lancet Infect Dis. 2016;16(10):1106–1107. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(16)30336-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 123.Nicastri E, Castilletti C, Balestra P, Galgani S, Ippolito G. Zika Virus Infection in the Central Nervous System and Female Genital Tract. Emerg Infect Dis. 2016;22(12):2228–2230. doi: 10.3201/eid2212.161280. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 124.Prisant N, Bujan L, Benichou H, Hayot PH, Pavili L, Lurel S, Herrmann C, Janky E, Joguet G. Zika virus in the female genital tract. Lancet Infect Dis. 2016;16(9):1000–1001. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(16)30193-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 125.Visseaux B, Mortier E, Houhou-Fidouh N, Brichler S, Collin G, Larrouy L, Charpentier C, Descamps D. Zika virus in the female genital tract. Lancet Infect Dis. 2016;16(11):1220. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(16)30387-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 126.Brooks RB, Carlos MP, Myers RA, White MG, Bobo-Lenoci T, Aplan D, Blythe D, Feldman KA. Likely Sexual Transmission of Zika Virus from a Man with No Symptoms of Infection - Maryland, 2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2016;65(34):915–916. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6534e2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 127.Prisant N, Breurec S, Moriniere C, Bujan L, Joguet G. Zika Virus Genital Tract Shedding in Infected Women of Childbearing age. Clin Infect Dis. 2017;64(1):107–109. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciw669. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 128.Smith DR, Hollidge B, Daye S, Zeng X, Blancett C, Kuszpit K, Bocan T, Koehler JW, Coyne S, Minogue T, et al. Neuropathogenesis of Zika Virus in a Highly Susceptible Immunocompetent Mouse Model after Antibody Blockade of Type I Interferon. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017;11(1):e0005296. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0005296. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 129.Chan JF, Zhang AJ, Chan CC, Yip CC, Mak WW, Zhu H, Poon VK, Tee KM, Zhu Z, Cai JP, et al. Zika Virus Infection in Dexamethasone-immunosuppressed Mice Demonstrating Disseminated Infection with Multi-organ Involvement Including Orchitis Effectively Treated by Recombinant Type I Interferons. EBioMedicine. 2016;14:112–122. doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2016.11.017. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 130.Morrison TE, Diamond MS. Animal Models of Zika Virus Infection, Pathogenesis, and Immunity. J Virol. 2017;91(8) doi: 10.1128/JVI.00009-17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 131.Lazear HM, Govero J, Smith AM, Platt DJ, Fernandez E, Miner JJ, Diamond MS. A Mouse Model of Zika Virus Pathogenesis. Cell Host Microbe. 2016;19(5):720–730. doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2016.03.010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 132.Uraki R, Hwang J, Jurado KA, Householder S, Yockey LJ, Hastings AK, Homer RJ, Iwasaki A, Fikrig E. Zika virus causes testicular atrophy. Sci Adv. 2017;3(2):e1602899. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.1602899. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 133.Siddharthan V, Van Wettere AJ, Li R, Miao J, Wang Z, Morrey JD, Julander JG. Zika virus infection of adult and fetal STAT2 knock-out hamsters. Virology. 2017;507:89–95. doi: 10.1016/j.virol.2017.04.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 134.Khan S, Woodruff EM, Trapecar M, Fontaine KA, Ezaki A, Borbet TC, Ott M, Sanjabi S. Dampened antiviral immunity to intravaginal exposure to RNA viral pathogens allows enhanced viral replication. J Exp Med. 2016;213(13):2913–2929. doi: 10.1084/jem.20161289. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 135.Yockey LJ, Varela L, Rakib T, Khoury-Hanold W, Fink SL, Stutz B, Szigeti-Buck K, Van den Pol A, Lindenbach BD, Horvath TL, et al. Vaginal Exposure to Zika Virus during Pregnancy Leads to Fetal Brain Infection. Cell. 2016;166(5):1247–1256 e1244. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2016.08.004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 136.Dudley DM, Aliota MT, Mohr EL, Weiler AM, Lehrer-Brey G, Weisgrau KL, Mohns MS, Breitbach ME, Rasheed MN, Newman CM, et al. A rhesus macaque model of Asian-lineage Zika virus infection. Nat Commun. 2016;7:12204. doi: 10.1038/ncomms12204. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 137.Hirsch AJ, Smith JL, Haese NN, Broeckel RM, Parkins CJ, Kreklywich C, DeFilippis VR, Denton M, Smith PP, Messer WB, et al. Zika Virus infection of rhesus macaques leads to viral persistence in multiple tissues. PLoS Pathog. 2017;13(3):e1006219. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006219. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 138.Li XF, Dong HL, Huang XY, Qiu YF, Wang HJ, Deng YQ, Zhang NN, Ye Q, Zhao H, Liu ZY, et al. Characterization of a 2016 Clinical Isolate of Zika Virus in Non-human Primates. EBioMedicine. 2016;12:170–177. doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2016.09.022. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 139.Coffey LL, Pesavento PA, Keesler RI, Singapuri A, Watanabe J, Watanabe R, Yee J, Bliss-Moreau E, Cruzen C, Christe KL, et al. Zika Virus Tissue and Blood Compartmentalization in Acute Infection of Rhesus Macaques. PLoS One. 2017;12(1):e0171148. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0171148. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 140.Osuna CE, Lim SY, Deleage C, Griffin BD, Stein D, Schroeder LT, Omange R, Best K, Luo M, Hraber PT, et al. Zika viral dynamics and shedding in rhesus and cynomolgus macaques. Nat Med. 2016;22(12):1448–1455. doi: 10.1038/nm.4206. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 141.Haddow AD, Nalca A, Rossi FD, Miller LJ, Wiley MR, Perez-Sautu U, Washington SC, Norris SL, Wollen-Roberts SE, Shamblin JD, et al. High Infection Rates for Adult Macaques after Intravaginal or Intrarectal Inoculation with Zika Virus. Emerg Infect Dis. 2017;23(8) doi: 10.3201/eid2308.170036. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 142.Harrington LC, Scott TW, Lerdthusnee K, Coleman RC, Costero A, Clark GG, Jones JJ, Kitthawee S, Kittayapong P, Sithiprasasna R, et al. Dispersal of the dengue vector Aedes aegypti within and between rural communities. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2005;72(2):209–220. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 143.Stoddard ST, Forshey BM, Morrison AC, Paz-Soldan VA, Vazquez-Prokopec GM, Astete H, Reiner RC, Jr, Vilcarromero S, Elder JP, Halsey ES, et al. House-to-house human movement drives dengue virus transmission. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013;110(3):994–999. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1213349110. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 144.Atkinson B, Graham V, Miles RW, Lewandowski K, Dowall SD, Pullan ST, Hewson R. Complete Genome Sequence of Zika Virus Isolated from Semen. Genome Announc. 2016;4(5) doi: 10.1128/genomeA.01116-16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 145.Cooper TG, Noonan E, von Eckardstein S, Auger J, Baker HW, Behre HM, Haugen TB, Kruger T, Wang C, Mbizvo MT, et al. World Health Organization reference values for human semen characteristics. Hum Reprod Update. 2010;16(3):231–245. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmp048. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 146.Styer LM, Kent KA, Albright RG, Bennett CJ, Kramer LD, Bernard KA. Mosquitoes inoculate high doses of West Nile virus as they probe and feed on live hosts. PLoS Pathog. 2007;3(9):1262–1270. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.0030132. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 147.Berggren EK, Patchen L. Prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae and repeat infection among pregnant urban adolescents. Sex Transm Dis. 2011;38(3):172–174. doi: 10.1097/OLQ.0b013e3181f41b96. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 148.Chico RM, Mayaud P, Ariti C, Mabey D, Ronsmans C, Chandramohan D. Prevalence of malaria and sexually transmitted and reproductive tract infections in pregnancy in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review. JAMA. 2012;307(19):2079–2086. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.3428. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 149.Pomar L, Malinger G, Benoist G, Carles G, Ville Y, Rousset D, Hcini N, Pomar C, Jolivet A, Lambert V. Association between Zika virus and fetopathy: a prospective cohort study in French Guiana. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017 doi: 10.1002/uog.17404. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 150.Bartellas E, Crane JM, Daley M, Bennett KA, Hutchens D. Sexuality and sexual activity in pregnancy. BJOG. 2000;107(8):964–968. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2000.tb10397.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 151.Gray RH, Li X, Kigozi G, Serwadda D, Brahmbhatt H, Wabwire-Mangen F, Nalugoda F, Kiddugavu M, Sewankambo N, Quinn TC, et al. Increased risk of incident HIV during pregnancy in Rakai, Uganda: a prospective study. Lancet. 2005;366(9492):1182–1188. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67481-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 152.Pauleta JR, Pereira NM, Graca LM. Sexuality during pregnancy. J Sex Med. 2010;7(1 Pt 1):136–142. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2009.01538.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 153.Teasdale CA, Abrams EJ, Chiasson MA, Justman J, Blanchard K, Jones HE. Sexual Risk and Intravaginal Practice Behavior Changes During Pregnancy. Arch Sex Behav. 2017;46(2):539–548. doi: 10.1007/s10508-016-0818-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 154.Armstrong P, Hennessey M, Adams M, Cherry C, Chiu S, Harrist A, Kwit N, Lewis L, McGuire DO, Oduyebo T, et al. Travel-Associated Zika Virus Disease Cases Among U.S. Residents--United States, January 2015–February 2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2016;65(11):286–289. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6511e1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 155.Coelho FC, Durovni B, Saraceni V, Lemos C, Codeco CT, Camargo S, de Carvalho LM, Bastos L, Arduini D, Villela DA, et al. Higher incidence of Zika in adult women than adult men in Rio de Janeiro suggests a significant contribution of sexual transmission from men to women. Int J Infect Dis. 2016;51:128–132. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2016.08.023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 156.Dos Santos T, Rodriguez A, Almiron M, Sanhueza A, Ramon P, de Oliveira WK, Coelho GE, Badaro R, Cortez J, Ospina M, et al. Zika Virus and the Guillain-Barre Syndrome - Case Series from Seven Countries. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(16):1598–1601. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1609015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 157.Lozier M, Adams L, Febo MF, Torres-Aponte J, Bello-Pagan M, Ryff KR, Munoz-Jordan J, Garcia M, Rivera A, Read JS, et al. Incidence of Zika Virus Disease by Age and Sex - Puerto Rico, November 1, 2015–October 20, 2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2016;65(44):1219–1223. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6544a4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]