Skip to main content
Advertisement
  • Loading metrics

Rhesus macaques model human Mayaro virus disease and transmit to Aedes aegypti mosquitoes

  • Adam J. Moore,

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft

    Affiliations Department of Pathology, Microbiology, and Immunology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America, School of Veterinary Medicine, One Health Institute, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America

  • Koen K. A. Van Rompay,

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Project administration, Supervision, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliations Department of Pathology, Microbiology, and Immunology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America, California National Primate Research Center, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America

  • William Louie,

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Department of Pathology, Microbiology, and Immunology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America

  • Jennifer K. Watanabe,

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation

    Affiliation California National Primate Research Center, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America

  • Sunny An,

    Roles Investigation

    Affiliation Department of Pathology, Microbiology, and Immunology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America

  • Rochelle Leung,

    Roles Investigation

    Affiliation Department of Pathology, Microbiology, and Immunology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America

  • Jodie L. Usachenko,

    Roles Data curation, Investigation

    Affiliation California National Primate Research Center, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America

  • Peter N. Chu,

    Roles Data curation, Investigation, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation California National Primate Research Center, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America

  • Katherine J. Olstad,

    Roles Data curation, Investigation

    Affiliations Department of Pathology, Microbiology, and Immunology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America, California National Primate Research Center, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America

  • Colleen S. McCoy,

    Roles Data curation, Investigation, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation California National Primate Research Center, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America

  • Rafael K. Campos,

    Roles Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing

    Current address: Department of Microbiology and Immunology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA

    Affiliation Institute for Human Infections and Immunity and Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Texas, United States of America

  • Scott C. Weaver,

    Roles Conceptualization, Resources, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Institute for Human Infections and Immunity and Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Texas, United States of America

  • Shannan L. Rossi,

    Roles Conceptualization, Project administration, Supervision, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Institute for Human Infections and Immunity and Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Texas, United States of America

  • Lark L. Coffey

    Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Project administration, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    lcoffey@ucdavis.edu

    Affiliation Department of Pathology, Microbiology, and Immunology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, California, United States of America

Abstract

Background

Mayaro virus (MAYV) is a mosquito-borne alphavirus endemic to Latin America that causes fever and arthritis. Unlike the related chikungunya virus, MAYV has not caused widespread, human-amplified epidemics. One possible explanation is that human viremia levels are too low to support transmission to urban Aedes (Stegomyia) aegypti mosquitoes. We used rhesus macaques (RM) to model human-to-Ae. aegypti transmission and to further expand understanding of their relevance to human MAYV disease.

Methodology/Principal Findings

Twelve RM were inoculated with a genotype D lineage MAYV from an infectious clone using one of 3 dose and route combinations: 7 log10 plaque forming units (PFU) intravenously (IV), 7 log10 PFU subcutaneously (SC), or 3 log10 PFU SC. Viremia was measured daily in plasma and RM were euthanized 10- or 12-days post-inoculation (dpi). On 2, 3, 5, and 7 dpi, Ae. aegypti were allowed to bloodfeed on RM, incubated for 10 days, then dissected and tested to detect infectious MAYV in tissues and saliva. RM developed infectious MAYV viremias that lasted 3 days and peaked 1–2 dpi with titers ranging from 2-6 log10 PFU/ml. RM inoculated with 7 log10 PFU IV developed significantly higher viremias (area under the curve) than those receiving 3 log10 PFU SC. MAYV RNA was detected in muscle, lymphoid, central nervous, and cardiac tissues. RM showed no signs of fever or joint swelling but some developed mild rashes in areas distant from mosquito feeding sites and histologic inflammation was observed in joints and muscles. Only Ae. aegypti that fed on viremic RM 2 dpi became infected, with an overall infection rate of 48%. Among all mosquitoes that fed on RM 2 dpi, only 2% (4/217) had infectious MAYV in their saliva, suggesting transmission competence. Despite 11 of 12 RM transmitting MAYV to at least one mosquito, individual RM varied in infectiousness to Ae. aegypti, and mosquito cohort infection rates did not correlate with RM viremia levels.

Conclusions/Significance

RM exhibit short-lived MAYV viremias, broad tissue tropism, and mild joint and muscle inflammation, closely resembling human infection. While viremic RM can infect Ae. aegypti, the transmission window is narrow and transmission by Ae. aegypti is rare in this model. The combination of a short infectious period in RM and low transmissibility of Ae. aegypti infected from RM may help explain the absence of widespread urban MAYV outbreaks.

Author summary

Mayaro virus (MAYV) is a mosquito-borne virus found in Latin America that causes fever and joint pain, similar to chikungunya virus (CHIKV). However, unlike CHIKV, MAYV has not led to large outbreaks. One reason may be that levels of MAYV in human blood are too low for Aedes aegypti mosquitoes—known for spreading chikungunya, dengue, and Zika viruses—to pick up and transmit the virus in cities. To better understand this, we studied rhesus macaques, a monkey species that serves as a model for how MAYV behaves in people. We tracked virus levels in their blood and tissues and observed mild joint and muscle inflammation, similar to Mayaro fever in people. Although the macaques were able to infect some Ae. aegypti mosquitoes, the transmission window was short, and only a few mosquitoes that became infected had virus in their saliva, suggesting transmission competence. This limited ability of urban mosquitoes to spread MAYV may help explain why major outbreaks have not occurred.

Introduction

Mayaro virus (MAYV, Togaviridae, Alphavirus; species Alphavirus mayaro) is a mosquito-borne RNA virus that causes Mayaro fever, an acute febrile illness associated with chronic arthralgia [1]. Unlike the related chikungunya virus (CHIKV), MAYV has not caused widespread, human amplified, urban outbreaks in its enzootic regions of Latin America [13]. Consequently, research on MAYV has been relatively limited, especially compared to CHIKV. For example, although multiple vaccine candidates have been developed [49], none have progressed to evaluation in non-human primates (NHP). This is partly due to the historical lack of NHP models for MAYV. While NHP susceptibility was first reported in 1967 [10], it was not until 2023 that cynomolgus [11] and rhesus macaques (RM) [12] were developed as models of human MAYV disease. The RM study defined clinical disease, viremia kinetics, tissue tropism, and immune responses but was limited to three male animals inoculated with a single MAYV dose and employed a genotype L strain (where MAYV comprises 3 genotypes: D, L, and N), which has its known distribution restricted to Brazil [13] and Haiti [14]. If MAYV can efficiently be transmitted from viremic people to urban mosquitoes (human amplification), it poses a risk of major urban outbreaks. However, human MAYV viremia kinetics remain poorly characterized, making it unclear whether viremia levels are sufficient for transmission to urban mosquitoes. To address these gaps, we inoculated male and female RM once with one of 2 doses of a genotype D MAYV strain, which circulates throughout South America [13]. RM were inoculated subcutaneously to mimic infection from a feeding mosquito [15,16], or intravenously to bypass the skin and ensure infection, since, at the time we began these studies, neither of the 2023 papers demonstrating successful subcutaneous MAYV infection of macaques had been published. We then characterized RM viremia magnitude and duration, tissue tropism, neutralizing antibody levels, and histopathologic changes in muscles and joints.

The global spread of CHIKV is driven by transmission using Aedes (Stegomyia) aegypti and Ae. (Stegomyia) albopictus mosquitoes, which thrive in urban tropical environments and are expanding into temperate regions [17]. In contrast, MAYV outbreaks tend to be more localized [2,18], and seropositivity is higher among individuals living in or near forests than in cities [1820]. This pattern suggests that human exposure primarily occurs in forested areas where MAYV cycles between non-human primates, small mammals, birds, reptiles, and multiple species of forest-dwelling mosquitoes [1,21,22]. Although a lack of urban mosquito surveillance in Latin America may obscure potential MAYV transmission in cities, some evidence suggests Ae. aegypti could play a role in MAYV transmission cycles. MAYV RNA has been detected in adult Ae. aegypti in Brazil [23,24], and infectious MAYV has been recovered from Ae. aegypti eggs [25]. Laboratory vector competence studies using artificial bloodmeals have also demonstrated Ae. aegypti are susceptible to MAYV [2630]. Furthermore, Ae. aegypti that ingested MAYV in artificial bloodmeals developed detectable MAYV RNA in salivary glands and, in transmission experiments, cohorts of 10–15 mosquitoes that fed together on naïve immunocompromised mice 7 days later all transmitted MAYV to the mice, with 50% of naïve Ae. aegypti that subsequently fed on viremic mice becoming infected, demonstrating successful Ae. aegypti -mouse- Ae. aegypti MAYV cycling [26]. These findings suggest that Ae. aegypti could contribute to urban MAYV transmission, although immunocompromised mice are less representative of human infection than RM. If MAYV can be efficiently transmitted from infected humans to Ae. aegypti, it poses a risk for major urban outbreaks as seen with CHIKV. Therefore, a goal of this study was to use experimentally infected RM to evaluate MAYV transmission to Ae. aegypti.

Methods

Ethics statement

The study was approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of the University of California, Davis (Protocol number 23106).

Animal source, care, use, and sample collection

This study used 12 healthy adult Indian origin rhesus macaques (RM, Macaca mulatta), including nine males and three females, aged 3.7 to 6.6 years. All animals were from a type D retrovirus-, simian immunodeficiency virus-, and simian lymphocyte tropic virus type 1-free colony at the California National Primate Research Center (CNPRC). All animals were previously exposed to the flavivirus dengue virus, which is not known to impact MAYV infection outcomes. All RM passed a physical exam before study enrollment. The RM were all born and raised at CNPRC in outdoor environments, Although the alphavirus Western equine encephalitis virus has historically circulated in California, no environmental activity in California mosquito pools has been detected since 2007, despite ongoing annual surveillance [31]. All experimental procedures were conducted at CNPRC, which is accredited by the Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care International (AAALAC). Animal care followed the guidelines outlined in the 2011 Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals by the Institute for Laboratory Animal Research. RM were housed indoors in stainless steel cages (Lab Products Inc., Seaford, DE), with cage sizes scaled to each animal according to national standards. Housing conditions included a 12-hour (h) light/dark cycle, temperatures of 64–84°F, and room humidity of 30–70%. Animals that were previously bonded were housed together. They had free access to water and were fed a commercial high-protein diet (Ralston Purina Co., St. Louis, MO) supplemented with fresh produce. Animals were monitored daily for clinical signs, including behavior changes, rash or redness, rectal temperature, and joint swelling at time of sedation. The cumulative number of clinical observations from 1-7 dpi are reported, with several caveats. Day 0 was excluded since observations were made prior to inoculation and were therefore likely not related to MAYV treatment. Observations past 7 dpi were also excluded as they were not available for all animals. Any observation that was related to a procedure (razor burn, injection) or mosquito presentation (e.g., rash at feeding site) on the day of or 1 day after were also excluded from totals. For MAYV inoculation, blood collections, and mosquito feedings, RM were immobilized with ketamine HCl (Dechra Veterinary Products, Overland Park, KS) at 10 mg/kg that was injected intramuscularly in the left leg after overnight fasting. Blood samples were collected using venipuncture. A portion of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA)-anticoagulated whole blood was used for complete blood counts, performed by the CNPRC Clinical Laboratories. The remaining blood was processed by centrifugation at 900 x g for 10 minutes (m) to separate plasma from cells. Plasma was then centrifuged again at 900 x g for 10 m to remove residual cells, after which aliquots were immediately frozen at -80°C. Blood collected without anticoagulant was processed via centrifugation at 900 x g for 10 m to obtain serum. Cerebrospinal fluid was collected from the cervical region. Half of the RM in each cohort were selected for euthanasia on 10 or 12 dpi. Euthanasia was performed with an overdose of pentobarbital, followed by necropsy and tissue collection. Samples were collected from all major organ systems, with a focus on lymphoid tissues, joints, and muscles. A skin biopsy, referred to as the “skin inoculation site” was collected from the middle back region, corresponding to the location where the SC-inoculated animals were injected with MAYV. Tissues were processed using three methods: (i) snap-frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored at -80°C; (ii) preserved in RNALater (ThermoFisher, Waltham, MA) followed by incubation overnight at 4°C then transfer to -80°C for long-term storage, and (iii) fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde.

MAYV source and inoculations

All 12 RM were inoculated with MAYV strain IQT4235. The virus was derived from an infectious clone plasmid created from the sequence of strain IQT4235, a genotype D lineage virus which predominates in Latin America [6]. The plasmid was derived from the sequence of a MAYV strain that was originally isolated from the serum of a febrile human in Iquitos, Peru in 1997 (GenBank: MK070491) [27]. Before in vitro transcription, the complete MAYV cDNA sequence in the plasmid was verified (Plasmidsaurus, Eugene, OR). The sequence in the plasmid was identical to the GenBank sequence except for 2 non-coding mutations (T6298A and G10797A). To generate infectious MAYV, the cDNA clone was linearized using the PacI restriction endonuclease (New England Biolabs, Ipswich, MA), transcribed in vitro into mRNA using the mMessage mMachine SP6 transcription kit (ThermoFisher, Waltham, MA), and electroporated into Vero cells using a BioRad Gene Pulser XCell (Hercules, CA) with the following settings: 125 Volts, 10 millisecond pulse length, 1 second intervals, 3 pulses. After in vitro transcription, the RNA was deep sequenced using the methodologies described below. Infectious MAYV was harvested from Vero cell culture supernatant 2 days post-electroporation, titrated, and stored at -70°C until use. To evaluate effects of dose and inoculation route, male RM were randomly divided into 3 groups. Since only 3 females were available, 1 female was assigned to each group. Each group received a single MAYV inoculation on day 0 with one of the following: 7 log10 IV, 7 log10 PFU SC, or 3 log10 PFU SC. The IV route and 7 log10 dose were chosen to ensure infection, as these studies were initiated before publication of recent MAYV NHP studies [11,12], when infectivity of MAYV IQT4235 for RM was not certain. The SC route was selected to mimic mosquito-borne transmission [32]. The 3 log10 dose was intended to simulate a mosquito-delivered dose, where our prior studies with CHIKV [33] and studies by us [27] and others [28,29] for MAYV show that Ae. aegypti salivate between 1.0-2.5 log10 PFU or 1.0-4.0 log10 genomic RNAs into capillary tubes. IV injections were administered in the saphenous vein, while SC injections were administered in the upper back between the shoulder blades. Inocula were back-titrated by plaque assay to verify the administered dose. Blood samples were collected daily from 1-7 days post-inoculation (dpi) and again at euthanasia, 10 or 12 dpi.

MAYV RNA isolation from macaque plasma and tissues

Frozen plasma and tissues were thawed at room temperature. For tissue processing, each sample was individually weighed, then combined with 500 µl Dulbecco’s modified eagle medium (DMEM) (GenClone, Waltham, MA) and a 4 mm glass bead (ThermoFisher, Waltham, MA). Homogenization was performed using a Retsch MM400 Tissue Lyser (Haan, Germany) at 30 shakes/s for 5 min, followed by a 10 min rest. Samples were then rotated and homogenized again using the same conditions. To clarify the supernatant, homogenized tissues were centrifuged at 3000 g for 2 min. Thawed plasma or supernatant from tissues was used immediately after homogenization for plaque assays or RNA extractions.

Tissue processing and histopathologic analyses

RM tissues were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde and then paraffin embedded, sectioned, and stained with hematoxylin and eosin. A pathologist, blinded to treatment, evaluated joints, tendons, and muscles for pathologic changes using a quantitative scoring metric (S1 Table). Tissues from age- and sex-matched colony control animals not part of this study that were not MAYV exposed served as comparators.

Mosquito source, presentation to rhesus macaques, sampling, and processing

Adult Ae. aegypti mosquitoes aged 3–9 days from the 33rd generation of a colony originally collected in Los Angeles, CA, and identified morphologically in the field [34], were used in this study. Mosquitoes were reared in an insectary under controlled conditions (28oC, 75% humidity, 12hr light/dark cycle) with free access to 10% sucrose in water. All mosquitoes presented to RM were from the same cohort. Twenty-four h prior to RM presentation, sucrose was replaced with sterile water. Mosquitoes were housed in pint sized containers and transported inside plastic shoeboxes from a rearing insectary to the CNPRC animal rooms. On 2, 3, 5, and 7 days post inoculation (dpi) of the RM, cohorts of ~100 mixed-sex Ae. aegypti were presented to the shaved abdomens of anesthetized RM and allowed to feed for 10–15 m. Feeding was confirmed by visual observation of red abdomens. After feeding, mosquitoes were transported in shoeboxes placed inside sealed bags into an arthropod containment level 3 (ACL-3) facility. Mosquitoes were anesthetized with CO2 and bloodfed females were separated from males and non-fed females on a cold table (Bioquip, Compton, CA). Bloodfed females were incubated at 28oC with 75% humidity with 12-h light/dark cycle for 10 days post feed (dpf), with continuous access to 10% sucrose. Nine to 20 mosquitoes per RM per feeding day were incubated. At 10 dpf, mosquitoes were anesthetized with CO2 for 10 s, immobilized on a chill table, and their legs and wings were removed. Saliva was collected using expectoration assays, where the proboscis was inserted into a capillary tube containing DMEM with 5% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum (FBS) (56oC, 30 min) (GenClone, Waltham, MA) and 1% penicillin-streptomycin (P/S) (Genesee Scientific, El Cajon, CA) for 30 m to stimulate salivation. Mosquito tissues were placed in 500 µl DMEM supplemented with 5% FBS and 1% P/S, then homogenized in a TissueLyser II (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) at 20 shakes/s for 2 m and stored at -70oC until further use.

Cells

Vero cells (ATCC CCL-81, Manassas, VA) were used for titration and neutralization assays. Vero cells are African green monkey kidneys cells were maintained in DMEM with 5% FBS and 1% P/S and incubated at 37oC with 5% CO2.

Infectious MAYV detections in inocula, RM, and mosquito samples

Infectious MAYV was quantified from RM inocula, plasma, and mosquito tissues using plaque assays on Vero cells. Mosquito bodies were initially tested for infection. If virus was detected, legs and wings were subsequently tested, following the route of virus dissemination in a mosquito [35,36]. If infectious virus was detected in legs and wings, saliva samples were passaged in Vero cells. Saliva was passaged to maximize virus detection as our prior CHIKV studies [33] show transmitted doses are low. For saliva, 50–75 µl of sample in DMEM was inoculated onto a single well of 60% confluent Vero cells in a 24-well plate. An additional 25–50 µl DMEM was added, and the plate was incubated for 1 h, with rocking every 10 m to facilitate viral attachment and maintain cell hydration. After incubation, 1 ml of DMEM was added to each well, and plates were incubated at 37oC with 5% CO2 for 3 days. If cytopathic effects (CPE) were observed 3 dpi in the test wells but not in the negative control wells, the supernatant was harvested and stored at -80oC. If no CPE was observed, the supernatant was transferred to a 1.5 ml tube, vortexed for 10 s, and then 100 µl was inoculated into fresh Vero cells for a second passage under identical conditions to the first passage. If CPE were detected in either passage, the saliva sample was considered positive for infectious MAYV. For titrations, Vero cells were seeded into 12 (RM)- or 24 (mosquito)-well plates and incubated until 100% confluent. Plasma and homogenized tissue samples were diluted in ten-fold series in DMEM in technical duplicates, with dilution ranges of 10-1-10-11 (plasma), and 10-1-10-12 (mosquitoes). For infection assays, 125 µl (12-well) or 100 µl (24-well) of each diluted sample was inoculated per well and incubated for 1 h, with rocking every 10 m. After incubation, 2 ml (12-well) or 1 ml (24-well) 0.4% agarose (Genesee Scientific, El Cajon, CA) -DMEM at 42oC was added. Plates were incubated for 3 days, then fixed with 2% formalin for 1 h. The agarose overlay was removed and plates were stained with 0.05% weight/volume crystal violet (Millipore-Sigma, Burlington, MA) for 5 m, rinsed with deionized (DI) water, and dried before reading on a light box. Viral titers were calculated using equation 1:

(1)

The infectious MAYV titer of a sample is presented as the mean of duplicate titrations. The limit of detection of titrations was 80 PFU/ml (12-well plate) or 100 PFU/ml (24-well). To convert PFU/ml to PFU/mosquito tissue, the PFU/ml titer was adjusted to account for the volume of media the mosquito tissue was homogenized in (500 µl) and the fraction of that homogenate that was used for serial dilutions (12 µl for 24-well plates, 2.4% of total volume) using equation 2:

(2)

Samples with no detectable infectious MAYV are reported below the LOD lines on graphs and are excluded from calculations of means.

MAYV RNA quantitation by reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR)

MAYV RNA was extracted from RM plasma and homogenized tissues using a viral RNA isolation kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific, #AMB18365) and machine (MagMA Express 96 #4400076, Waltham, MA). Two hundred microliters of sample were mixed with 10 µl RNA binding beads, 10 µl lysis binding enhancer, 120 µl 100% isopropanol (Geel, Antwerp, Belgium) and 120 µl lysis binding solution, which was loaded into the machine in a 96 deep well plate. Extracted RNA was eluted in 65 µl of Elution Buffer (ThermoFisher, Waltham, MA) for storage at -80°C prior to quantification. Into each well of the RT-qPCR plate, 10 µl of extracted RNA, 0.8 µl each of the 100mM forward and reverse primers, 0.2 µl of 100mM probe, 5 µl of TaqMan Fast Advanced Master Mix 4x (Applied Biosystems, Waltham, MA), and 3.2 µl of nuclease-free water (Waltham, MA) were added. Each RT-qPCR plate included 2 wells of negative controls consisting of nuclease-free water (Waltham, MA), and 2 wells of each serial 10-fold positive control dilution that comprised standards of in vitro transcribed MAYV RNA derived from the infectious clone, ranging from 8.1 x 109 to 8.1 x 10-2 genomes/ml, measured using a Qubit (Waltham, MA) prior to serial dilution. The RT-qPCR conditions on the Applied Biosystem ViiA 7 real-time PCR machine (Waltham, MA) were as follows: 52oC 15 s, 94oC 2 m, then 40 cycles of 94oC 15 s, 55oC 40 s, 68oC 20 s. The following primers were used: Forward: GGTAATGATCCACAGTCCATGC (5156 → 5177), Reverse: CGGGTTGAACAACCGGTTC (5237 → 5219), Probe: FAM-CTGACAACCAACAACCCATATCAACGG-NFQ-MGB (5190 → 5216).

Every sample was tested using technical triplicates. The primers and probe were designed de novo and purchased from ATCC (Manassas, VA). The primers all bind in the MAYV nonstructural protein 3 (nsp3) gene. The limit of detection (LOD), determined by averaging the lowest RNA level detected in the standards of all RT-qPCR assays, was 1.0 x 103.5 genomes/gram. The MAYV RNA level in a sample is presented as the mean of triplicate measurements. The number of samples with no detectable RNA levels are reported below the LOD lines on graphs. Samples with no detectable MAYV RNA are excluded from means.

Neutralizing antibody quantification by plaque reduction neutralization test (PRNT)

MAYV neutralizing antibodies in RM sera were quantified using a PRNT80 assay in a 12-well format using MAYV strain IQT4235, the homologous strain used for RM inoculation. The PRNT80 titer was defined as the serum dilution that neutralized 80% of plaques compared to a virus-only control sample, which consisted of approximately 40 PFU of MAYV without RM serum. Sera were heat inactivated at 56oC for 30 m to destroy complement proteins. Controls included a positive serum from a MAYV-inoculated RM in this study that showed neutralization in a preliminary screening and a negative control consisting of serum from a RM with no alphavirus exposure history in a 1:100 final dilution. Each of these serum controls was tested with and without MAYV. A negative control of DMEM only was also included. All samples and controls were tested in technical duplicates. Serum was diluted 1:10 in technical duplicates, then serially two-fold diluted from 1:10–1:5,120. Serum dilutions were mixed 1:1 with virus to make a final series of 1:20–1:10,240. Serum-virus samples and controls were incubated at 37oC with 5% CO2 for 1 h. Following incubation, serum-virus mixtures or controls were inoculated onto plates of Vero cells at a volume of 125 µl/well and incubated for 1 h with rocking every 10 m. After incubation, a 0.4% agarose-DMEM overlay at 42oC was applied to wells. Plates were incubated for 3 days at 37oC with 5% CO2, then fixed with 2% formalin for 1 h. After removal of the agarose overlay, plates were stained with 0.05% weight/volume crystal violet for 5 m, washed with DI water, and dried before counting on a light box. PRNT80 titers are reported as the mean inverse serum dilution that resulted in 80% plaque reduction compared to virus-only control wells. If duplicate tests yielded different PRNT80 titers, the sample was re-tested, and all re-tested samples showed concordance in both replicates. The limit of detection for this assay was 20.

MAYV deep sequencing from in vitro transcribed MAYV RNA, RM, and mosquito saliva samples

MAYV genomes were sequenced from in vitro transcribed RNA that was used to generate the virus stock that was inoculated into RM, plasma samples from all 12 RM at 2 dpi, and from all Vero passaged Ae. aegypti saliva samples that contained infectious MAYV. To generate material for sequencing, viral RNA from plasma was extracted a second time from the same samples previously tested by RT-qPCR following the same extraction protocol. Viral RNA from passaged saliva samples was extracted from Vero supernatants that had been thawed once. The extracted RNA was sequenced using ClickSeq [37]. To enrich and capture MAYV genomic RNA, we designed set of tiled MAYV primers (S2 Table) that match with 100% identity to the MAYV genome used in these studies (GenBank: MK070491). 10 ul of extracted RNA was used as input in reverse transcription reactions, together with 10 pM of MAYV-specific tiled primers and a mixture of dNTPs and 3′-azido-2′,3′-dideoxynucleotides (AzNTPs) (nucleotide analogues with modified 3′ groups that serve as chain terminators) at a ratio of 35:1, per the standard protocol for ClickSeq [38]. Primers were annealed by heating the extracted RNA to 95oC for 2 m, followed by slow cooling to 50oC. Reverse transcription components (Superscript IV, ThermoFisher, Waltham, MA) were added at 50oC to initiate cDNA synthesis. The reverse transcription reaction was incubation for 10 m at 50oC and then 10 m at 80oC, per the manufacturer’s standard protocol. 2.5 units of RNaseH were then added and incubated at 37oC for 20 m and then heat-denatured at 80oC for 10 m. The 3′-azido-blocked cDNA fragments were then “click-ligated” to the 5′-hexynyl adaptor containing the full Illumina i5 adaptor with i5 indexes via copper(I)-catalyzed azide-alkyne cycloaddition (CuAAC). Click-ligated cDNA was used as input to a PCR reaction that provided i7 indexes for 21 cycles. cDNA library fragment sizes of 300–600 nt were selected using double-sided SPRI bead purification and sequenced on an Illumina NovaSeq X, yielding > 10M 150x2 paired end reads per sample. Raw FASTQ data were preprocessed (adaptor trimming and quality filtering) using fastp [39] and cutadapt [40], using batch scripts previously published for analysis Tiled-ClickSeq data [41]. Reads were then mapped to the MAYV reference genome with bowtie2 [42] and single nucleotide variants and minority variants were called using pilon [43].

Statistical Analyses

GraphPad Prism 10.3.1 was used for all statistical analyses, which are enumerated in the results. Analyses of infectious MAYV titers and RNA levels were performed on log-transformed data.

Results

Rhesus macaques develop a 3-day MAYV infectious viremia

This study aimed to characterize infection dynamics and disease outcomes in RM following inoculation of infectious clone derived MAYV IQT4325 from Iquitos, Peru, using 3 dose and route combinations (Fig 1A). Back-titration of the inocula confirmed that the administered doses were within 10% of the target doses. Clinical signs of disease were monitored, and blood samples were collected daily from 1-7 dpi and at necropsy, 10 or 12 dpi. Infectious MAYV and MAYV RNA were quantified from plasma, while tissues were harvested and analyzed for MAYV RNA levels. Histopathological evaluation of muscle and joint tissues was conducted, with inflammation scored using quantitative metrics. None of the MAYV-inoculated RM exhibited signs of behavioral changes or joint swelling, but 8 animals exhibited other signs of mild clinical disease between 1 and 4 dpi. Three animals had mildly elevated temperatures, 3 animals had nausea, 5 animals developed mild erythema at the inoculation site, and one animal developed an abdominal rash prior to mosquito feeding. Some of the rashes were detected on a day of mosquito feeding and on the shaved area of the abdomen where mosquitoes were presented. Eight of 12 RM also developed rashes or skin redness in a region distant from the abdomen and not on a day of mosquito presentation (S3 Table). All MAYV-inoculated RM developed detectable viremia, with infectious MAYV in plasma observed from 1-2 (N = 1) or 1–3 (N = 11) dpi, peaking at 2–6 log10 PFU/ml. No infectious MAYV was detectable in plasma after 3 dpi (Fig 1B). Peak infectious viremia occurred at 1 (N = 4) or 2 (N = 8) dpi and mean infectious viremia between the 1 female and 3 male RM in each group were similar, although statistical analyses were not performed given only 1 female was in each group. RM that received 7 log10 PFU IV had significantly higher mean viremia areas under the curve (AUC) compared to those receiving 3 log10 PFU SC (Kruskal Wallis, Tukey’s post-hoc, p = 0.005) (Fig 1C). However, no significant difference in AUC was observed between the 2 SC groups (Fig 1C). The mean number of cumulative clinical observations from 1-7 dpi was not different across groups of RM that received different MAYV doses and routes, and there was no correlation with peak viremia or AUC (Kruskal-Wallis, p > 0.05) (S1A-C Fig). The detection pattern of MAYV RNA in plasma mirrored that of infectious virus, with RNA detected from 1-3 (N = 8) and 1–4 dpi (N = 4) animals, peaking at 7–9 log10 genomes/ml (Fig 1D). MAYV RNA levels peaked 1 (N = 1) or 2 (N = 11) dpi. In most samples, MAYV RNA levels were typically several logs higher than infectious MAYV levels. There were no significant differences in mean genome AUC levels across cohorts (Kruskal-Wallis, p > 0.05) (Fig 1E). Together, these results demonstrate that RM are susceptible to infection with MAYV infectious clone IQT4235 and that some infected animals develop mild clinical disease and focal rash. Viremia was short-lived, with infectious virus becoming undetectable after 3 dpi and viral RNA levels undetectable after 4 dpi.

thumbnail
Fig 1. Rhesus macaques develop short MAYV viremias.

(A) Study design in which 12 rhesus macaques (9 males and 3 females) were inoculated with 3 or 7 log10 PFU MAYV IQT4235 from an infectious clone by intravenous (IV) or subcutaneous (SC) routes on day 0, followed by blood collections 1-7 days post-inoculation (dpi) and blood collections and euthanasia 10 or 12 dpi. (B) MAYV infectious viremia in plasma 1-12 dpi measured as log10 plaque forming units (PFU)/ml. Each line shows kinetics from 1 RM and bars report standard deviations from duplicate titrations. (C) Area under the viremia curve (AUC). Horizontal lines denote averages. D) MAYV RNA in plasma measured as log10 genomes/ml 1-7 and 10 or 12 dpi. Each line shows kinetics from 1 RM and bars report standard deviations from triplicate RT-qPCR measurements. (E) Area under the MAYV RNA curve. Horizontal lines denote averages. Data points outlined in black represent female animals. P values are based on Kruskal-Wallis with Tukey’s post-hoc tests, ns = not significant (p > 0.05). The colors and shape identifiers denote individual RM, which are also identified with a unique number. LOD is the limit of detection. Images created using BioRender.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0013061.g001

MAYV-infected rhesus macaques have detectable neutralizing antibody

We measured endpoint neutralizing antibody titers in RM serum upon euthanasia, 10 or 12 dpi, against the homologous strain of MAYV used for RM inoculation. All 12 animals had detectable PRNT80 titers, ranging from 80 to 1280 (Fig 2A), with a mean titer of 160. There was no significant difference in mean titers between the different dose and route groups (Kruskal-Wallis, p > 0.05).These data demonstrate RM have MAYV-specific neutralizing antibody detectable 10–12 days after MAYV infection.

thumbnail
Fig 2. Rhesus macaques have MAYV neutralizing antibodies in serum and MAYV RNA in multiple tissues 10 or 12 dpi.

(A) Plaque reduction neutralization test 80% (PRNT80) titers in serum. PRNT80 titers are based on duplicate titrations. Numbers above bars show day of euthanasia on which PRNT80 titers were measured. The solid black line shows the average titer for all RM. The colors and shape identifiers denote individual RM, which are also identified with a unique number. The dotted line shows the LOD. MAYV RNA levels in (B) central nervous system (CNS), quadriceps, and reproductive organs, (C) joints and skin, and (D) lymphoid tissues, heart, and liver. The colors and shapes identify individual RM. Data points with black outlines represent female animals. MAYV RNA levels were measured by RT-qPCR with an average LOD of 3.5 log10 genomes/gram, indicated by the horizontal dotted line. Cerebrospinal fluid data is graphed in genomes/ml with the same LOD. Horizontal lines show mean titers. Values from animals without detectable MAYV RNA are not included in means but the number of animals with no detectable RNA (ND) are shown below the LOD line. “ns” indicates no statistically significant difference by Kruskal-Wallis test, p > 0.05. No statistical analyses were performed on heart, cerebellum, ovary, and CSF tissues due to sample numbers with measurable RNA levels. CSF = cerebrospinal fluid; Q. Muscle/Tendon = quadricep; JC = joint capsule; inoc. = inoculation; LN = lymph node.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0013061.g002

MAYV RNA tropism is diffuse and includes muscle, lymphoid, central nervous, and circulatory systems of rhesus macaques

We evaluated whether infectious MAYV or MAYV RNA could be detected in various tissues, including muscle and joint, as well as other systems previously identified as targets in male rhesus [12] and female cynomolgus [11] macaques. We measured both infectious MAYV and MAYV RNA levels in 14 non-reproductive tissues for each RM and in testes and ovaries. No infectious MAYV was detected in any of the RM tissues. However, MAYV RNA was detected in every tissue type for at least one RM (Fig 2B2D). We observed considerable variability in MAYV RNA detection both within and across cohorts and tissue types. No statistically significant differences in mean tissue titers were observed across different dose and route groups (Kruskal-Wallis, p > 0.05).

The mean MAYV RNA level across all tissues ranged from 4.1-9.0 log10 genomes/gram (Fig 2B2D). Most RM in each group had detectable MAYV RNA in the majority of their tissues (Fig 3). For the reproductive tissues, all but one male and one female had detectable MAYV RNA in their testes and ovaries, respectively. These data show that MAYV infects multiple RM tissue systems, as evidenced by viral RNA detections in most animals at 10 or 12 dpi, nearly a week after MAYV RNA clearance from the blood. In general, the highest MAYV RNA levels were detected in lymphoid tissues including lymph nodes and spleen.

thumbnail
Fig 3. MAYV RNA is detectable in multiple tissues of rhesus macaques 10 or 12 dpi.

The heatmap shows the magnitude of MAYV RNA detection. The colors and shape identifiers denote individual RM, which are also identified with a unique number. Female animals (4, 8, and 12) are represented as diamonds. MAYV RNA levels were measured by RT-qPCR with an average limit of detection (LOD) of 3.5 log10 genomes/gram. Boxes with X symbols show tissues that were not available due to sex.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0013061.g003

MAYV infection of rhesus macaques produces histopathologic signs of inflammation in in joints and muscles

After establishing the susceptibility, viremia kinetics, and tissue tropism of MAYV IQT4235 in RM, we focused on identifying histopathologic changes in target tissues. Since alphaviruses like MAYV target joints and muscles, causing muscle pain and arthritic disease, we concentrated on these tissue types. Using our quantitative histopathologic scoring scale (S1 Table), we identified and quantified inflammatory changes in hematoxylin and eosin-stained joint and muscle tissues. Inflammation was considered present if any of the 12 tissues evaluated showed had a score greater than 0, where 0 represents the baseline for colony control animals not exposed to MAYV. All 12 MAYV inoculated RM showed histopathologic signs of inflammation, with joint scores ranging from 6 to 14 and muscle scores from 1 to 10 (Fig 4A). No significant differences were found in mean pathology scores in joint, muscle, or composite (joint & muscle) tissues across any treatment groups (Kruskal-Wallis, p > 0.05). Additionally, there was no significant difference in mean pathology scores between RM euthanized at 10 or 12 dpi (Kruskal-Wallis, p > 0.05). Representative images of the inflammatory responses show immune cells (dark purple, marked with asterisks*) in the joint synovium for a finger (Fig 4B), toe (Fig 4C), and elbow (Fig 4D). There was no correlation between the joints & muscles pathology score and the cumulative clinical score (S1D Fig). These data demonstrate that MAYV caused histopathologic signs of muscle and joint inflammation in all infected RM at 10 or 12 dpi. Furthermore, the route of inoculation and dose did not affect the magnitude of these histopathologic changes at these sites.

thumbnail
Fig 4. MAYV infection of rhesus macaques produces mild inflammatory responses in joints and muscles.

(A) Pathology scores in joints and muscles for MAYV infected RM based on quantitative histopathologic criteria (S1 Table). The colors and shape identifiers denote individual RM. Bars show means. ns denotes not significant (Kruskal-Wallis, p > 0.05). Representative histology images of (B) Joint synovium of finger, animal 2 from 7 log10 PFU IV group, scale bar: 20 micrometers. (C) Joint synovium of toe, animal 10 from 3 log10 PFU SC group, scale bar: 100 micrometers. (D) Joint synovium of elbow, animal 2 from 7 log10 PFU IV group scale bar: 50 micrometers. Asterisks indicate immune cell(s).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0013061.g004

MAYV-viremic rhesus macaques infect Ae. aegypti 2 days after macaque inoculation

To evaluate the ability of RM to transmit MAYV to a primary arbovirus vector in urban settings, we allowed female Ae. aegypti mosquitoes, sourced from a colony originating from Los Angeles, California, USA, to bloodfeed on each anesthetized RM 2, 3, 5, and 7 dpi (Fig 5A). These times were chosen based on our projection of when the animals would be viremic. Since we did not test RM plasma in real-time, we were unaware that animals cleared detectable viremia after 3 dpi, and neither of the 2023 macaque studies showing short viremias had been published at the time our study was conducted. All mosquitoes that bloodfed were incubated for 10 days, the period during which MAYV disseminates and reaches mosquito saliva [2730]. We assessed MAYV infection in mosquitoes by testing their bodies, legs and wings for dissemination, and saliva, a proxy for transmission. All RM showed detectable viremias at 2 and 3 dpi, but none were viremic at 5 or 7 dpi (Fig 5B). The timing of mosquito presentations therefore covered both viremic (2 and 3 dpi) and aviremic (5 and 7 dpi) periods in RM. Except for one mosquito that fed 3 dpi, only RM 2 dpi were infectious to Ae. aegypti (Fig 5C). For mosquitoes that fed 2 dpi, 48% (104/217) of bodies tested positive for MAYV. Among these, 38% (39/104) of their legs and wings tested positive. These data demonstrate that MAYV-infected RM can infect Ae. aegypti but the window of infectiousness is narrow and does not extend past 2 dpi in this model. Dissemination rates from these mosquitoes were also low.

thumbnail
Fig 5. MAYV viremic rhesus macaques are infectious to Ae. aegypti mosquitoes in a narrow window, 2 dpi.

(A) Experimental design showing the timing of mosquito exposure to MAYV-infected RM 2, 3, 5, and 7 dpi, followed by mosquito incubation and harvest of bodies, legs and wings, and saliva 10 days post-feed (dpf). (B) Mean viremia levels in RM on mosquito feeding days, represented as cohort log-transformed means from the data shown in Fig 1B. Error bars show standard deviations. (C) Rates of MAYV infection in Ae. aegypti (bodies), dissemination in legs and wings (L&W), and transmission in saliva from mosquitoes that fed on RM 2, 3, 5, or 7 dpi. Error bars show standard deviations and the fractions above each error bar represent the number of mosquitoes with detectable infectious MAYV divided by the number of mosquitoes tested. Images created using BioRender.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0013061.g005

Few Ae. aegypti that feed on viremic rhesus macaques transmit infectious MAYV

To evaluate the transmissibility of MAYV by infected mosquitoes, we used detection of infectious virus in saliva as a surrogate for transmission to a vertebrate. Saliva samples from individual Ae. aegypti were tested using a Vero cell passaging approach. Saliva collected into capillary tubes from mosquitoes with detectable infectious MAYV in their legs and wings was passaged once or twice on Vero cells. Samples showing cytopathic effects at either passage in Vero cells were considered to contain infectious MAYV. Of the 39 mosquitoes with disseminated infections in legs and wings, 4 (10%) had infectious MAYV in saliva (Fig 5C). Of these four mosquitoes, one fed on RM 3, two fed on RM 4 and one fed on RM 12. The overall potential transmission rate for all 217 Ae. aegypti that fed on RM in this study was 2% (4/217), and 4% (4/104) of mosquitoes with infected bodies. These data show that while Ae. aegypti infected from RM may transmit MAYV, the probability of transmission appears to be low.

Individual rhesus macaques are variably infectious to Ae. aegypti

To assess MAYV infectivity in Ae. aegypti that ingested MAYV from viremic RM 2 dpi, we quantified infectious MAYV in bodies (representing infection) and legs & wings (representing disseminated infection) 10 dpf. The mean infection rates were not significantly different in cohorts that fed on RM inoculated with different MAYV doses or routes (Kruskal–Wallis, p > 0.05).(Fig 6A). Eleven of 12 RM infected at least one Ae. aegypti body. Infection and dissemination rates varied widely within cohorts that fed on different RM, ranging from 5% (1/20) to 90% (18/20) infected and 0% (0/1) to 100% (4/4) disseminated (Fig 6B).

thumbnail
Fig 6. MAYV infects and disseminates Ae. aegypti that ingest bloodmeals from viremic rhesus macaques 2 dpi.

(A) Cohort infection rates of Ae. aegypti exposed to RM treated with the same dose and route of MAYV. Each dot represents the mean infection rate from a cohort that fed on a single RM, with error bars indicating standard deviations. Fractions on bars represent number of positive mosquito bodies divided by the number of bloodfed mosquitoes. (B) Rates of infection (bodies, solid bars) and dissemination (legs and wings, open bars) in cohorts of Ae. aegypti that ingested bloodmeals from each viremic RM. Fractions above bars show the number of positive tissue samples divided by the number tested. The colors and shape identifiers denote individual RM, which are also identified with a unique number. (C-E) Infectious MAYV levels in bodies and legs of individual Ae. aegypti that ingested bloodmeals from viremic RM and which became infected. Doses and routes of RM treatment are indicated by colored data points, and red numbers show the infectious plasma MAYV RM titers at the time of mosquito feeding, 2 dpi. Each dot represents a single mosquito tissue titration, with solid horizontal lines showing the mean values. Mosquito tissues with no detectable infectious MAYV above the LOD are not included in means; the numbers (N) of negatives are shown below the LOD line. The horizontal dotted line shows the assay limit of detection (LOD), 3.3 log10 PFU/tissue. The colors and shapes of data points follow designations for individual RM, and data points with black outlines represent mosquitoes that fed on female RM. ns denotes not significant, p < 0.05, ANOVA for panel A and Kruskal-Wallis for panels C-E.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0013061.g006

Ae. aegypti that feed on viremic rhesus macaques develop a range of MAYV levels

Mean Ae. aegypti body or leg and wing titers were not significantly different across cohorts that fed on RM inoculated with different MAYV doses or routes (one-way ANOVA, p > 0.05) (S2 Fig). Ae. aegypti developed a range of MAYV titers, with cohort body means ranging from 5.1 to 6.8 log10 PFU. For legs and wings, mean titers ranged from 4.2 to 5.8 log10 PFU. Mean body titers in cohorts that fed on RM in the same group were not different (Kruskal Wallis, p > 0.05, [mean leg and wing titers were not compared statistically due to small and uneven sample sizes]) (Fig 6C6E). The results from these studies demonstrate individual RM are variably infectious to Ae. aegypti 2 dpi, with the majority of animals infecting mosquitoes. Individual mosquitoes that fed on the same RM showed variable rates of infection and dissemination and variable magnitudes of infection.

Rhesus macaque MAYV viremia at the time of mosquito feeding does not predict Ae. aegypti infection rates or magnitudes

The variable infectivity of RM for Ae. aegypti was accompanied by a 3 log10 viremia range (2–5 log10 PFU/ml blood, as indicated by the red values in Figs 5B and 6C6E) at mosquito presentation. This prompted us to investigate whether RM viremia at the time of mosquito feeding correlates with mosquito infection rates. We predicted that, similar to conventional vector competence studies that use virus-spiked bloodmeals, Ae. aegypti infected by viremic RM would show a dose-dependent response to MAYV infection. To test this, we performed a Spearman’s correlation analysis comparing infection rates in Ae. aegypti that fed on different MAYV-infected RM (Fig 7A). The correlation between RM viremia and Ae. aegypti infection rate (rho = 0.43), showed a moderately positive relationship but was not statistically significant (p = 0.16). We also assessed whether the magnitude of viremia at mosquito presentation correlated with mean MAYV body titers in cohorts of infected mosquitoes that fed on each RM (Fig 7B). The rho value of 0.0046 (p = 0.99) showed no association between these two variables. These results indicate that the magnitude of MAYV RM viremia at the time of Ae. aegypti presentation does not predict Ae. aegypti infectiousness or infection levels in mosquitoes.

thumbnail
Fig 7. Rhesus macaque MAYV viremia levels do not correlate with Ae. aegypti (A) infection rates or (B) mean body titers.

Lines show linear regression and the R2 value represents the coefficient of determination, p shows p values, Spearman’s correlation analyses.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0013061.g007

Mayaro virus is genetically stable during rhesus macaque infection and transmission from Ae. aegypti

To evaluate whether genetic changes in MAYV arising during infection of RM or Ae. aegypti may influence infectivity of RM to mosquitoes which could explain the lack of correlation between the magnitude of RM viremia and Ae. aegypti infection rates, we deep sequenced the MAYV genomes in plasma from all 12 RM at 2 dpi and compared it to the MAYV plasmid sequence that was used to generate the virus stock that was inoculated into RM. We also sequenced all 4 Vero passaged MAYV positive Ae. aegypti saliva samples. All 12 plasmas and 3 of the 4 Ae. aegypti saliva samples were identical across the genome at the consensus level (>50% of RNAs) to the sequence of MAYV used to produce the virus stock for RM inoculations. There was a single non-coding mutation (G5758A) in 1 Vero passaged mosquito saliva sample from a mosquito that fed on RM 3. These data do not support viral genetic differences as a contributor to the variable infectiousness of RM for Ae. aegypti.

Discussion

This is the fourth study to investigate experimental MAYV infection of macaques, following the three previous studies that demonstrated susceptibility, tropism, and mild disease [1012]. In this study, we inoculated 12 RM with 2 doses of MAYV and observed infectious viremias for 2–3 days, peaking at 2–6 log10 PFU/ml, along with 3–4 days of detectable plasma viral RNA. All RM had MAYV specific neutralizing antibodies 10 or 12 dpi, viral RNA in multiple tissues, and mild inflammation in the evaluated joints and muscles. Some RM had skin rashes. Since we exposed the RM to Ae. aegypti and mosquito feeding can induce responses in the skin, we cannot exclude mosquito feeding as a cause of skin manifestations. With the limitation that group sizes were small (N = 4), there were no significant differences in neutralizing antibody titers, joint and muscle histopathology scores, or tissue tropism among groups treated with different MAYV doses and inoculation routes. We cannot make conclusions about sex differences due to low RM numbers. Given we did not measure neutralizing antibody titers prior to MAYV inoculation, we do not know whether titers increased after infection.

While existing murine models of MAYV disease replicate features of Mayaro fever in people, such as weight loss, arthralgia, and elevated pro-inflammatory cytokines [4,4446], NHP more accurately mimic humans due to closer genetic, physiological, anatomical, and immune system similarities. NHP models are also crucial for the licensure of viral vaccines [47]. NHP are particularly valuable for understanding human MAYV, as widespread outbreaks have not been well-documented, limiting understanding of clinical Mayaro fever. In humans, MAYV viremias at the time of clinic presentation range from 2.5-5.0 log10 PFU/ml [2,27] and are accompanied by fever, rash, and chronic arthralgia in up to 50% of cases [1,48,49]. In the first published NHP study of MAYV, conducted in 1967, 6 RM inoculated SC with 4.7-5.9 log10 suckling mouse intracerebral inoculation lethal dose 50% developed 4–5 day viremias peaking at 3.0-5.3 log10 PFU/ml [10]. In 2023, Weber et al. [12] inoculated 3 male RM SC with 5 log10 PFU/ml MAYV BeAr 505411, a lineage L strain prevalent in Brazil [50]. The animals were monitored daily and euthanized 10 dpi. In those male RM, MAYV RNA was detected in muscle, joint, genital, nervous, cardiovascular, urinary, skin, and lymphoid tissues. Inflammation was observed in small joints, with rashes similar to those in humans [48] and elevated cytokine levels as observed in humans [51]. Also in 2023, Hamilton et al. [11] IV inoculated 12 female cynomolgus macaques with 6 log10 PFU MAYV, detecting a 3–4 day infectious viremia. The study used strains from all 3 genetic lineages (N, L, and D [50]). Mean RNA viremias peaked 2 dpi for all lineages and, similar to observations from RM, MAYV RNA was detected in many tissues. Our study builds on this research by further defining MAYV viremia magnitude and kinetics, tissue tropism, and histopathologic changes in a larger number of both male and female RM inoculated with a lineage D MAYV strain (IQT4235) not previously tested in NHP. Compared to CHIKV, MAYV viremias in RM are shorter and lower than the 4–6 day average and 5–12 log10 PFU/ml peak CHIKV kinetics in macaques (reviewed in [52]). Collectively, the data from this and prior MAYV NHP studies demonstrate that macaques are susceptible to acute MAYV infection, exhibiting short viremias, minor rashes, and mild inflammatory disease in muscles and joints, which mirrors human arthritic symptoms, where MAYV arthralgia occurs commonly in the hand, knee, ankle, foot, and wrist [53]. Alphavirus replication in muscle tissues impacts pathogenesis and persistent disease signs [7,54,55]; for MAYV, this could be influenced by MAYV RNA detection in muscles and other tissues after clearance of infectious virus and viral RNA from blood. Detection of MAYV RNA in cerebellum and cerebrospinal fluid in the RM in this study suggests nervous tissue involvement. Neurologic disease signs have not been reported in MAYV patients but occur in CHIKV patients [56,57] and MAYV infects cultured human brain cells [58]. One caveat of our studies is that we used infectious clone-derived virus representing a single strain of MAYV from lineage D. Alphaviruses rescued from infectious clones have lower genetic diversity than wild type strains, [59] which can reduce fitness and infectivity [60,61]. We did not include a group of RM that was sham-inoculated and evaluated histologically; as such, we relied on baseline histopathologic observations in joint and muscle tissues from other RM that were not treated identically to the animals in this study. Further, our assessments of MAYV RNA levels and tropism in tissues is limited to 10 and 12 dpi, which may miss detection at other time points.

Although prior studies have examined vector competence for Ae. aegypti that ingested MAYV from artificial bloodmeals [2730] and mice [26], this is the first to expose Ae. aegypti to MAYV-infected RM. Even though infectious viremias were detected from 1-3 dpi in all RM and 11 of 12 RM infected at least 1 Ae. aegypti, only mosquitoes that fed 2 dpi became infected (caveat: there was 1 mosquito that fed 3 dpi which became infected). These data show there is a narrow temporal window of RM MAYV infectivity for Ae. aegypti. Only 2% of all Ae. aegypti that bloodfed from RM 2 dpi and 10% of those that developed disseminated infections transmitted infectious MAYV in saliva. We did not observe a correlation between RM viremia 2 dpi and Ae. aegypti cohort infection rates or the mean magnitude of infection in mosquito bodies. The low transmissibility from RM to Ae. aegypti and from Ae. aegypti into capillary tubes and the lack of dose response contrasts with patterns from conventional vector competence assessments that use artificial bloodmeals. These studies used mosquitoes from the United States [28,29], Peru [27], or Brazil [30] and bloodmeals with 5–9 log10 PFU/ml of MAYV strain IQT4235 which derives from a human in Iquitos, Peru in 1997 (the same strain from which the infectious clone we used in this study was made), or TRVL4675, which was isolated from a human in 1954 in Trinidad. Collectively these studies reported higher rates of MAYV transmission than in our study; infectious MAYV was detected in 50–90% of saliva samples collected 7 or 14 day after the artificial bloodmeal. The study using Peruvian mosquitoes and IQT4235 [27] also detected a dose-dependent response wherein infection and transmission rates increased with higher bloodmeal titers, especially at or exceeding 5 log10 PFU/ml. These disparities suggest that artificial bloodmeals with high titers that exceed human or RM viremias may overestimate susceptibility to and transmissibility by Ae. aegypti for MAYV compared to RM-derived infections.

We observed that individual RM were variably infectious to mosquitoes. Intra-host variability in infectiousness is another feature of arbovirus transmission to vectors that artificial bloodmeals may not recapitulate and which has not been evaluated from NHP for any alphavirus including MAYV. The variability was not related to the magnitude of viremia or viral genetic changes in the MAYV genome in RM plasma at the period of mosquito feeding. Given that the animals we used were outbred, we cannot exclude RM genetic factors that condition differential infectiousness of individual animals to mosquitoes. We also did not evaluate cytokine levels or anti-MAYV IgG and IgM titers that may reduce human infectiousness to mosquitoes [62,63]. RM viremia was assessed from blood collected via the femoral vein immediately preceding mosquito presentation on the abdomen of each animal; if levels in the skin and blood-borne virus in the capillary beds in the abdomen differ from the femoral vein, the measured viremia might be different than levels the mosquitoes ingested. Mosquito probing can be both in venules and extra-venular [16]; it is also possible that MAYV in the epidermis was ingested by feeding mosquitoes but would not be represented in viremias reported. We did not sample skin at the time of feeding to assess this possibility. Individual mosquitoes may also have ingested variable bloodmeal volumes, which may have impacted infection success. We did not present Ae. aegypti to RM 1 dpi; this may have overlooked an early period during which the animals were infectious to mosquitoes. There are multiple studies for mosquito-borne flaviviruses including dengue (DENV), yellow fever (YFV), and Zika (ZIKV) that show host and virus species both affect infectiousness of an infected vertebrate for a mosquito vector. For DENV, higher viremia is the major determinant of human-to-Ae. aegypti transmission [6366]. This contrasts with our prior NHP studies, where Ae. albopictus exposed to experimentally DENV-2-infected cynomolgus macaques and squirrel monkeys were not more likely to become infected after feeding on animals with higher viremias, and, unexpectedly, some aviremic animals even transmitted DENV to Ae. albopictus [67]. Conversely, we found that rates of infection in Ae. aegypti that ingested bloodmeals from YFV-infected cynomolgus macaques [68] and Ae. albopictus that ingested bloodmeals from ZIKV-infected squirrel monkeys or cynomolgus macaques [67] correlate with NHP viremia levels.

This study further establishes RM as model of human MAYV and shows that Ae. aegypti are capable of transmitting MAYV from infected RM at a very low rate. A limitation of our work is that we only used Ae. aegypti from a single origin (Los Angeles, California) which restricts our ability to understand whether this observation is true for Ae. aegypti from other areas. Poor MAYV transmissibility by Ae. aegypti infected from RM may reflect human infectiousness and could, in part, explain why MAYV outbreaks in urban areas are not widespread. Epidemics of CHIKV have been potentiated by adaptation for increased infection and transmission by urban vectors. Mutations in the CHIKV envelope glycoprotein genes have been associated with outbreaks since 2005 by increasing infectivity and transmissibility by Ae. albopictus [69,70]. Similarly, a Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus (another alphavirus) outbreak in Mexico was likely initiated via envelope gene mutations that augment infectivity for Ae. (Ochlerotatus) taeniorhynchus [71]. Given that MAYV is an emerging public health threat [1,18,21], the continued development of NHP models and assessments of transmission to urban Ae. aegypti mosquitoes advance our understanding of MAYV disease and the potential for human-Ae. aegypti-human transmission.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. Cumulative numbers of clinical observations in MAYV-infected RM from 1-7 dpi, excluding observations that could be associated with procedures involving injections or mosquito feeding by (A) dose and route treatment, (B) peak viremia, and (C) AUC of the viremia curve, and (D) joints & muscles pathology score. ns denotes not-significant, Kruskal-Wallis, p > 0.05.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0013061.s001

(TIFF)

S2 Fig. Magnitudes of MAYV infection in (A) bodies and (B) legs and wings of Ae. aegypti that ingested bloodmeals from RM treated with different doses and routes 2 days post-inoculation.

Lines shown means. ns denotes not significant, 2 way ANOVA, p > 0.05. Mosquitoes with no detectable infectious MAYV are not represented on this graph.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0013061.s002

(TIFF)

S1 Table. Muscle and joint histopathology scoring rubric.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0013061.s003

(DOCX)

S2 Table. Tiled MAYV primers used for library generation for sequencing.

Primers were designed to match the genome of the parent strain, GenBank: MK070491.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0013061.s004

(DOCX)

S3 Table. Physical observations of skin in MAYV inoculated RM.

Inoc. is inoculation, DPI is day post-inoculation, PFU is plaque forming unit, IV is intravenous, SC is subcutaneous.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0013061.s005

(DOCX)

Acknowledgments

We thank the staff of California National Primate Research Center (CNPRC) Colony Management and Research Services and Clinical Laboratories for their expert technical assistance. We thank Andrew Routh at ClickSeq Technologies for supporting the sequencing aspects of this project.

References

  1. 1. Diagne CT, Bengue M, Choumet V, Hamel R, Pompon J, Missé D. Mayaro Virus Pathogenesis and Transmission Mechanisms. Pathogens. 2020;9(9):738. pmid:32911824
  2. 2. Pinheiro FP, Freitas RB, Travassos da Rosa JF, Gabbay YB, Mello WA, LeDuc JW. An outbreak of Mayaro virus disease in Belterra, Brazil. I. Clinical and virological findings. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1981;30(3):674–81. pmid:6266263
  3. 3. Azevedo RSS, Silva EVP, Carvalho VL, Rodrigues SG, Nunes-Neto JP, Monteiro H, et al. Mayaro fever virus, Brazilian Amazon. Emerg Infect Dis. 2009;15(11):1830–2. pmid:19891877
  4. 4. Webb EM, Azar SR, Haller SL, Langsjoen RM, Cuthbert CE, Ramjag AT, et al. Effects of Chikungunya virus immunity on Mayaro virus disease and epidemic potential. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):20399. pmid:31892710
  5. 5. Robinson DM, McManus AT, Cole FE Jr, Pedersen CE Jr. Inactivated Mayaro Vaccine Produced in Human Diploid Cell Cultures. Military Medicine. 1976;141(3):163–6.
  6. 6. Weise WJ, Hermance ME, Forrester N, Adams AP, Langsjoen R, Gorchakov R, et al. A novel live-attenuated vaccine candidate for Mayaro fever. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2014;8(8):e2969. pmid:25101995
  7. 7. Mota MT de O, Costa VV, Sugimoto MA, Guimarães G de F, Queiroz-Junior CM, Moreira TP, et al. In-depth characterization of a novel live-attenuated Mayaro virus vaccine candidate using an immunocompetent mouse model of Mayaro disease. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):5306. pmid:32210270
  8. 8. Abbo SR, Nguyen W, Abma-Henkens MHC, van de Kamer D, Savelkoul NHA, Geertsema C, et al. Comparative Efficacy of Mayaro Virus-Like Particle Vaccines Produced in Insect or Mammalian Cells. J Virol. 2023;97(3):e0160122. pmid:36883812
  9. 9. Choi H, Kudchodkar SB, Reuschel EL, Asija K, Borole P, Ho M, et al. Protective immunity by an engineered DNA vaccine for Mayaro virus. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2019;13(2):e0007042. pmid:30730897
  10. 10. Binn LN, Harrison VR, Randall R. Patterns of Viremia and Antibody Observed in Rhesus Monkeys Inoculated with Chikungunya and Other Serologically Related Group a Arboviruses. The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. 1967;16(6):782–5.
  11. 11. Hamilton MM, Webb EM, Peterson MC, Patel G, Porto M, Orekov T, et al. Comparative pathogenesis of three Mayaro virus genotypes in the cynomolgus macaque. J Gen Virol. 2024;105(7). pmid:38995674
  12. 12. Weber WC, Labriola CS, Kreklywich CN, Ray K, Haese NN, Andoh TF, et al. Mayaro virus pathogenesis and immunity in rhesus macaques. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2023;17(11):e0011742. pmid:37983245
  13. 13. Marinho MDS, Ferreira GM, Grosche VR, Nicolau-Junior N, Campos T de L, Santos IA, et al. Evolutionary Profile of Mayaro Virus in the Americas: An Update into Genome Variability. Viruses. 2024;16(5):809. pmid:38793690
  14. 14. Blohm G, Elbadry MA, Mavian C, Stephenson C, Loeb J, White S, et al. Mayaro as a Caribbean traveler: Evidence for multiple introductions and transmission of the virus into Haiti. Int J Infect Dis. 2019;87:151–3. pmid:31382049
  15. 15. Smith DR, Carrara A-S, Aguilar PV, Weaver SC. Evaluation of methods to assess transmission potential of Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus by mosquitoes and estimation of mosquito saliva titers. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2005;73(1):33–9. pmid:16014828
  16. 16. Choumet V, Attout T, Chartier L, Khun H, Sautereau J, Robbe-Vincent A, et al. Visualizing non infectious and infectious Anopheles gambiae blood feedings in naive and saliva-immunized mice. PLoS One. 2012;7(12):e50464. pmid:23272060
  17. 17. Kraemer MUG, Sinka ME, Duda KA, Mylne AQN, Shearer FM, Barker CM, et al. The global distribution of the arbovirus vectors Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus. Elife. 2015;4:e08347. pmid:26126267
  18. 18. Pezzi L, Rodriguez-Morales AJ, Reusken CB, Ribeiro GS, LaBeaud AD, Lourenço-de-Oliveira R, et al. GloPID-R report on chikungunya, o’nyong-nyong and Mayaro virus, part 3: Epidemiological distribution of Mayaro virus. Antiviral Res. 2019;172:104610. pmid:31545981
  19. 19. Talarmin A, Chandler LJ, Kazanji M, de Thoisy B, Debon P, Lelarge J, et al. Mayaro virus fever in French Guiana: isolation, identification, and seroprevalence. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1998;59(3):452–6. pmid:9749643
  20. 20. Izurieta RO, Macaluso M, Watts DM, Tesh RB, Guerra B, Cruz LM, et al. Hunting in the Rainforest and Mayaro Virus Infection: An emerging Alphavirus in Ecuador. J Glob Infect Dis. 2011;3(4):317–23. pmid:22223990
  21. 21. Pezzi L, Diallo M, Rosa-Freitas MG, Vega-Rua A, Ng LFP, Boyer S, et al. GloPID-R report on chikungunya, o’nyong-nyong and Mayaro virus, part 5: Entomological aspects. Antiviral Res. 2020;174:104670. pmid:31812638
  22. 22. Alencar J, Lorosa ES, Dégallier N, Serra-Freire NM, Pacheco JB, Guimarães AÉ. Feeding Patterns of Haemagogus janthinomys (Diptera: Culicidae) in Different Regions of Brazil. J Med Entomol. 2005;42(6):981–5.
  23. 23. da Silva Neves NA, da Silva Ferreira R, Morais DO, Pavon JAR, de Pinho JB, Slhessarenko RD. Chikungunya, Zika, Mayaro, and Equine Encephalitis virus detection in adult Culicinae from South Central Mato Grosso, Brazil, during the rainy season of 2018. Braz J Microbiol. 2022;53(1):63–70. pmid:34787837
  24. 24. de Curcio JS, Salem-Izacc SM, Pereira Neto LM, Nunes EB, Anunciação CE, Silveira-Lacerda E de P. Detection of Mayaro virus in Aedes aegypti mosquitoes circulating in Goiânia-Goiás-Brazil. Microbes Infect. 2022;24(4):104948. pmid:35108606
  25. 25. Maia LMS, Bezerra MCF, Costa MCS, Souza EM, Oliveira MEB, Ribeiro ALM, et al. Natural vertical infection by dengue virus serotype 4, Zika virus and Mayaro virus in Aedes (Stegomyia) aegypti and Aedes (Stegomyia) albopictus. Med Vet Entomol. 2019;33(3):437–42. pmid:30776139
  26. 26. Krokovsky L, Lins CRB, Guedes DRD, Wallau G da L, Ayres CFJ, Paiva MHS. Dynamic of Mayaro Virus Transmission in Aedes aegypti, Culex quinquefasciatus Mosquitoes, and a Mice Model. Viruses. 2023;15(3):799. pmid:36992508
  27. 27. Long KC, Ziegler SA, Thangamani S, Hausser NL, Kochel TJ, Higgs S, et al. Experimental transmission of Mayaro virus by Aedes aegypti. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2011;85(4):750–7. pmid:21976583
  28. 28. Kantor AM, Lin J, Wang A, Thompson DC, Franz AWE. Infection Pattern of Mayaro Virus in Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) and Transmission Potential of the Virus in Mixed Infections With Chikungunya Virus. J Med Entomol. 2019;56(3):832–43. pmid:30668762
  29. 29. Wiggins K, Eastmond B, Alto BW. Transmission potential of Mayaro virus in Florida Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus mosquitoes. Med Vet Entomol. 2018;32(4):436–42. pmid:30006976
  30. 30. Pereira TN, Carvalho FD, De Mendonça SF, Rocha MN, Moreira LA. Vector competence of Aedes aegypti, Aedes albopictus, and Culex quinquefasciatus mosquitoes for Mayaro virus. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2020;14(4):e0007518. pmid:32287269
  31. 31. California Department of Public Health. Vector-Borne Disease Section Annual Report 2023. 2023. Available: https://westnile.ca.gov/pdfs/VBDSAnnualReport23.pdf
  32. 32. Choo Y-M, Buss GK, Tan K, Leal WS. Multitasking roles of mosquito labrum in oviposition and blood feeding. Front Physiol. 2015;6:306. pmid:26578978
  33. 33. Stapleford KA, Coffey LL, Lay S, Bordería AV, Duong V, Isakov O, et al. Emergence and transmission of arbovirus evolutionary intermediates with epidemic potential. Cell Host Microbe. 2014;15(6):706–16. pmid:24922573
  34. 34. Main BJ, Nicholson J, Winokur OC, Steiner C, Riemersma KK, Stuart J, et al. Vector competence of Aedes aegypti, Culex tarsalis, and Culex quinquefasciatus from California for Zika virus. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2018;12(6):e0006524. pmid:29927940
  35. 35. Franz AWE, Kantor AM, Passarelli AL, Clem RJ. Tissue Barriers to Arbovirus Infection in Mosquitoes. Viruses. 2015;7(7):3741–67. pmid:26184281
  36. 36. Riemersma KK, Coffey LL. Chikungunya virus populations experience diversity- dependent attenuation and purifying intra-vector selection in Californian Aedes aegypti mosquitoes. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2019;13(11):e0007853. pmid:31751338
  37. 37. Routh A, Head SR, Ordoukhanian P, Johnson JE. ClickSeq: Fragmentation-Free Next-Generation Sequencing via Click Ligation of Adaptors to Stochastically Terminated 3’-Azido cDNAs. J Mol Biol. 2015;427(16):2610–6. pmid:26116762
  38. 38. Routh A, Jaworski E. X-ClickSeq: Custom-Primed Protocol with Single Indexing using ClickSeq Kit v1. ZappyLab, Inc. 2024.
  39. 39. Chen S, Zhou Y, Chen Y, Gu J. fastp: an ultra-fast all-in-one FASTQ preprocessor. Bioinformatics. 2018;34(17):i884–90. pmid:30423086
  40. 40. Martin M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMBnet j. 2011;17(1):10.
  41. 41. Jaworski E, Langsjoen RM, Mitchell B, Judy B, Newman P, Plante JA, et al. Tiled-ClickSeq for targeted sequencing of complete coronavirus genomes with simultaneous capture of RNA recombination and minority variants. Elife. 2021;10:e68479. pmid:34581669
  42. 42. Langmead B, Salzberg SL. Fast gapped-read alignment with Bowtie 2. Nat Methods. 2012;9(4):357–9. pmid:22388286
  43. 43. Walker BJ, Abeel T, Shea T, Priest M, Abouelliel A, Sakthikumar S, et al. Pilon: an integrated tool for comprehensive microbial variant detection and genome assembly improvement. PLoS One. 2014;9(11):e112963. pmid:25409509
  44. 44. Fumagalli MJ, de Souza WM, de Castro-Jorge LA, de Carvalho RVH, Castro Í de A, de Almeida LGN, et al. Chikungunya Virus Exposure Partially Cross-Protects against Mayaro Virus Infection in Mice. J Virol. 2021;95(23):e0112221. pmid:34549980
  45. 45. Nguyen W, Nakayama E, Yan K, Tang B, Le TT, Liu L, et al. Arthritogenic Alphavirus Vaccines: Serogrouping Versus Cross-Protection in Mouse Models. Vaccines (Basel). 2020;8(2):209. pmid:32380760
  46. 46. Rosa RB, de Castro EF, de Oliveira Santos D, da Silva MV, Pena LJ. Mouse Models of Mayaro Virus. Viruses. 2023;15(9):1803. pmid:37766210
  47. 47. FDA. CBER and vaccine development – 101. https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/development-approval-process-cber/vaccine-development-101. 2024. Accessed 2024 October 16.
  48. 48. Halsey ES, Siles C, Guevara C, Vilcarromero S, Jhonston EJ, Ramal C, et al. Mayaro virus infection, Amazon Basin region, Peru, 2010-2013. Emerg Infect Dis. 2013;19(11):1839–42. pmid:24210165
  49. 49. Aguilar-Luis MA, Del Valle-Mendoza J, Silva-Caso W, Gil-Ramirez T, Levy-Blitchtein S, Bazán-Mayra J, et al. An emerging public health threat: Mayaro virus increases its distribution in Peru. Int J Infect Dis. 2020;92:253–8. pmid:31978575
  50. 50. Auguste AJ, Liria J, Forrester NL, Giambalvo D, Moncada M, Long KC, et al. Evolutionary and Ecological Characterization of Mayaro Virus Strains Isolated during an Outbreak, Venezuela, 2010. Emerg Infect Dis. 2015;21(10):1742–50. pmid:26401714
  51. 51. Santiago FW, Halsey ES, Siles C, Vilcarromero S, Guevara C, Silvas JA, et al. Long-Term Arthralgia after Mayaro Virus Infection Correlates with Sustained Pro-inflammatory Cytokine Response. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2015;9(10):e0004104. pmid:26496497
  52. 52. Broeckel R, Haese N, Messaoudi I, Streblow DN. Nonhuman Primate Models of Chikungunya Virus Infection and Disease (CHIKV NHP Model). Pathogens. 2015;4(3):662–81. pmid:26389957
  53. 53. Arenívar C, Rodríguez Y, Rodríguez-Morales AJ, Anaya J-M. Osteoarticular manifestations of Mayaro virus infection. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2019;31(5):512–6. pmid:31361271
  54. 54. Labadie K, Larcher T, Joubert C, Mannioui A, Delache B, Brochard P, et al. Chikungunya disease in nonhuman primates involves long-term viral persistence in macrophages. J Clin Invest. 2010;120(3):894–906. pmid:20179353
  55. 55. Lucas CJ, Morrison TE. Animal models of alphavirus infection and human disease. Adv Virus Res. 2022;113:25–88. pmid:36307168
  56. 56. de Lima STS, de Souza WM, Cavalcante JW, da Silva Candido D, Fumagalli MJ, Carrera J-P, et al. Fatal Outcome of Chikungunya Virus Infection in Brazil. Clin Infect Dis. 2021;73(7):e2436–43. pmid:32766829
  57. 57. Noval MG, Spector SN, Bartnicki E, Izzo F, Narula N, Yeung ST, et al. MAVS signaling is required for preventing persistent chikungunya heart infection and chronic vascular tissue inflammation. Nat Commun. 2023;14(1):4668. pmid:37537212
  58. 58. Bengue M, Ferraris P, Barthelemy J, Diagne CT, Hamel R, Liégeois F, et al. Mayaro Virus Infects Human Brain Cells and Induces a Potent Antiviral Response in Human Astrocytes. Viruses. 2021;13(3):465. pmid:33799906
  59. 59. Riemersma KK, Steiner C, Singapuri A, Coffey LL. Chikungunya Virus Fidelity Variants Exhibit Differential Attenuation and Population Diversity in Cell Culture and Adult Mice. J Virol. 2019;93(3):e01606-18. pmid:30429348
  60. 60. Weaver SC, Brault AC, Kang W, Holland JJ. Genetic and fitness changes accompanying adaptation of an arbovirus to vertebrate and invertebrate cells. J Virol. 1999;73(5):4316–26. pmid:10196330
  61. 61. Rozen-Gagnon K, Stapleford KA, Mongelli V, Blanc H, Failloux A-B, Saleh M-C, et al. Alphavirus mutator variants present host-specific defects and attenuation in mammalian and insect models. PLoS Pathog. 2014;10(1):e1003877. pmid:24453971
  62. 62. Rathakrishnan A, Wang SM, Hu Y, Khan AM, Ponnampalavanar S, Lum LCS, et al. Cytokine expression profile of dengue patients at different phases of illness. PLoS One. 2012;7(12):e52215. pmid:23284941
  63. 63. Nguyet MN, Duong THK, Trung VT, Nguyen THQ, Tran CNB, Long VT, et al. Host and viral features of human dengue cases shape the population of infected and infectious Aedes aegypti mosquitoes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013;110(22):9072–7. pmid:23674683
  64. 64. Duong V, Lambrechts L, Paul RE, Ly S, Lay RS, Long KC, et al. Asymptomatic humans transmit dengue virus to mosquitoes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015;112(47):14688–93. pmid:26553981
  65. 65. Long KC, Sulca J, Bazan I, Astete H, Jaba HL, Siles C, et al. Feasibility of feeding Aedes aegypti mosquitoes on dengue virus-infected human volunteers for vector competence studies in Iquitos, Peru. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2019;13(2):e0007116. pmid:30753180
  66. 66. Lambrechts L, Reiner RC Jr, Briesemeister MV, Barrera P, Long KC, Elson WH, et al. Direct mosquito feedings on dengue-2 virus-infected people reveal dynamics of human infectiousness. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2023;17(9):e0011593. pmid:37656759
  67. 67. Hanley KA, Cecilia H, Azar SR, Moehn BA, Gass JT, Oliveira da Silva NI, et al. Trade-offs shaping transmission of sylvatic dengue and Zika viruses in monkey hosts. Nat Commun. 2024;15(1):2682. pmid:38538621
  68. 68. Shinde DP, Plante JA, Scharton D, Mitchell B, Walker J, Azar SR, et al. Potential role of heterologous flavivirus immunity in preventing urban transmission of yellow fever virus. Nat Commun. 2024;15(1):9728. pmid:39523371
  69. 69. 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. pmid:18069894
  70. 70. Tsetsarkin KA, Chen R, Weaver SC. Interspecies transmission and chikungunya virus emergence. Curr Opin Virol. 2016;16:143–50. pmid:26986235
  71. 71. Anishchenko M, Bowen RA, Paessler S, Austgen L, Greene IP, Weaver SC. Venezuelan encephalitis emergence mediated by a phylogenetically predicted viral mutation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006;103(13):4994–9. pmid:16549790