Browse Subject Areas

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

  • Loading metrics

Molecular identification of blood meals in mosquitoes (Diptera, Culicidae) in urban and forested habitats in southern Brazil

  • Camila Silva Santos ,

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Writing – original draft (CSS);

    Affiliation Departamento de Zoologia, Laboratório de Morfologia e Fisiologia de Culicidae e Chironomidae, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil

  • Marcio Roberto Pie,

    Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Departamento de Zoologia, Laboratório de Dinâmica Evolutiva e Sistemas Complexos, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil

  • Tatiana Carneiro da Rocha,

    Roles Methodology, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Departamento de Farmácia, Laboratório de Saúde Pública e Ambiental, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil

  • Mario Antonio Navarro-Silva

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Writing – review & editing (CSS);

    Affiliation Departamento de Zoologia, Laboratório de Morfologia e Fisiologia de Culicidae e Chironomidae, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil

Molecular identification of blood meals in mosquitoes (Diptera, Culicidae) in urban and forested habitats in southern Brazil

  • Camila Silva Santos, 
  • Marcio Roberto Pie, 
  • Tatiana Carneiro da Rocha, 
  • Mario Antonio Navarro-Silva


The study of host associations of mosquitoes (Diptera, Culicidae) provides valuable information to assist in our understanding of a variety of related issues, from their life-history to the entomological surveillance of pathogens. In this study, we identified and characterized mosquito blood meals from both urban and forested areas in the city of Paranaguá, state of Paraná, Brazil, by analyzing the amplification of host DNA ingested by mosquitoes under different storage conditions and digestion levels. Host DNA preservation was evaluated in fresh blood meals according to storage duration (30 to 180 days) and temperature (-20°C / -80°C) and, in digested blood, according the degree of digestion classified on the Sella scale. Molecular analysis of blood meals was based on DNA extraction and amplification of a fragment of the mitochondrial COI gene. We determined that, up to180 days of storage, the evaluated temperatures did not influence the preservation of fresh blood meals DNA, whereas the amplification success was increasingly reduced over the course of the digestion process. The species Anopheles cruzii, Aedes fluviatilis, Aedes scapularis, Psorophora ferox, Culex quinquefasciatus, Culex mollis, and Culex intrincatus, together with specimens representing four subgenera and one genus of Culicidae [Ae. (Ochlerotatus), Cx. (Culex), Cx. (Melanoconion), Cx. (Microculex), and Limatus, respectively] had their blood meals identified. Their diverse host use was evidenced by the identification of 19 species of vertebrate host, namely two amphibians, three mammals and 14 birds. Birds were the most commonly identified host in blood meals. These results not only show the diversity of mosquito hosts, but also underscore the challenges involved in monitoring arboviruses of public health importance, given potential combinations of host use for each mosquito species.


Hematophagy is shared by females of most mosquito species [1], which use energy from blood digestion mainly for egg production and maturation, thus increasing their reproductive efficiency [2]. Blood meals might consist of blood from several host taxa, such as worms, leeches [3], fishes [4], amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals [5]. A species-specific host preference is an innate characteristic, with a genetic basis, but that is modulated by factors that influence patterns of search and choice of the host, such as environmental conditions and host characteristics [6].

The contact with different hosts can allow for the use of novel vertebrate species in the transmission of pathogens [7]. A less diversified host use allows for some pathogens to come into contact and to adapt to specific hosts [8,9]. On the other hand, an opportunistic zoophilic behavior can lead to the adaptation and transmission of pathogens to different species of vertebrate [10,11]. Understanding the host use patterns of mosquitoes can help in our understanding of their life-history, as well as the impact of host choice on their survival, reproduction, and in the transmission ecology of mosquito-vectored pathogens [1215]. In addition, this knowledge is crucial for efforts related to entomological surveillance [16], providing information that can help monitoring vectors, particularly in the context of environmental disturbance [17].

Several approaches have been used to identify the blood meals of mosquitoes, such as serological and molecular methods. Assays such as precipitin tests and ELISA (Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay), which were common prior to PCR-based blood meal analysis, tended to show low specificity, given that identification was based on tests that only indicated groups of vertebrates as potential hosts [1820]. Currently, species level identification is achieved using molecular methods based on the DNA in ingested blood [21,22]. The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) followed by DNA sequencing of the PCR product is among the most direct and specific approaches, being ideal to the study of hematophagous arthropods with diverse host use, particularly in the case of wild animals [13].

Molecular methods require maximum integrity of the DNA molecule for the optimal detection and amplification of the target fragment [23]. In arthropods with blood meals, DNA degradation results mainly from the process of digestion and/or due to the storage conditions from the collection of the specimens to the DNA extraction in the laboratory [24]. The degree of blood digestion thus determines the PCR amplification and the identification of the vertebrate host [25,26]. Likewise, an inadequate preservation of the blood-engorged mosquito in terms of temperature and time since collection might reduce the chances of positive identifications [23,27].

Given that mosquitoes collected in the field show different degrees of digestion in their blood meal, it is thus important to assess the ideal storage conditions of mosquito blood meals after field collection. In addition, although storage at -80°C is the ideal way to preserve blood DNA, it is necessary to determine the temperature limits and duration of storage for mosquitoes used in studies seeking to identify their host choice [27]. Thus, the goals of the present study were: i) to analyze the impact of the degree of blood digestion, temperature, and time of storage of blood-engorged females in the DNA amplification of their vertebrate host; ii) to determine the blood sources of mosquitoes collected in urban and forested areas in a region of the Atlantic Forest in southern Brazil. The obtained results can help in the development of entomological surveillance protocols, given that the storage conditions and the process of blood digestion analyzed in the present study have been shown to be critical in the identification of blood sources. In addition, this study provides important information to our understanding of the host use patterns of mosquitoes in natural and urban environments.

Material and methods

Ethics statements

The protocol for the use of animals in the laboratory was approved by the Commission on Ethics for the Use of Animals of the Institute of Biological Sciences of the Universidade Federal do Paraná (CEUA/BIO-URPF) (Protocol number 719). All procedures for manipulation and animal care were carried out in strict conformity with the recommendations by the training manual of that commission. The collection of mosquito specimens in the field was carried out in a private urban area, which was authorized by the respective owners. In the forested area, in a public property, the collection permit was issued by the Instituto Ambiental do Paraná. In both areas, the collection of specimens did not involve threatened or protected species and did not entail losses for any vertebrate animal, nor risks to human health.


In order to assess the effects of temperature and storage duration on the amplification of blood DNA, we used females of Aedes aegypti belonging to a Rockefeller strain. These females were approximately 30 days old and were reared and kept in the Laboratório de Morfologia e Fisiologia de Culicidae e Chironomidae of the Universidade Federal do Paraná under temperatures between 25–29° C, 70–80% relative humidity, and 12:12 h (light:dark) photoperiod. Daily, these mosquito females had a 10% sucrose solution available for feeding. For the blood meal, anesthetized mice (Mus musculus) became available for approximately 40 minutes, following a protocol approved by the committee on ethics for animal experimentation. The assessment of the effect of the degree of blood digestion on DNA amplification, as well as the identification of vertebrate hosts, involved females collected in the field.

Study area

The municipality of Paranaguá, Paraná, Brazil (25°31’14” S, 48°30’34” W), located in the coastal region of the state, has an annual rainfall between 2,000 and 2,200 mm, with well-distributed rain throughout the year and no clearly defined dry season. There is predominance of humid subtropical climate (Cfa), based on the classification of Koeppen [28]. Two areas were studied in this municipality: an urban site (Ilha dos Valadares–IVal) and a forested site (Parque Estadual do Palmito–PEP) (Fig 1). The IVal has an area of about 5 km2 and a population of approximately 26,000 inhabitants (in 2010) [29]. The PEP is a remnant of Atlantic Forest with an area of 17.824 km2, being composed of lowland dense ombrophilous forests, mangroves, and coastal shrublands. Given that it is a permanently protected area, the park allows for public visitation and scientific research. Studies in the park have indicated the presence of anurans [30], birds [31], bats [32], and a primate [33] (Table 1).

Fig 1. Municipality of Paranaguá, located in the coastal region of the state of Paraná, Brazil.

Location of the urban site (IVal) and the forested site (PEP).

Table 1. Species of vertebrate detected in the PEP according to bibliographical data and recorded between 2006 and 2014.

Sampling, storage, and identification of mosquito females

In the laboratory, 36 blood-engorged Ae. aegypti females (Rockefeller strain) were killed by freezing at -20°C immediately after full blood engorgement, and were individually placed in 1.5 mL microtubes. Half of those specimens were stored at -20°C, whereas the other half was kept at -80°C. Every 30 days, over a period of 180 days, three stored samples at each temperature were processed to identify their blood meal.

In the field, resting mosquitoes were collected between October of 2016 and March of 2017, in eight days of sampling, average of one collection per month, except January (no collections), February (three), and March (two), alternating between the morning (between 8:00 AM and 12:00 AM) and the afternoon (between 1:00PM and 4:00PM). Mosquitoes were collected with the simultaneous use of two or three Nasci aspirators attached to a 12V battery. The mosquito receptacle was changed every 10 min, for a total sampling effort of 710 min (130 min in IVal and 580 min in PEP). In IVal, sampling was carried out both within and around housing areas, where as in PEP sampling was conducted in transect across the main trail by walking perpendicularly to the edge of the forest. Three points were sampled across a total travel distance of 1.2 km.

Field-collected mosquitoes were killed by freezing in a cooler with liquid nitrogen, in which they were also transported under a temperature that did not exceed -4°C. In the laboratory, mosquitoes were stored at -80°C until specimens were identified. Using a refrigerated surface and a stereoscopic microscope, engorged females were identified at the species level using dichotomous keys [3538]. The degree of digestion in the engorged blood was classified according to the Sella scale, following Detinova et al. [39] (Fig 2). Females classified between 2 and 6 were housed in individual microtubes and stored at -80°C until the molecular analysis of their blood meals.

Fig 2. Females of Aedes aegypti at different degrees of digestion, based on the Sella scale.

Each specimen is indicated with the corresponding approximate digestion time (in h).

Identification of the blood meals

DNA was isolated from individual engorged females using the HotShot protocol developed by Truett et al. [40]. Using tweezers and sterile pipette tips, the abdomen of each analyzed female was removed and placed whole within 0.2 mL tubes containing 50 μL of lysis buffer (NaOH 25mM + EDTA 0.2 mM, pH 12.0). The blood was mixed with the solution and the visible parts of the abdomen were then removed. Samples were incubated in a thermocycler at 95°C for 30 min and later placed in an ice bath for four to five min. Fifty μL of neutral buffer (Tris-HCl 40 mM, pH 5.0) were then added and thoroughly homogenized the samples. Samples were kept at -20°C until being amplified by PCR.

The template DNA was amplified using a nested PCR protocol using universal vertebrate primers (M13BC-FW and BCV-RV1; M13 and BCV-RV2) (Table 2) developed by Alcaide et al. [41] that has as its target a ~800-bp fragment of the cytochrome c oxidase I gene (COI). A slightly modified protocol for the first PCR was done with 30 μL final volume containing 1X of enzyme buffer (Sigma), 3.16 mM of MgCl2 (Thermo Scientific), 0.5 mM of dNTP mix (Amresco), 10 μg of BSA (Bovine Serum Albumin), 5% of DMSO, 0.66 μM of each of the primers (M13BC-FW and BCV-RV1), 1U of Taq DNA Polymerase (Sigma), and a concentration of extracted DNA between 70 and 150 ng/μL. Thermocycling conditions included an initial denaturation phase for 4 min at 94°C, followed by 39 cycles of 40 s at 94°C, 40 s at 45°C and 1 min at 72°C, with a final extension of 7 min at 72°C, in a Bio-Rad thermocycler. The second PCR was carried out in a final volume of 30 μL including 1X of enzyme buffer (Sigma), 5.66 mM of MgCl2 (Thermo Scientific), 0.66 mM of dNTP mix (Amresco), 5 μg of BSA (Bovine Serum Albumin), 5% of DMSO, 0.33 μM of each primer (M13 and BCV-RV2), 1U of Taq DNA Polymerase (Sigma), and 1.0 μL of PCR product of the first reaction. Thermocycling conditions included an initial denaturation of 3 min at 94°C, followed by a touchdown protocol of 16 cycles of reduction in annealing temperature from 60°C to 45°C (-1°C per cycle) with 1 min of extension at 72°C and 40 s of denaturation at 94°C, followed by 24 cycles of 40 s at 94°C, 45°C and 72°C, with a final extension of 7 min at 72°C. Each reaction included a negative control of autoclaved Milli-Q water instead of template DNA, as well as a positive control established in preliminary tests using Rockefeller strain Ae. aegypti females that ingested only mice blood and went through the whole process of identifying the blood meal, including sequencing.

Table 2. Primers used for the amplification of DNA fragments of the COI gene for vertebrates and mosquitoes.

The products of the second PCR were subjected to electrophoresis in a 1% agarose gel. Amplification success was used to assess the impact of storage conditions and degree of digestion on amplification success. To determine the blood meals, field samples that had been successfully amplified were purified using a QIAquick PCR Purification Kit (Qiagen) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Purified DNA was subject to Sanger sequencing reactions using BigDye Terminator v3.1 Cycle Sequencing Kit (Applied Biosystems) and sequenced on an ABI 3730 DNA Analyser (Applied Biosystems) at the Centro de Pesquisas sobre o Genoma Humano e Células-Tronco of the Universidade de São Paulo.

Molecular identification of Culicidae

Given the damage caused by the collection through suction method to some important structures (e.g. scales and legs), molecular identification was also used to determine the species, subspecies, or genera of collected mosquitoes. Only females with uncertain morphological identification and that had their blood meal successfully determined were included in this analysis. All structures present after separating the abdomen (i.e. head, thorax, and legs) were used for DNA extraction, following the protocol developed by Bona et al. [42]. The amplification of a 650-bp fragment of the COI gene was carried out using the universal invertebrate primers LCO 1490 and HCO 2198 [43] (Table 2). The used PCR protocol was based on Wang et al. [44] as follows. PCR included 1X enzyme buffer (Sigma), 3.16 mM of MgCl2 (Thermo Scientific), 0.2 mM of dNTP mix (Amresco), 0.4 μM of each of the primers, 1U of Taq DNA Polymerase (Sigma), and a volume of DNA extract with a concentration of approximately 40 ng/μL to reach a final volume of 30 μL. Thermocycling conditions included an initial denaturation for 1 min at 94°C, followed by six cycles of 40 s at 94°C, 40 s at 45°C and 1 min at 72°C, 36 cycles of 40 s at 94°C, 40 s at 51°C and 1 min at 72°C, with a final extension of 5 min at 72°C. The verification of amplification, purification, and, sequencing were the same as those used to identify blood meals, as well as the analysis of the resulting sequences.

Sequence analysis

The obtained sequences were edited using BioEdit Sequence Alignment Editor v. 7.2.5 [45,46] and aligned using MUSCLE, as implemented in MEGA 6 [47]. Sequence identification was conducted by comparison with those deposited in GenBank (NCBI: National Center for Biotechnology Information– and BOLD (Barcode of Life Data System - A vertebrate host was considered as identified when sequence similarity was ≥ 98%. As some species of Culicidae that were present in the PEP [48] did not contain genetic data in GenBank or BOLD, by standardization, we considered as identified species only those with similarity equal to 100%. Similarly values below those cut-off values were considered as identification to the genus or subgenus levels.

Data analysis

Amplification success at each temperature was assessed according to the total number of successfully amplified samples at each storage duration. For mosquitoes collected in the field, scores based on the digestion scale were related to the number of successful amplifications using a Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test, carried out in R version 3.5.0 [49].


Samples that remained stored for 30 to 180 days at -20°C resulted in 100% amplification of host DNA from completely engorged Ae. aegypti females. Similar results were obtained for samples kept at -80°C, except that one sample did not result in positive amplification, leading the amplification success under those conditions to be slightly lower (i.e. 94.4%, Fig 3).

Fig 3. Amplification of DNA present in completely engorged Aedes aegypti females that were stored under -80°C or -20°C for 30 to 180 days until DNA extraction.

Wells 1–18: females stored at -80°C, with a 94,4% of amplification success. Arrow indicates sample 14, stored for 150 days that did not lead to amplification. Wells 19–36: females stored at -20°C with 100% amplification success. MW: 100-bp molecular weight ladder.

Of all 3.087 field-collected mosquitoes, 1.951 were female and, of those, 155 (7.9%) were blood-engorged. Of those females, 148 allowed for the visualization of the degree of blood meal digestion and were classified according to the Sella scale (between 2 and 6). Based on that set of females, 52 (35.1%) led to positive DNA amplification, with the highest success rates in females classified as either 2 and 3. The degree of blood digestion was inversely related to amplification success (Wilcoxon rank sum test, W = 3274.5, p = 0.0012), with a particular reduction in the beginning of class 4 females (Table 3).

Table 3. Total of engorged females collected in IVal and PEP classified according to the Sella scale.

Amount and percentage of amplification per scale.

Of the 155 engorged females collected in IVal and PEP, 54 (34.8%) had their host identified through blood meal analysis. As the molecular identification of mosquitoes has been shown to be efficient, mainly of cryptic species [44], through this method and the use of morphological characters, we identified seven mosquito species (An. cruzii, Ae. fluviatilis, Ae. scapularis, Ps. ferox, Cx. quinquefasciatus, Cx. mollis, and Cx. intrincatus) and specimens that represented four subgenera and one genus of Culicidae [Ae. (Ochlerotatus), Cx. (Culex), Cx. (Melanoconion), Cx. (Microculex), and Limatus, respectively], all analyzed with respect to their blood source (Table 4). These numbers did not include females whose blood meals were successfully amplified, but that did not show similarity with vertebrate species deposited in GenBank or BOLD (Table 4). These sequences showed a high number of double peaks in the electropherograms, which suggested that their blood meals included more than one host species in the same gonotrophic cycle. Of the 54 studied females, only seven mosquito specimens were identified through molecular techniques (Table 4).

Table 4. Mosquito species for which blood-engorged females were collected in IVal and PEP, average Sella score of total engorged females and number of blood meals identified by species.

Specimens with molecular identification are shown with corresponding GenBank accession numbers.

In IVal, we were able to identify the origin of the blood meal of 29 mosquito females of the following species Cx. quinquefasciatus (n = 27), Cx. intrincatus (n = 1), Ae. scapularis (n = 1), which fed on avian (68.96%) and mammal blood (31.04%). Most blood meals of Cx. quinquefasciatus were identified as originating from chicken (Gallus gallus), followed by dogs (Canis lupus familiaris), humans (Homo sapiens), and passerine birds (Passer domesticus, and Turdus amaurochalinus). The blood meal of Cx. intrincatus led to the identification of the heron Nyctanassa violacea, whereas the blood meal of Ae. scapularis was identified as coming from a domestic dog (Table 5). All of the blood meals identified as human blood were detected in females collected within a human residence, as well as a female that fed on the blood of a chicken. The remaining vertebrates were identified from the blood meals of females collected in the vicinity of human housing.

Table 5. Blood meals of mosquito females collected in IVal in October and November of 2016 using Nasci aspirators.

Accession numbers indicate sequences deposited in GenBank corresponding to the identified vertebrate species.

In PEP, 25 females had their blood meal identified and included the following species: An. cruzii (n = 2), Ae. fluviatilis (n = 1), Ae. scapularis (n = 2), Ps. ferox (n = 2), Cx. quinquefasciatus (n = 9), Cx. mollis (n = 1), Aedes (Ochlerotatus) sp. (n = 2), Culex (Culex) sp. (n = 1), Culex (Melanoconion) sp. (n = 1), Culex (Microculex) sp. (n = 3), and Limatus sp. (n = 1). Fourteen species of vertebrates were used as host, including wild birds (n = 17, 68%), mammals (n = 6, 24%), and amphibians (n = 2, 8%). The genus Culex only had wild birds as their blood source, except for the subgenus Microculex which included a bird and two amphibians (Scinax argyreornatus and possibly Trachycephalus sp., both hylids). The blood meals of Ae. scapularis were identified as blood from birds and horse, and another specimen of the subgenus Ochlerotatus and a female of Limatus fed on avian blood. All blood meals of An. cruzii, Ae. fluviatilis, and Ps. ferox were identified as human blood (Table 6).

Table 6. Blood meals of mosquito species collected in PEP using aspirators between December of 2016 and March of 2017.

Accession numbers indicate sequences deposited in GenBank corresponding to the identified vertebrate species.


In the case of fresh blood meals, the short-term temperature storage conditions of engorged mosquitoes (up to 180 days) had a minor impact on the amplification of host DNA. However, the degree of digestion had a strong negative influence on the amplification and identification of host DNA. Over the past few decades, it has been shown that DNA detection and amplification by PCR are more efficient for engorged mosquitoes kept at temperatures equal or below -70°C [50]. In the present study, the effects of temperature and time of storage were nearly equivalent between -20°C and -80°C to Ae. aegypti females engorged with fresh blood. Previous studies using blood samples kept at -20°C for 95 days also maintained DNA integrity for molecular analyses [51]. On the other hand, in samples stored for over 20 years, the amount and quality of preserved DNA at -20°C were reduced in relation to preservation at -80°C, such that it is advised to keep samples under ultra-low temperatures for long-term storage [52].

For completely engorged mosquitoes with little or no interference in their digestion, especially engorged with fresh blood, the storage at -20°C for up to 180 days was sufficient to achieve good results in terms of PCR amplification. Tests with only fresh blood meals have limited the establishment of temperatures and storage periods more appropriate for blood already influenced by the digestion process, which can reduce the breadth of these factors. For field-collected specimens, DNA degradation due to the digestion process is unavoidable and, together with temperature, might reduce the viability and positive amplification of blood meals [27]. However, the physical conditions for the storage of mosquitoes at 4°C or -20°C, for up to two days, did not significantly affect DNA amplification, which is mostly influenced by the degree of digestion [24].

In the present study, amplification success decreased according to the degree of the digestion. Laboratory experiments that assessed blood digestion over the course of hours [24,26,27] and field studies that measured the degree of digestion using the Sella scale [5355] also showed this relationship. In addition, these studies were corroborated by the results of our study, which indicated that scores 2 and 3 were the most favorable for DNA amplification. In those studies, a significant reduction in amplification was detected starting on scores 5 and 6, yet this progressive reduction was detected in our study starting on score 4, which led to only 25% amplification success (Table 3).The loss of quality and quantity of DNA caused by the digestion of blood associated with other factors (e.g. extraction protocol [54], blood PCR inhibitors such as heme [56], and primer specificity and size of target fragment [57]) may have significantly affected the identification efficiency of the blood meals. The use of a universal primer whose target is a relatively long fragment, as used in the present study (about 800 bp), may also decrease the success of amplification, especially in DNA already partially degraded by digestion [57]. This factor may explain the different success rates found in blood meal amplifications of laboratory tested samples (without interference from digestion) and field samples (always observed digestion).

Despite the relative efficacy for identifying mosquito species [44], molecular identification based on DNA barcodes has already proved ineffective for some closely related species. In Brazil, some fragments of COI used in the identification of mosquito species were not sufficient to distinguish some species such as those of the subgenus Culex [58]. In addition, we also found that some species already recorded in our study area still do not present genetic information in the available databases (e.g. Culex ribeirensis). Thus, even using this molecular tool to identify mosquitoes, some specimens could not be identified at a specific level, and, in the urban and forested area, seven mosquito species (An. cruzii, Ae. fluviatilis, Ae. scapularis, Ps. ferox, Cx. quinquefasciatus, Cx. mollis, Cx. intrincatus) and specimens representing four subgenera and one genus of Culicidae [Ae. (Ochlerotatus), Cx. (Culex), Cx. (Melanoconion), Cx. (Microculex), and Limatus] were analyzed for the identified blood source. This analysis resulted in the identification of 19 vertebrate species as hosts (two amphibians, three mammals, and 14 birds). Given that the use of broad-spectrum molecular markers may not be sufficient to identify some of the species present in areas of high fauna richness such as PEP, success rates and specificity of identifications may be limited. However, the resulting identifications in this study allowed us to understand the host use of Culicidae species studied here and, through the identification of large groups of vertebrates, to infer about the potential risks of transmission of pathogens.

Only two species of mosquitoes (Cx. quinquefasciatus and Ae. scapularis) and one of vertebrate (Homo sapiens) were commonly recorded in both areas. As expected, the diversity of mosquitoes and hosts identified was higher in the forest area than in the urban area, since the PEP certainly has higher species richness [3034]. Birds represented most of the positive identifications and this may be related to the great abundance and availability of this class in both environments studied. In IVal, during collections, it was common to observe domestic poultry breeding outside some residences and, in the PEP, wild birds contribute significantly to the composition of the registered fauna [31,34].

Culex quinquefasciatus, in addition to being commonly studied in both areas, was the most abundant both in terms of engorged females and in the number of identified blood meals (Table 4). In many studies of mosquito host use, this species is commonly detected in urban and rural areas, as well as in parks and forests of the Neotropics [5962]. The ornithophilic habit was confirmed, with birds accounting for 77.8% of the identified blood meals, whereas mammals were detected in the remaining cases (only in females collected in urban areas). Given that it is considered as an opportunistic species [61], host selection between these two vertebrate classes has already been observed [60,63], which underscores the influence of the environment on the selection of blood meal sources [59]. Among mammals, the equal proportion of canine and human hosts (Table 5) did not evidence a clear preference in the selection within that class of vertebrate [64]. Chickens and passerines were the most commonly identified hosts (Tables 5 and 6), being widely used as blood sources in urban areas [65]. Both in this habitat and in the forested area, other orders of wild birds were also detected, given that the availability of other birds in that area might have facilitated their use as hosts.

The use of birds was also recorded in other specimens of Culex. Species of the subgenus Culex, such as Cx. mollis, are considered as primarily ornithophilic [5], with different species showing variation in their host use [60]. On the other hand, although some species of Melanoconion are primarily specialists [16], others, such as Cx. intrincatus, are considered as generalists, selecting birds, mammals, amphibians, and reptiles [5,66]. In general, and including the results on Cx. quinquefasciatus, the ornithophilic habit was particularly common in females of Culex (Tables 5 and 6).

The identification of blood meals in Microculex has also contributed to the frequency of avian blood means in our study, yet the record of amphibian hosts corroborate their tendency to select ectothermic hosts as well [67]. Given that these are mosquitoes with no known importance in terms of public health, few studies investigated and recorded their host use patterns [19,67,68]. As such, factors that influence their host preferences are still unknown.

Aedes scapularis considered as a generalist in its choice of blood sources, which could be influenced by the availability and abundance of vertebrate hosts [20]. Here, we identified bird, canine, and equine species as hosts of this species in urban and forested areas. This species has been recorded in Brazil as showing a tendency towards choosing mammals [59,61,69], with preference for large-bodied species such as horses [5,64].

The identification of avian blood in a single specimen of Limatus is consistent with previous records on the genus (e.g. L. durhami and L. pseudomethisticus), which were considered as opportunistic for choosing avian and mammalian hosts, including humans [67]. The low sampling does not allow us to analyze the host preferences of this genus.

In PEP, opportunistic species (An. cruzii and Ae. fluviatilis) [61,69] or species that tend to select mammalian hosts and, occasionally, birds (Ps. ferox) [20] had their blood meals identified as the blood of humans that possibly entered the forest or lived in the vicinity of the park. The low number of positive identifications did not allow us to determine the vertebrate hosts that sustain these species, which are considered as a potential or actual vector of pathogens [11,70,71]. The contact between An. cruzii and humans and the record of non-human primates in the park [33] might indicate transmission risks of the etiological agent of simian malaria to humans [72]. Likewise, the record of bats [32] in association with the presence of Ps. ferox raises concerns about the transmission risks of the Venezuelan Equine Encephalitis Virus [11].

The knowledge of the host use patterns of Culicidae can provide answers to issues that are still poorly understood for some species (e.g. patterns of search and selection of vertebrates, their interactions with other species, and transmission risks of pathogens). Limits of temperature and storage time and better digestion conditions of blood meals investigated in the present study can contribute to the design of entomological surveillance efforts. Our results suggest that most investigated species selected hosts according to their availability in the environment, which is an important contribution given the scarcity of information on host preferences of most mosquito species, either in urban or wild habitats. Given the environmental disturbances and the possibility of emergence (or reemergence) of human pathogens, this type of effort would be instrumental to continually monitor host use of hematophagous insects.


We thank the Primeira Regional de Saúde de Paranaguá (Secretaria Estadual de Saúde) and Instituto Ambiental do Paraná for permits to collect mosquitoes for this study. We also thank Dr. Angela Palacio, Dr. Vinicius Richardi, and M.Sc. Mario Arturo Sandoval for assistance during collection and processing of samples. We also thank André Olivotto for assistance during laboratory work.


  1. 1. Harbach RE. The Culicidae (Diptera): A review of taxonomy, classification and phylogeny. Zootaxa. 2007;1668: 591–638.
  2. 2. Phasomkusolsil S, Pantuwattana K, Tawong J, Khongtak W, Kertmanee Y, Monkanna N, et al. The relationship between wing length, blood meal volume, and fecundity for seven colonies of Anopheles species housed at the Armed Forces Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Bangkok, Thailand. Acta Trop. 2015;152: 220–227. pmid:26433074
  3. 3. Reeves LE, Holderman CJ, Blosser EM, Gillett-Kaufman JL, Kawahara AY, Kaufman PE, et al. Identification of Uranotaenia sapphirina as a specialist of annelids broadens known mosquito host use patterns. Commun Biol. 2018;1: 92. pmid:30271973
  4. 4. Toma T, Miyagi I, Tamashiro M. Blood meal identification and feeding habits of Uranotaenia species collected in the Ryukyu Archipelago. J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 2014;30: 215–218. pmid:25843097
  5. 5. Forattini OP, Gomes AC, Natal D, Kakitani I, Marucci D. Preferências alimentares de mosquitos Culicidae no Vale do Ribeira, São Paulo, Brasil. Rev Saude Publica. 1987;21: 171–187. pmid:3445099
  6. 6. Takken W, Verhulst NO. Host preferences of blood-feeding mosquitoes. Annu Rev Entomol. 2013;58: 433–453. pmid:23020619
  7. 7. Kilpatrick AM, Daszak P, Jones MJ, Marra PP, Kramer LD. Host heterogeneity dominates West Nile Virus transmission. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. 2006;273: 2327–2333. pmid:16928635
  8. 8. Kenney JL, Brault AC. The role of environmental, virological and vector interactions in dictating biological transmission of arthropod-borne viruses by mosquitoes. Adv Virus Res. 2014;89: 39–83. pmid:24751194
  9. 9. Musso D, Gubler DJ. Zika virus. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2016;29: 487–524. pmid:27029595
  10. 10. Hamer GL, Kitron UD, Goldberg TL, Brawn JD, Loss SR, Ruiz MO, et al. Host selection by Culex pipiens mosquitoes and West Nile Virus amplification. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2009;80: 268–278. pmid:19190226
  11. 11. Sotomayor-Bonilla J, Abella-Medrano CA, Chaves A, Álvarez-Mendizábal P, Rico-Chávez Ó, Ibáñez-Bernal S, et al. Potential sympatric vectors and mammalian hosts of Venezuelan Equine Encephalitis Virus in Southern Mexico. J Wildl Dis. 2017;53: 657–661. pmid:28384059
  12. 12. Styer LM, Minnick SL, Sun AK, Scott TW. Mortality and reproductive dynamics of Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) fed human blood. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2007;7: 86–98. pmid:17417961
  13. 13. Kent RJ. Molecular methods for arthropod bloodmeal identification and applications to ecological and vector-borne disease studies. Mol Ecol Resour. 2009;9: 4–18. pmid:21564560
  14. 14. Lyimo IN, Keegan SP, Ranford-Cartwright LC, Ferguson HM. The impact of uniform and mixed species blood meals on the fitness of the mosquito vector Anopheles gambiae s.s: Does a specialist pay for diversifying its host species diet? J Evol Biol. 2012;25: 452–460. pmid:22221693
  15. 15. Faraji A, Egizi A, Fonseca DM, Unlu I, Crepeau T, Healy SP, et al. Comparative host feeding patterns of the Asian Tiger Mosquito, Aedes albopictus, in urban and suburban Northeastern USA and implications for disease transmission. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2014;8: e3037. pmid:25101969
  16. 16. Regis L, Souza W V, Furtado AF, Fonseca CD, Silveira JC, Ribeiro PJ, et al. An entomological surveillance system based on open spatial information for participative dengue control. An Acad Bras Cienc. 2009;81: 655–662. pmid:19893891
  17. 17. Reiter P. Climate change and mosquito-borne disease. Environ Health Perspect. 2001;109: 141–161. pmid:11250812
  18. 18. Gomes LAM, Duarte R, Lima DC, Diniz BS, Serrão ML, Labarthe N. Comparison between precipitin and ELISA tests in the bloodmeal detection of Aedes aegypti (Linnaeus) and Aedes fluviatilis (Lutz) mosquitoes experimentally fed on feline, canine and human hosts. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 2001;96: 693–695. pmid:11500773
  19. 19. Alencar J, Mello CF, Gil-Santana HR, Giupponi APL, Araújo AN, Lorosa ES, et al. Feeding patterns of mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae) in the Atlantic Forest, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. J Med Entomol. 2015;52: 783–788. pmid:26336238
  20. 20. Mucci LF, Cardoso Júnior RP, Paula MB, Scandar SAS, Pacchioni ML, Fernandes A, et al. Feeding habits of mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae) in an area of sylvatic transmission of yellow fever in the state of São Paulo, Brazil. J Venom Anim Toxins Incl Trop Dis. 2015;21: 6. pmid:25810711
  21. 21. Kirchgatter K, Tubaki RM, Malafronte RS, Alves IC, Lima GFMC, Guimarães LO, et al. Anopheles (Kerteszia) cruzii (Diptera: Culicidae) in peridomiciliary area during asymptomatic malaria transmission in the Atlantic Forest: molecular identification of blood-meal sources indicates humans as primary intermediate hosts. Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo. 2014;56: 403–409. pmid:25229220
  22. 22. Hernandez-Triana LM, Brugman VA, Prosser SWJ, Weland C, Nikolova N, Thorne L, et al. Molecular approaches for blood meal analysis and species identification of mosquitoes (Insecta: Diptera: Culicidae) in rural locations in southern England, United Kingdom. Zootaxa. 2017;4250: 67–76. pmid:28610033
  23. 23. Mukabana WR, Takken W, Knols BGJ. Analysis of arthropod bloodmeals using molecular genetic markers. Trends Parasitol. 2002;18: 505–509. pmid:12473367
  24. 24. Oshaghi MA, Chavshin AR, Vatandoost H, Yaaghoobi F, Mohtarami F, Noorjah N. Effects of post-ingestion and physical conditions on PCR amplification of host blood meal DNA in mosquitoes. Exp Parasitol. 2006;112: 232–236. pmid:16364301
  25. 25. Ngo KA, Kramer LD. Identification of mosquito bloodmeals using Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) with order-specific primers. J Med Entomol. 2003;40: 215–222. pmid:12693851
  26. 26. Mukabana WR, Takken W, Seda P, Killeen GF, Hawley WA, Knols BGJ. Extent of digestion affects the success of amplifying human DNA from blood meals of Anopheles gambiae (Diptera: Culicidae). Bull Entomol Res. 2002;92: 233–239. pmid:12088540
  27. 27. Reeves LE, Holderman CJ, Gillett-Kaufman JL, Kawahara AY, Kaufman PE. Maintenance of host DNA integrity in field-preserved mosquito (Diptera: Culicidae) blood meals for identification by DNA barcoding. Parasites & Vectors.2016;9: 503. pmid:27629021
  28. 28. Vanhoni F, Mendonça F. O clima do litoral do Estado do Paraná. Rev Bras Climatol. 2008;3: 49–63.
  29. 29. IBGE—Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. Grade estatística 2010 [Internet]. 2010 [cited 22 Aug 2017]. Available from:
  30. 30. Leivas PT. Estrutura de comunidade de anuros em ilhas: padrões locais e regionais.Ph.D. Thesis, Universidade Federal do Paraná. 2014. Available from:
  31. 31. Carrano E. Composição e conservação da avifauna na Floresta Estadual do Palmito, município de Paranaguá, Paraná. M.Sc. Thesis, Universidade Federal do Paraná. 2006. Available from:
  32. 32. Rubio MBG, Varzinczak LH, Bernardi IP, Passos FC, Miranda JMD. Bats from two sites of the Paraná State coastal area, southern Brazil. Chiropt Neotrop. 2014;20: 1255–1263.
  33. 33. Passos FC, Miranda JMD, Aguiar LM, Ludwig G, Bernardi IP, Moro-Rios RF. Distribuição e ocorrência de primatas no estado do Paraná, Brasil. In: BICCA-MARQUES JC, editor. A Primatologia no Brasil 10. Porto Alegre: EDIPUCRS;2007. pp. 119–149.
  34. 34. Mestre LAM, Krul R, Moraes VS. Mangrove bird community of Paranaguá Bay—Paraná, Brazil. Brazilian Arch Biol Technol. 2007;50: 75–83.
  35. 35. Lane J. Neotropical Culicidae—V. I. São Paulo: EdUSP; 1953.
  36. 36. Lane J. Neotropical Culicidae—V.II. São Paulo: EdUSP; 1953.
  37. 37. Consoli RAGB, Oliveira RL. Principais mosquitos de importância sanitária no Brasil. 1st ed. Rio de Janeiro: Fiocruz; 1994.
  38. 38. Forattini OP. Culicidologia médica: Identificação, biologia, epidemiologia—Vol. 2. São Paulo: EdUSP; 2002.
  39. 39. Detinova TS, Beklemishev WN, Bertram DS. Age-grouping methods in Diptera of medical importance with special reference to some vectors of malaria. Geneva: World Health Organization;1962.
  40. 40. Truett GE, Heeger P, Mynatt RL, Truett AA, Walker JA, Warman ML. Preparation of PCR-quality mouse genomic DNA with Hot Sodium Hydroxide and Tris (HotSHOT). Biotechniques. 2000;29: 52–54. pmid:10907076
  41. 41. Alcaide M, Rico C, Ruiz S, Soriguer R, Muñoz J, Figuerola J. Disentangling vector-borne transmission networks: A universal DNA barcoding method to identify vertebrate hosts from arthropod bloodmeals. PLoS One. 2009;4: e7092. pmid:19768113
  42. 42. Bona ACD, Piccoli CF, Leandro AS, Kafka R, Twerdochilib AL, Navarro-Silva MA. Genetic profile and molecular resistance of Aedes (Stegomyia) aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) in Foz do Iguaçu (Brazil), at the border with Argentina and Paraguay. Zoologia. 2012;29: 540–548.
  43. 43. Folmer O, Black M, Hoeh W, Lutz R, Vrijenhoek R. DNA primers for amplification of mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I from diverse metazoan invertebrates. Mol Mar Biol Biotechnol. 1994;3: 294–299. pmid:7881515
  44. 44. Wang G, Li C, Guo X, Xing D, Dong Y, Wang Z, et al. Identifying the main mosquito species in China based on DNA barcoding. PLoS One. 2012;7: e47051. pmid:23071708
  45. 45. Hall TA. BioEdit: a user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for Windows 95/98/NT. Nucleic Acids Symp Ser. 1999;41: 95–98. citeulike-article-id:691774
  46. 46. Hall TA. BioEdit version 7.2.5 [Internet]. 2013. Available from:
  47. 47. Tamura K, Stecher G, Peterson D, Filipski A, Kumar S. MEGA 6: Molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 6.0. Mol Biol Evol. 2013;30: 2725–2729. pmid:24132122
  48. 48. Santos EB, Favretto MA, Costa SGS, Navarro-Silva MA. Mites (Acari: Trombidiformes) parasitizing mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae) in an Atlantic Forest area in southern Brazil with a new mite genus country record. Exp Appl Acarol. 2016;69: 323–333. pmid:27085719
  49. 49. R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Internet]. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2018. URL:
  50. 50. Coulson RMR, Curtis CF, Ready PD, Hill N, Smith DF. Amplification and analysis of human DNA present in mosquito bloodmeals. Med Vet Entomol. 1990;4: 357–366. pmid:2133003
  51. 51. AlRokayan SAH. Effect of storage temperature on the quality and quantity of DNA extracted from blood. Pakistan J Biol Sci. 2000;3: 392–394.
  52. 52. Hara M, Nakanishi H, Takahashi S, Tamura A, Yoneyama K, Saito K, et al. Effects of storage method on DNA degradation in old bloodstain samples. Forensic Sci Int Genet Suppl Ser.2015;5: e39–e41.
  53. 53. Tuten HC, Bridges WC, Paul KS, Adler PH. Blood-feeding ecology of mosquitoes in zoos. Med Vet Entomol. 2012;26: 407–416. pmid:22390304
  54. 54. Martínez-de la Puente J, Ruiz S, Soriguer R, Figuerola J. Effect of blood meal digestion and DNA extraction protocol on the success of blood meal source determination in the malaria vector Anopheles atroparvus. Malar J. 2013;12: 109. pmid:23517864
  55. 55. Brugman VA, Hernandez-Triana LM, England ME, Medlock JM, Mertens PPC, Logan JG, et al. Blood-feeding patterns of native mosquitoes and insights into their potential role as pathogen vectors in the Thames estuary region of the United Kingdom. Parasites &Vectors. 2017;10: 1–12. pmid:28347323
  56. 56. Akane A, Matsubara K, Nakamura H, Takahashi S, Kimura K. Identification of the heme compound copurified with Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) from bloodstains, a major inhibitor of Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) amplification. J Forensic Sci. 1994;39: 362–372. pmid:8195750
  57. 57. Gómez-Díaz E, Figuerola J. New perspectives in tracing vector-borne interaction networks. Trends Parasitol. 2010;26: 470–476. pmid:20580608
  58. 58. Laurito M, Oliveira TMP, Almirón WR, Sallum MAM. COI barcode versus morphological identification of Culex (Culex) (Diptera: Culicidae) species: a case study using samples from Argentina and Brazil. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 2013;108: 110–122. pmid:24473810
  59. 59. Lorosa ES, Faria MS, Oliveira LCM, Alencar J, Marcondes CB. Blood meal identification of selected mosquitoes in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 2010;26: 18–23. pmid:20402346
  60. 60. Stein M, Zalazar L, Willener JA, Ludueña Almeida F, Almirón WR. Culicidae (Diptera) selection of humans, chickens and rabbits in three different environments in the province of Chaco, Argentina. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 2013;108: 563–571. pmid:23903970
  61. 61. Carvalho GC, Malafronte RS, Izumisawa CM, Teixeira RS, Natal L, Marrelli MT. Blood meal sources of mosquitoes captured in municipal parks in São Paulo, Brazil. J Vector Ecol. 2014;39: 146–152. pmid:24820567
  62. 62. Moreno M, Saavedra MP, Bickersmith SA, Prussing C, Michalski A, Tong Rios C, et al. Intensive trapping of blood-fed Anopheles darlingi in Amazonian Peru reveals unexpectedly high proportions of avian blood-meals. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017;11: 1–19. pmid:28231248
  63. 63. Alencar J, Silva JS, Oliveira LCM, Marcondes CB, Morone F, Lorosa ES. Feeding patterns of Culex quinquefasciatus (Diptera: Culicidae) from eastern Santa Catarina state, Brazil. J Med Entomol. 2012;49: 952–954. pmid:22897058
  64. 64. Gomes AC, Silva NN, Marques GRAM, Brito M. Host-feeding patterns of potential human disease vectors in the Paraíba Valley Region, State of São Paulo, Brazil. J Vector Ecol. 2003;28: 74–78. pmid:12831131
  65. 65. Garcia-Rejon JE, Blitvich BJ, Farfan-Ale JA, Loroño-Pino MA, Chim WAC, Flores-Flores LF, et al. Host-feeding preference of the mosquito, Culex quinquefasciatus, in Yucatan State, Mexico. J Insect Sci. 2010;10: 1–12.
  66. 66. Forattini OP, Gomes AC, Natal D, Kakitani I, Marucci D. Preferências alimentares e domiciliares de mosquitos Culicidae no Vale do Ribeira, São Paulo, Brasil, com especial referência a Aedes scapularis e a Culex (Melanoconion). Rev Saude Publica. 1989;23: 9–19. pmid:2573142
  67. 67. Lourenço-de-Oliveira R, Heyden R. Alguns aspectos da ecologia dos mosquitos (Diptera: Culicidae) de uma área de planície (Granjas, Calábria), em Jacarepaguá, Rio de Janeiro. IV. Preferências alimentares quanto ao hospedeiro e frequência domiciliar. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 1986;81: 15–27.
  68. 68. Lutz A, Lutz B. Notes on the genus Phyllomedusa Wagler. Observations on small Phyllomedusae without vomerine teeth or conspicuous parotids found in the region of Rio de Janeiro. III—Mosquitos biting batrachians and phragmosis in casque-headed frog. An da Acad Bras Ciência. 1939;11: 250–256.
  69. 69. Silva JS, Alencar J, Costa JM, Seixas-lorosa E, Guimarães AE. Feeding patterns of mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae) in six Brazilian environmental preservation areas. J Vector Ecol. 2012;37: 342–350. pmid:23181858
  70. 70. Neves A, Urbinatti PR, Malafronte RS, Fernandes A, Paganini WS, Natal D. Malaria outside the Amazon region: natural Plasmodium infection in anophelines collected near an indigenous village in the Vale do Rio Branco, Itanhaém, SP, Brazil. Acta Trop. 2013;125: 102–106. pmid:22989665
  71. 71. Silva LJB, Magalh DM, Bottino-Rojas V, Pereira TN, Sorgine MHF, Caragata EP, et al. Wolbachia and dengue virus infection in the mosquito Aedes fluviatilis (Diptera: Culicidae). PLoS One. 2017;12: e0181678. pmid:28732048
  72. 72. Brasil P, Zalis MG, Pina-Costa A, Siqueira AM, Bianco C, Silva S. Plasmodium simium causing human malaria: a zoonoses with outbreak potential in the Rio de Janeiro Brazilian Atlantic forest. Lancet Glob Heal. 2017;5: e1038–e1046.