• Users Online: 1372
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 


 
 
Table of Contents
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 58  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 119-125

Seasonal Diversity of mosquito species in Dakshina Kannada district, Karnataka, India


1 Department of Zoology, Vivekananda College, Puttur, Karnataka, India
2 ICMR-Vector Control Research Centre, Field Station, Madurai, Tamil Nadu, India
3 Department of Applied Zoology, Mangalore University, Karnataka, India

Date of Submission23-Dec-2019
Date of Acceptance17-Feb-2020
Date of Web Publication13-Jan-2022

Correspondence Address:
K S Sreepada
Department of Applied Zoology, Mangalore University, Mangalagangothri- 574 100
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0972-9062.321758

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 

Background & objectives: Dakshina Kannada is one of the districts of Karnataka state of India with high incidences of mosquito-borne diseases, especially malaria and dengue. The larval stages of the mosquitoes are very important in determining the prevalence of adult mosquitoes and associated diseases. Hence, the occurrence of mosquito species was investigated by sampling different water bodies present in the Dakshina Kannada district from June 2014 to May 2017.
Methods: Random sampling was carried out from permanent and temporary, artificial and natural water bodies belonging to 11 types of microhabitats using dippers and suction pumps.
Results: A maximum of 37 mosquito species belonging to 12 genera were recorded with the dominant genera being Culex. Most species have been recorded from temporary bodies of water with the highest number of species in receptacles. Monsoon is the most productive season, both in terms of occurrence and abundance followed by post-monsoon and pre-monsoon. The abundance of mosquito larvae was significantly higher in temporary water bodies compared to the permanent.
Interpretation & conclusion: Abundant rainfall in the study area which produces many natural and domestic temporary water bodies accounts for mosquito breeding throughout the year.

Keywords: Mosquito; diversity; season; habitats


How to cite this article:
Ishwara Prasad K S, Govindarajan R, Sreepada K S. Seasonal Diversity of mosquito species in Dakshina Kannada district, Karnataka, India. J Vector Borne Dis 2021;58:119-25

How to cite this URL:
Ishwara Prasad K S, Govindarajan R, Sreepada K S. Seasonal Diversity of mosquito species in Dakshina Kannada district, Karnataka, India. J Vector Borne Dis [serial online] 2021 [cited 2022 Jan 22];58:119-25. Available from: https://www.jvbd.org/text.asp?2021/58/2/119/321758


  Introduction Top


India is ranked fifth after Brazil, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand in terms of mosquito species diversity[1] consisting of 393 species in 49 genera and 41 subgenera. Of these, less than 10% (31 species) are recognized in India as vectors of mosquito-borne diseases[2]. Recent updates added 10 species, raising the checklist to 403 species belonging to 50 genera contributing more than 11% of the world mosquito species[3]. Checklists are accessible from southern India, including 31 species of Anopheles mosquitoes from eastern slopes of the Western Ghats[4], 119 species from the Nilgiri hills[5] and 124 species from the phytotelmatic habitats of the Western Ghats hills of Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu[6].

The life cycle of a mosquito requires a spectrum of aquatic environments. The lentic bodies serve as oviposition sites for the female and nurseries for the developmental stages of mosquitoes. These water bodies range from seasonal tree holes to permanent water bodies such as ponds and lakes[7]. While the larger proportion of mosquito larvae prefers still water, there are larvae that live in slow-flowing streams, irrigational canals such as Anopheles minimus[8],[9],[10], An. culicifacies[11],[12],[13], An. fluviatilis, An. subpictus, An. pseudojemesi, An. barbirostris, An. jeyporiensis[14]. Therefore, the distribution of mosquito species is greatly influenced by the availability and the type of breeding habitats. The rapid urbanization process required the anthropological alteration of water and land resources resulting in water retention systems that eventually provide aquatic habitats for the development of mosquito larvae. Furthermore, the deforestation that triggers the forest-dwelling mosquito species to acclimatize to human habitation provides a broad range of new ecological niches for these species. Agricultural practices using extensive irrigation creates sustainable temporary habitats for the mosquitoes even in the unfavorable dry season, which also makes a significant contribution to the prevalence of mosquito species[15].

In the state of Karnataka, studies on mosquito diversity were carried out in some regions of Mysore, Mandya, Udupi and Bellary district[16],[17],[18],[19],[20],[21],[22],[23]. Although the coastal areas and adjacent foothills of Western Ghats of Dakshina Kannada district were at high risk of vector-borne diseases like malaria and dengue in the past several decades, the detailed survey on the occurrence of the mosquitoes is wanting. Except for the preliminary survey conducted in Mangaluru taluk of Dakshina Kannada district which reported 26 species of mosquitoes belonging to 6 genera, none of the studies have reported mosquito diversity in the district[24]. [Figure 1] represents the incidences of malaria and dengue in the Dakshina Kannada district in recent years. Along with these, other mosquito-borne diseases like filariasis and chikungunya were also reported from the district. Alarmingly, the two coastal cities of Karnataka, Mangaluru of Dakshina Kannada district and Udupi contribute about 72% of malaria cases in the state[25]. Therefore, a systematic mosquito larval sampling was done in the water bodies of the Dakshina Kannada district.
Figure 1: Incidences of malaria and dengue in the Dakshina Kannada District India
(Source: District health office)


Click here to view



  Material & Methods Top


Study site

The Dakshina Kannada district is situated in the southwestern part between the seashore of the Arabian Sea and Western Ghats foothill forests extending between 12.8438° N, 75.2479° E. The primary agriculture is areca nut along with paddy, coconut, black pepper, rubber and cocoa as additional crops. The district is also home to some major industries such as Mangalore Chemical and Fertilizers Ltd. (MCF), Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd. (MRPL) and port like New Mangalore Port Trust (NMPT). Rapid development projects in urban and semi-urban areas and the expansion of rubber plantations, irrigation systems of the areca garden provided excellent breeding habitats for mosquitoes, making this area highly vulnerable to mosquito proliferation. In addition, the climatic conditions marked by heavy rainfall and flooding during the monsoon season (June-September), sporadic post-monsoon rain (October-January) and frequent pre- monsoon rainfall during hot summer (February-May) generate a lot of temporary and permanent water pools that keep the mosquito population incessant.

Methodology

The Larval sampling was undertaken from June 2014 to May 2017. Monthly random samplings were done in five taluks namely Bantwal, Belthangady, Mangaluru, Puttur and Sullia from different types of water bodies. The geographical coordinates in each study site were noted using a Garmin eTrex GPS and a Google map was constructed using Google Earth [Figure 2]. In each study site, the mosquito breeding sites include permanent natural water bodies (ponds and swamps), permanent artificial water bodies (tanks); temporary natural water collections (streams, temporary pools, tree holes, areca sheaths and leaf axils) and temporary artificial water bodies (paddy fields, receptacles and tyres). Larval sampling was done using a 300ml capacity dipper. From large water bodies like the pond, swamp and streams, etc. three dips were taken. From the smaller habitats such as receptacles, areca sheath, etc., the entire water was poured. A small suction pump was used to collect larvae from inaccessible habitats such as tree hole, tyres, tree stump and leaf axils. These samples were brought to the laboratory, Department of Zoology, Vivekananda College Puttur, for further processing and identification.
Figure 2: Location map of Dakshina Kannada district and larval sampling sites.

Click here to view


Preservation and identification

From each sample, three to four IV instar larvae were separated and starved for a day and then killed in hot water on the next day. In some cases they were individually reared for the identification of the related fourth instar larva. The larvae and larval skin were then stored in a small vial containing 70% ethyl alcohol. The remaining larvae were reared in white enamel trays placed inside the insectary (20 × 20 × 20 cm). The larval feed was provided daily in ad libitum with 3:1 powdered dog biscuits and yeast. Emerging adults were fed with a 10% sucrose solution soaked in cotton which was kept in the insectary. Mosquitoes were collected and anesthetized using diethyl ether after a day of emergence, using an aspirator tube or test tube. The larvae and adult mosquitoes were identified using standard keys[7],[26],[27],[28],[29],[30],[31],[32],[33],[34]. Verification of the species was done by dissecting larvae and by mounting the male hypopygium of adults. Further confirmation of the species was done by entomologist working in ICMR-Vector Control Research Centre, Field Station, Madurai, Tamil Nadu, India. The abbreviations of generic names provided by Reinert[35] were followed.

Data analysis

Seasonal and taluk wise Shannon-Weaver index (H’) for species evenness and richness[36], Simpson’s index (D) for species dominance[37],[38], Evenness index (e^H/S) for the relative abundance of species, Margalef index for richness index was determined using PAST (PAleontological STatistics) software version 3.14. Mosquito species similarity between the various habitats was calculated using the Bray-Curtis similarity index[39]. The abundance of mosquito larvae in different habitats was compared by independent t-test using SPSS software (25.0).


  Results and Discussion Top


A total of 37 species of mosquito belonging to 12 genera and 12 subgenera were recorded for the first time in the district. Of these, genus Culex was the most predominant comprised of 16 species followed by genus Anopheles representing 8 species. The distribution of mosquito species reveals that 84.7% of larvae come from transient and 15.3% come from permanent water bodies. Among the species, the most dominant species was Stegomyia albopicta (27.4%), followed by Armigeres subalbatus (19%), Cx. quinquefasciatus,An. stephensi (6.5%) and Cx. tritaeniorhynchus (4.9%).

Of the total species collected, 35 species were found in temporary water bodies and 19 species were found in permanent water bodies. Within temporary habitats, receptacles showed the highest of 16 species followed by tree holes and temporary pools with 12 species each, and areca sheaths with 11 species. Among permanent habitats, tanks showed a maximum of 13 species followed by swamps 8 species and ponds 7 species. The abundance of mosquito larvae in temporary water bodies was x̅4.32 (s=2.36). By comparison, the abundance of larvae in permanent water bodies was numerically smaller x̅3.76 (s=1.71). There was a significant difference in the abundance of mosquito larvae between temporary and permanent water bodies (t = 5.50, p = 0.001). Furthermore, the abundance of mosquito larvae was also significantly lower in artificial habitats compared to the natural habitats (t = -4.07, p = 0.001).

Although most of the species were collected from multiple habitats, 11 species were collected from single habitat. These include Cx. pallidothorax and Cx. minor (cement tanks), Malaya genurostris (leaf axils), Cx. vishnui (paddy fields), Cx. flavicornis and Stegomyia aegypti (receptacles), An. barbirostris (streams), An. tessellates (temporary pools), Cx. brevipalpis, Downsiomyia niveus, Hulecoeteomyia chrysolineata and Phagomyia prominens (tree holes). Of these recorded species, Lutzia halifaxii and Toxorhynchites splendens larvae were predatory in nature but collected from some areas in very low numbers.

The Bray-Curtis Similarity index [Figure 3] indicates that the receptacles and areca sheaths have a similarity index of 0.65 as both habitats were temporary water bodies the composition of the species was similar. Among the larger habitats, paddy fields and swamps were showing high similarity (0.57). The analysis shows that the species found in smaller water bodies form a cluster and the species found in large water bodies form another cluster.
Figure 3: Bray-Curtis similarity indices among the habitats based on the seasonal abundance and occurrence of mosquito larvae (AS-Areca Sheaths; CT-Cement Tanks; LA-Leaf Axils; PF-Paddy Fields; Po-Ponds; Re-Receptacles; St-Streams; Sw- Swamps; TH-Tree Holes; TP-Temporary Pools; Ty-Tyres).

Click here to view


The seasonal occurrences of mosquito species revealed that a maximum of 35 species were recorded during monsoon season followed by 23 species during the post-monsoon season and 15 species during pre-monsoon season [Table 1]. The higher species richness during monsoon season may be due to the availability of innumerable breeding sites. The species richness (S) showed following descending order among the five taluks: Bantwal (32), Puttur (28), Mangaluru (27), Sullia (25) and Belthangady (21). Diversity indices namely Shannon and Simpson’s index showed little variation among the different taluks [Table 2]. Seasonally, the Shannon-Weaver index was high during monsoon (2.57) and post-monsoon (2.43) due to the increase in the number of breeding habitats that depend upon rainfall and low during pre-monsoon season (2.0). Simpson’s index was similar to a range of 0.83 to 0.87. During monsoon, the evenness index was marginally low (0.37) and was equal during pre-monsoon and post-monsoon seasons (0.49). Nevertheless, during pre- monsoon, the dominance was high (0.17) compared to the other two seasons (monsoon = 014, post-monsoon=0.13) reflecting the dominance of few species during pre-monsoon.
Table 1: Seasonal occurrence of mosquito larvae in different habitats of Dakshina Kannada District[48]

Click here to view
Table 2: Mosquito larval diversity indices (seasonal and taluk wise) in the Dakshina Kannada district from June 2014 to May 2017

Click here to view


Of the recorded species, 12 species are known to be vectors of various mosquito-borne diseases. Three malarial vectors An. annularis, An. maculatus and An. stephensi were collected during all three seasons. An. stephensi was primarily obtained from urban and semi-urban cement reservoirs of permanent nature. The species is considered as a primary urban vector and breeds mainly in man-made containers[40]. In Mangaluru city, water stored in tanks on construction sites and stagnant water under construction sites was presumed to provide an ideal breeding site for Anopheles mosquito[41]. Larval surveillance and control program is recommended to monitor the urban malaria vector An. stephensi[42]. The vectors An. annularis and An. maculatus were collected from rural paddy fields, ponds and swamps of rural areas of the district.

During the present study, six Japanese encephalitis (JE) vectors namely An. barbirostris, Cx. fuscocephala, Cx. gelidus, Cx. quinquefasciatus, Cx. tritaeniorhynchus and Cx. vishnui were collected. Among these, Cx. quinquefasciatus is also an elephantiasis vector that was collected during the early months of monsoon and post-monsoon in large numbers from six different types of breeding sites. The other species Cx. tritaeniorhynchus, which transmits the JE virus was recorded from several permanent water bodies throughout the year. Recent studies have reported that JE transmission can take place from endemic to non-endemic areas of India[43]. Even though there were rare cases of JE reported in the district, the presence of different incremented vector species, associated breeding grounds and availability of vertebrate host[44] like goats and pigs is a warning sign for the district. Therefore, if control measures are not taken, disease outbreak may occur, as evidenced in the neighboring southern states[45].

The most common species found in a wide variety of temporary water bodies was Stegomyia albopicta. Adaptation of this species to breed in multiple niches provided a potential chance for the proliferation. In addition, it acts as an emerging arboviral vector in the Western Ghats foothills. The species has been collected throughout the year with a rapid increase during the month of May with the onset of rain. St. aegypti, on the other hand, was a rare species recorded from rural and semi-urban areas, breeding only in water stored in artificial containers such as plastic tanks and mud pots. Although both St. aegypti and St. albopicta are potential vectors of dengue and chikungunya in different parts of India, it is highly evident that the latter species may be a major vector transmitting the dengue virus in the district. Therefore, it is important to elucidate its role in disease transmission in this region. The higher prevalence of vector St. albopicta in the adjoining states of Kerala and Tamil Nadu suggests that this species can play an alternative role for dengue transmission in the absence of St. aegypti. The species was found to be a potential vector for dengue in Western Ghats foothills and then can be spread to the adjoining areas[46]. The slow shrinking of forested areas due to the substitution of cash crops such as rubber and palm is also one of the reasons why dengue vectors flourished in rural areas from their original forest area[47].

Abundant rainfall that creates a lot of natural and domestic temporary water bodies combined with tropical temperatures and a high relative humidity account for mosquito breeding in the study area throughout the year. The district authorities have implemented several vector control programs by preventing mosquito breeding near construction sites, by clearing the accumulated water in apartments by spraying larvicidal oil in water-stagnant places and fogging operations. Despite anti-malaria and other vector control drives practiced in the district, the cases of mosquito-borne diseases have not been controlled. This further highlights the fact that water bodies mainly associated with human habitation like water tanks, drums, artificial containers in the district must be properly managed by constant monitoring programs for the occurrence of vector species. While it is quite difficult to carry out anti-larval operations in rural areas, community awareness of proper maintenance of water bodies in both agricultural farms and residential areas can help in controlling the mosquito population and thus facilitate the attainment of very low levels of mosquito-borne diseases.

Conflict of interest: None[48]


  Acknowledgements Top


The authors are grateful to Mangalore University for providing the necessary laboratory facilities to undertake this research work. The authors would like to sincerely thank Director, ICMR-VCRC, Puducherry and Dr. P. Philip Samuel, ICMR, Field Station, Madurai for providing mosquito Identification facility. We also would like to extend our gratitude to the Principal, Vivekananda College, Puttur for infrastructural facilities to carry out this work.



 
  References Top

1.
Foley DH, Rueda LM, Wilkerson RC. Insight into mosquito biogeography from country species records. J Med Entomol Suppl 2007; 44(4): 554–67.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Bhattacharyya DR, Rajavel AR, Natarajan R, Mohapatra PK, Jambulingam P, Mahanta J, et al. Faunal richness and the checklist of Indian mosquitoes (Family: Culicidae). CheckList 2014; 10(6): 1342–58.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Tyagi BK, Muinirathinam A, Venkatesh A. An inventory of the authentically identified and classified mosquito taxa in the ‘CRME Museum’, with annotations on its significance in taxonomic research in India. Int J Mosq Res 2016; 3: 58–113.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Tewari SC, Hiriyan J, Reuben R. Survey of the Anopheline fauna of the Western Ghats in Tamil Nadu, India. Indian J Malariol 1987; 24: 21–8.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Bhuyan PJ, Hiriyan J, Chandrasekaran P, Annadurai C. An annotated checklist of mosquito fauna with vector bionomics in Nilgiri hills, southern India. J Evol Med Dent Sci 2013; 2(11): 1654–5.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Munirathinam A, Krishnamoorthi G, Baskaran R, Govindarajan A, Venkatesh A, Tyagi BK. Mosquito species biodiversity in Phytotelmata from Western Ghats, South India. Halteres 2014; 5: 56–3.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Rattanarithikul R, Harbach RE, Harrison BA, Panthusiri P, Coleman RE, Richardson JH. Illustrated keys to the mosquitoes of Thailand VI Tribe Aedini. Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health 2010; 41(Suppl 1): 1–38.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Dev V. Breeding habitats of anopheline mosquitoes in Assam. Indian J Malariol 1994; 31(1): 31–4.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Dev V, Adak T, Singh OP, Nanda N, Baidya BK. Malaria transmission in Tripura: Disease distribution & determinants. Indian J Med Res 2015; 142(Suppl): S12–22.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Manguin S, Garros C, Dusfour I, Harbach RE, Coosemans M. Bionomics, taxonomy, and distribution of the major malaria vector taxa of Anopheles subgenus Cellia in Southeast Asia: an updated review. Infect Genet Evol 2008; 8(4): 489–503.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Rao TR. The Anophelines of India. Revised Edition, Malaria Research Centre, I.C.M.R. Delhi. (1984)  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Nagpal BN, Sharma VP. Indian Anophelines. New Delhi: Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd, 1995: p. 416.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Sahu SS, Gunasekaran K, Jambulingam P, Das PK. Susceptibility status of Anopheles fluviatilis, A. annularis and A. culicifacies to insecticides in Koraput District, Orissa. Indian J Malariol 1990; 27(1): 51–3.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Tiwari S, Ghosh SK, Sathyanarayan TS, Nanda N, Uragayala S, Valecha N. Malaria Outbreaks in Villages in North Karnataka, India, and Role of Sibling Species of Anopheles culicifacies Complex. Health 2015; 7(8): 946–4.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Norris DE. Mosquito-borne diseases as a consequence of land use change. EcoHealth 2004; 1: 19–4.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Gowda NN and Vijayan VA. Survey of Mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae) in Mysore city, Karnataka. Journal of Mysore University 1992; 32; 321–4.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Urmila J Ganesh KN, Pushpalatha N Vijayan VA. Increased mosquito breeding activity in Mysore University Campus, Manasagangothri, Karnataka. J Commun Dis 1999; 31(3): 203–6.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Kumar YS, Ganesh N, Vijayan VA. Mosquito diversity in Rajiv Gandhi National park (Nagarahole), Karnataka State, India. J Entomol Res Soc 2004; 6(2): 1–3.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Kumar YS, and Vijayan VA. Mosquito fauna and breeding habitats in the rural area of Mysore and Mandya districts, Karnataka state, India. Entomon 2005; 30: 123–8.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Fukoorziba MR, Vijayan VA. Seasonal abundance of larval stage of Culex Species mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae) in an endemic area of Japanese Encephalitis in Mysore, India. Pak J Med Sci 2006; 9: 2468–2.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Rajavel AR, Natarajan R, Vaidyanathan K. Mosquitoes of the mangrove forests of India: Part Six-Kundapur, Karnataka and Kannur, Kerala. J Am Mosq Control Assoc 2006; 22: 582–5.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Kanojia PC. Ecological study on mosquito vectors of Japanese encephalitis virus in Bellary district, Karnataka. Indian J Med Res 2007; 126(2): 152–7.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Kanojia PC, Jamgaonkar AV. Mosquito records from a hot and dry climatic area experiencing frequent outbreaks of Japanese encephalitis, Bellary district, Karnataka, India. J Am Mosq Control Assoc 2008; 24(1): 6–10.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Prasad KSI and Sreepada KS. Distribution and seasonal abundance of mosquitoes in Mangalore Taluk, Dakshina Kannada District, Karnataka. Journal of Basic and Applied Biology 2013; 7(4): 45–3.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Ghosh SK, Manju R. Malaria elimination in India—The way forward. J Vector Borne Dis 2019; 56(1): 32–40.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Christophers SR. The fauna of British India including Ceylon and Burma (Diptera: Culicidae). Tribe Anophelini. London: Taylor and Francis 1933: p.371.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Barraud PJ. The fauna of British India including Burma and Ceylon (Diptera: Culicidae). Tribes Megarhinini and Culicini. London: Taylor and Francis 1934: p.463.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Bram RA. Contributions to the mosquito fauna of Southeast Asia II. The genus Culex in Thailand (Diptera: Culicidae). Contrib Amer Ent Inst 1967; 2: 1–296.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
Harrison BA, Scanlon JE. Medical entomology studies-II. The subgenus Anopheles in Thailand (Diptera: Culicidae). Contrib Amer Ent Inst 1975; 12: 1–307.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.
Sirivanakarn S. Medical entomology studies–III. A revision of the subgenus Culex in the Oriental Region (Diptera: Culicidae). Contrib Amer Ent Inst 1976; 13: 1–272.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
Huang YM. Contribution to mosquito fauna of Southeast Asia XI. The subgenus Stegomyia of Aedes in the Oriental region with keys to the species (Diptera: Culicidae). Contrib Amer Ent Inst 1979; 15: 1–79.  Back to cited text no. 31
    
32.
Rattanarithikul, R. A guide to the genera of mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae) of Thailand with illustrated keys, biological notes and preservation and mounting techniques. Mosq Syst 1982; 14(3): 139–208.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.
Rattanarithikul R, Harbach RE, Harrison BA, Panthusiri P, Jones JW, Coleman RE. Illustrated keys to the mosquitoes of Thailand-II. Genera Culex and Lutzia. Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health 2005; 36(Suppl 2): 1–97.  Back to cited text no. 33
    
34.
Rattanarithikul R, Harbach RE, Harrison BA, Panthusiri P, Coleman RE. Illustrated keys to the mosquitoes of Thailand IV. Anopheles. Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health 2006; 41: 1–87.  Back to cited text no. 34
    
35.
Reinert JF. List of abbreviations for currently valid generic-level taxa in family Culicidae (Diptera). European Mosquito Bulletin 2009; 27: 68–6.  Back to cited text no. 35
    
36.
Melo AS. What we win “confounding” species richness and evenness in a diversity index? Biota Neotrop 2008; 8: 21–27.  Back to cited text no. 36
    
37.
Buzas MA, Hayek LAC. Biodiversity resolution: An integrated approach. Biodivers Lett 1996; 3: 40–43.  Back to cited text no. 37
    
38.
Gorelick R. Combining richness and abundance into a single diversity index using matrix analogues of Shannon’s and Simpson’s indices. Ecography 2006; 29(4): 525–30.  Back to cited text no. 38
    
39.
Srivastava AK and Prasad SB. Study of Diversity and Abundance of Anopheline Mosquitoes in Meghalaya, India. Austin J Infect Dis 2015; 2(1): 1–9.  Back to cited text no. 39
    
40.
Dash AP, Adak T, Raghavendra K, Singh OP. The biology and control of malaria vectors in India. Curr Sci 2007; 92: 1571–8.  Back to cited text no. 40
    
41.
Dayanand KK, Kishore P, Valleesha C, Rajeshwara NA, Srinivas BK, et al. Malaria prevalence in Mangaluru city area in the southwestern coastal region of India. Malar J 2017; 16: 1–10.  Back to cited text no. 41
    
42.
Anvikar AR, Naman S, Akshay CD, Gagan SS, Madan MP, et al. Epidemiology of Plasmodium vivax Malaria in India. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2016; 95(6 Suppl): 108–20.  Back to cited text no. 42
    
43.
Samuel PP, Thenmozhi V, Muniaraj M, Ramesh, DS. Victor JL, Balaji T, et al. Changing paradigm in the epidemiology of Japanese encephalitis in a non-endemic region. J Vector Borne Dis 2018; 55: 203–7.  Back to cited text no. 43
    
44.
Rajendran R, Thenmozhi V, Ayanar K, Manavalan R. Sentinel goats for monitoring JE virus activity in Cuddalore district (South Arcot). CRME (ICMR) Annual Report 2000 - 2001.  Back to cited text no. 44
    
45.
Samuel PP, Hiriyan J, Gajanana A. Japanese encephalitis virus infection in mosquitoes and its epidemiological implications. ICMR Bull 2000; 30: 37–2.  Back to cited text no. 45
    
46.
Samuel PP, Victor JL, Govindarajan R, Babu SR, Nagaraj J, Kumar D, Arunachalam N. Anthropophilic Behavior of Aedes albopictus: A predominant vector of dengue/chikungunya in Thiruvananthapuram district, Kerala, South India. J Commun Dis 2016; 48: 1–11.  Back to cited text no. 46
    
47.
Samuel PP, Govindarajan R, VictorJL, Krishnamoorthy R, Paramasivan R, Arunachalam N. Emergence of dengue in the tribal pockets of Nilgiris district, Tamil Nadu. Tropical Doctor 2017; 47: 170–3.  Back to cited text no. 47
    
48.
Harbach R. Mosquito Taxonomic Inventory (www.mosquito-taxonomic-inventory.info/) Updated 26 August 2019.  Back to cited text no. 48
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2]



 

Top
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

  Material & M...Results and Disc...
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Acknowledgements
References
Article Figures
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed464    
    Printed0    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded46    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal