Next Article in Journal
Study of the Repellent Activity of 60 Essential Oils and Their Main Constituents against Aedes albopictus, and Nano-Formulation Development
Previous Article in Journal
A Genetic Compensation Phenomenon and Global Gene Expression Changes in Sex-miR-2766-3p Knockout Strain of Spodoptera exigua Hübner (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Insects
Volume 13
Issue 12
10.3390/insects13121076
insects-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Mosquitoes and Mosquito-Borne Diseases in Vietnam

by
Ly Na Huynh
1,2,3,
Long Bien Tran
3,
Hong Sang Nguyen
3,
Van Hoang Ho
3,
Philippe Parola
1,2 and
Xuan Quang Nguyen
3,*
1
Aix Marseille Univ, IRD, AP-HM, SSA, VITROME, 13005 Marseille, France
2
IHU-Méditerranée Infection, 19-21 Boulevard Jean Moulin, 13005 Marseille, France
3
Institute of Malariology, Parasitology and Entomology, Quy Nhon (IMPE-QN), MoH Vietnam, Zone 8, Nhon Phu Ward, Quy Nhon City 590000, Vietnam
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Insects 2022, 13(12), 1076; https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13121076
Submission received: 3 October 2022 / Revised: 31 October 2022 / Accepted: 17 November 2022 / Published: 22 November 2022
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

Vietnam is one of the tropical countries of Asia where individuals are at high risk of attaining mosquito-borne diseases. Due to rapid urbanization in Vietnam, most of the major cities have immense population growth, along with inadequate control measures over mosquitoes. These factors contributed to a sudden increase in the population of disease vectors that lead to cyclical epidemics of mosquito-borne diseases. This review paper aims to (i) provide a complete checklist of Vietnamese mosquitoes, (ii) provide an overview of mosquito-borne diseases in Vietnam, and (iii) preventive measures for mosquitoes in Vietnam. We list 281 mosquito species, belonging to 42 subgenera of 22 genera. We found that three genera, namely, Anopheles, Aedes, and Culex are found to be potential vectors for mosquito-borne diseases in Vietnam. We found dengue and malaria are the most common mosquito-borne diseases in Vietnam with about 320,702 cases and 54 deaths in the 2019 outbreak and 4548 clinical cases and six deaths, respectively. We suggest that mosquito-borne diseases could be effectively controlled and prevented through mechanical, chemical, biological, and genetic methods.

Abstract

Mosquito-borne diseases pose a significant threat to humans in almost every part of the world. Key factors such as global warming, climatic conditions, rapid urbanisation, frequent human relocation, and widespread deforestation significantly increase the number of mosquitoes and mosquito-borne diseases in Vietnam, and elsewhere around the world. In southeast Asia, and notably in Vietnam, national mosquito control programmes contribute to reducing the risk of mosquito-borne disease transmission, however, malaria and dengue remain a threat to public health. The aim of our review is to provide a complete checklist of all Vietnamese mosquitoes that have been recognised, as well as an overview of mosquito-borne diseases in Vietnam. A total of 281 mosquito species of 42 subgenera and 22 genera exist in Vietnam. Of those, Anopheles, Aedes, and Culex are found to be potential vectors for mosquito-borne diseases. Major mosquito-borne diseases in high-incidence areas of Vietnam include malaria, dengue, and Japanese encephalitis. This review may be useful to entomological researchers for future surveys of Vietnamese mosquitoes and to decision-makers responsible for vector control tactics.

1. Introduction

Mosquitoes are vectors of disease and can transmit many infectious pathogens (arboviruses, filariae, and protozoans) that cause common and emerging diseases, specifically malaria, dengue, Zika, chikungunya, and Japanese encephalitis, between humans or from other creatures to humans [1]. Mosquito-borne diseases are widely distributed in almost all countries of the world, but are mainly concentrated in tropical and subtropical regions of the globe with warm and humid climates [2]. There are 3563 valid species, belonging to three genera (Anopheles, Aedes, and Culex) within two subfamilies (Anophelinae and Culicinae) [3,4]. The mosquito vectors of the Anopheles genus can transmit malaria and filariasis, while the Aedes genus can transmit dengue virus (DENV), chikungunya virus (CHIKV), Zika virus (ZIKV), yellow fever virus (YFV), and the Culex genus can transmit filariasis, Japanese encephalitis virus (JEV), West Nile virus (WNV), and Rift Valley Fever (RVF) [5,6]. According to the World Health Organization (WHO, 2020), every year about 219 million malaria cases and 96 million symptomatic dengue cases, leading to more than 445,000 and 40,000 deaths, respectively, are recorded globally [4,7]. There are no potential vaccines available for most mosquito-borne diseases. The WHO has, therefore, declared that the key preventive measures for controlling mosquito-borne diseases are a change of behaviour, public awareness, and environmental management [7].
Vietnam is a tropical country in Asia where individuals are at high risk of acquiring mosquito-borne diseases such as malaria, dengue, Zika, Japanese encephalitis, and lymphatic filariasis [8]. Although malaria was previously endemic in many parts of Vietnam, it has recently been significantly reduced following vector control efforts by the Vietnamese government. These measures included prompt case detection and treatment with pyronaridine-artesunate (Pyramax) which is used for diversifying anti-malarial therapy in artemisinin- and piperaquine-resistant Plasmodium falciparum parasite regions [9], the widespread distribution of insecticide-treated bed nets (ITNs), long-lasting insecticide-treated bed nets/long-lasting insecticide-treated hammock nets (LLTNs/LLHNs), and the regular the use of pyrethroids through indoor residual spraying (IRS) in households [10,11,12,13,14,15]. However, malaria continues to persist as an important public health threat in the Central Highlands and the southern forested and mountainous regions [16,17], where almost all ethnic minority groups live in impoverished socio-economic conditions. It mainly affects people such as farmers and/or forest-goers, as well as temporary migrants moving from endemic regions [18]. In addition, vector resistance to chemical insecticide, has been found in every main species. Anopheles minimus sensu lato (s.l.) was found to be pyrethroid-resistant in northern Vietnam, Anopheles dirus s.l. showed possible tolerance to type II pyrethroids in central Vietnam, and Anopheles epiroticus showed high resistance to pyrethroids in the Mekong Delta region [19,20]. The drug-resistant malaria strains in particular pose a major potential threat to extensive malaria control and elimination strategies planned for the whole country before 2030 [13,21,22]. Cases of the multidrug resistance of the P. falciparum malaria parasite in Vietnam and other southeast Asian countries such as Laos, Cambodia, Thailand, and Myanmar, have been published [16,23,24]. Dengue fever (DF) is the fastest spreading mosquito-borne arboviral infection in the whole world, which is transmitted to humans through the bites of infected female Aedes aegypti or Aedes albopictus mosquitoes [25]. Vietnam has been ranked among the five countries with the heaviest dengue burden in the Asian-Pacific region [26,27]. Due to rapid urbanisation, most of the major cities in Vietnam have experienced immense population growth, coupled with inadequate mosquito control measures. Additionally, the country faces the risk of climate change [28,29] and extreme weather variability, with widespread flooding due to rising sea levels. Other unexpected outcomes of climate change include rising temperatures and decreasing rainfall. These factors have contributed to a sudden increase in the population of disease vectors that lead to cyclical epidemics of mosquito-borne diseases [30].
This is the first review that provides a complete checklist of Vietnamese mosquitoes along with a comprehensive and systematic overview of mosquito-borne diseases in Vietnam. We hope it may be useful to decision-makers responsible for vector control strategies and to researchers for future surveys on mosquitoes.

2. Mosquitoes and Medical Importance in Vietnam

In Vietnam, detailed studies on mosquitoes (particularly on the Anopheles, Culex, and Aedes species) were initiated after the first outbreak of the dengue virus in 1959 [30]. However, the first detailed report on mosquitoes and their relationship to human diseases in Vietnam was proposed by Parrish in 1968 [31]. In this report, Parrish identified 94 different mosquito species from ten United States Air Force (USAF) installations in Vietnam between June 1966 and June 1968. Of these, 22 species were reported as main vectors of human diseases [31]. In 1970, Reinert [32] and Tyson [33] improved the catalogue of Culex and Aedes mosquitoes in SEA countries including Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines.
In 1974, Thoa [34] collected and examined around 107,000 mosquitoes in and around poultry houses and piggeries in Saigon city (now known as Ho Chi Minh City) between 1972–1973 and noted that the Culex species (particularly Culex tritaeniorhynchus) was predominant. Later, Thuan [35] studied and reported the evolution of Anopheles mosquitoes in the Da Nang, Quang Nam, Phu Khanh, Nghia Binh, and Thuan Hai provinces, between 1975 and 1986. Since then, multiple studies on the diversity of medical mosquito vectors in Vietnam have been published [36]. Bui et al. (2008) listed 191 species and subspecies, 28 subgenera and 35 genera, and the authors compared their research with those published from US military sources during the Vietnam war. However, these data were not exhaustive, as they did not update all the reported research by domestic authors [37]. More recently, Nguyen (2015) listed 255 species in 21 genera and 42 subgenera. The author’s list was based on research papers published by domestic and foreign researchers [38]. Nevertheless, none of them are documented as a literature review of existing mosquito species, along with their associated mosquito-borne diseases. Hence, in this review, we provide a complete checklist of all recognised mosquitoes in Vietnam. It was compiled from multiple reliable studies published both nationally and internationally by Parrish (1969) and Grothaus et al. (1971) [31,32], Reinert (1973) [39], Vu (1984) [36], Harbach (2007) [40], Bui et al. (2008) [37] and Nguyen (2015) [38].
Our research reported the existence of a total of 281 Vietnamese mosquito species in 42 subgenera and 22 genera, of which the main vectors were 66 Anopheles, 51 Aedes, 50 Culex, one Aedeomyia, 12 Armigeres, three Coquillettidia, one Ficalbia, seven Heizmannia, one Hodgesia, one Kimia, four Lutzia, three Malaya, nine Mansonia, three Mimomyia, 24 Ochlerotatus, three Orthopodomyia, three Topomyia, four Toxorhynchites, six Tripteroides, one Udaya, 20 Uranotaenia, and eight Verrallina species [31,36,37,38,39,40]. These findings are presented in Table 1 and Table 2. The distribution of the primary mosquito vectors in Vietnam and breeding and resting sites are shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2.

3. Mosquito-Associated Microorganims and Human Diseases

3.1. Malaria

Malaria is a protozoal infection of erythrocytes and ranks fourth among parasitic diseases affecting birds, reptiles, humans, and other mammals [4,5] Human malaria is also known as ague, marsh fever, paludism, and intermittent fever [4]. Of the 172 known Plasmodium species, only four, namely P. falciparum, Plasmodium vivax, Plasmodium malariae, and Plasmodium ovale, are commonly known to infect humans with malaria [5]. P. falciparum has caused the greatest morbidity and mortality to date, with several hundreds of millions of clinical malaria cases [41].
In Vietnam, malaria became a serious public health problem in the late 1980s and early 1990s [42]. In 1991, the National Malaria Control Programme (NMCP), based on ITNs, IRS, and early diagnosis and treatment of malaria (EDTM), was approved. Since then, there has been a reduction in malaria cases between 1991, when there were estimated to be 1,674,000 uncomplicated and severe clinical cases and 4650 deaths, and 2017, when there were estimated to be 4548 clinical cases and six deaths [42,43,44]. Nevertheless, as is the case in many countries in the Asia-Pacific region, Vietnam faces the challenges of rapidly evolving multi-drug resistant parasites [45], changes in the outdoor feeding and early biting and resting behaviour of some mosquitoes, as well as insecticide-resistant mosquitoes, which impact the malarial control and elimination strategies which were expected to eradicate the disease by 2030.
Early in the 19th century, Leger (1910) published 15 species of Anopheles mosquitoes in Vietnam. Gallilard and Dang (1946) built the taxonomic key of 22 Anopheles mosquito species. Tran (1995), published a list of 55 species nationwide [46]. To date, 64 Anopheles species have been identified, but, only 15 Anopheles species have formally been recognised as likely to transmit malaria [47].
Three vectors have been incriminated as playing the role of primary vector in malaria transmission, namely An. dirus Peyton and Harrison, An. minimus Theobald, and An. epiroticus Linton and Harbach (Sundaicus complex) [19,48,49,50]. Other secondary vectors are Anopheles aconitus Dönitz, Anopheles campestris Linnaeus, Anopheles culicifacies Giles, Anopheles indefinitus Ludlow, Anopheles interruptus Puri, Anopheles jeyporiensis James, Anopheles maculatus Theobald, Anopheles lesteri Baisas and Hu, Anopheles nimpe Nguyen, Tran and Harbach, Anopheles sinensis Wiedemann, Anopheles subpictus Grassi, and Anopheles vagus Dönitz, which may be considered to contribute towards the transmission of malaria outside of forested regions [11].
Anopheles dirus sensu stricto (s.s.) Peyton and Harrison (Figure 3a), 1979, spread to forested and mountain areas from the central and south-eastern regions of Vietnam [51]. An. dirus s.s. belongs to the Anopheles (Cellia) leucosphyrus group, with 20 member species [52]. This species, previously known as Anopheles balabacensis, comes from Vietnam and other SEA countries [44]. Recently, it was formally named An. dirus s.s. (species A) [52]. Of the four Plasmodium species reported in Vietnam and known to be true parasites of humans, P. falciparum (64%) and P. vivax (35%) [53] have commonly been found, while P. ovale, P. malariae are also present but at low levels [53,54,55]. In 2009, a fifth parasite species was discovered, Plasmodium knowlesi, a macaque parasite that was recognised for the first time in a case of human malaria in a nine-year-old child in Khanh Phu in the Khanh Hoa province of Vietnam [56]. Interestingly, An. dirus was incriminated as the vector for carrying sporozoites of P. knowlesi, P. falciparum, and P. vivax, in a paper published by Charmand [57]. An. minimus s.l. (Figure 3b) belongs to the Minimus subgroup. The An. minimus complex comprises three species, of which two are known to occur in the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS), namely An. minimus Theobald (formerly An. minimus A), and Anopheles harrisoni Harbach and Manguin (formerly An. minimus C) [19]. An. minimus s.l. is widespread in hilly and forested areas nationwide. These mosquitoes breed in small, slow-flowing streams with aquatic vegetation, and clear water in full sunlight [58]. An. epiroticus (formerly Anopheles sundaicus species A) (Figure 3c), which is distinguished by brackish water populations in sunlight, only occurs in coastal areas of southern Vietnam [59].

3.2. Dengue

Dengue or dengue fever is the most prominent mosquito-borne virus, leading to approximately 100 million symptomatic cases in about 100 tropical-zone countries every year [60,61]. According to the WHO (2021), the number of dengue cases increased more than eight-fold from 505,430 cases in 2000 to 5.2 million cases in 2019, with an increase in the death rate from 960 in 2000 to 4032 in 2015 [60]. It is estimated that approximately 70% of these cases were in Asia, with the most affected countries being, in order, the Philippines (420,000), Vietnam (320,000), Malaysia (131,000), and Bangladesh (101,000) [60]. The dengue virus (family Flaviviridae) has five distinct serotypes (DENV-1 to DENV-5) and serotypes 1–4 are widely spread globally [62]. Infection with any of these five serotypes can cause illnesses such as dengue fever and dengue shock syndrome [60]. Generally, the dengue virus is transmitted in humans through bites of the female Aedes mosquito.
Vietnam is the country that is second most affected by the dengue virus in Asia, as well as in the world, and the first dengue case was reported in 1959 [8,60,63]. However, the largest dengue outbreak was reported in 2019, with about 320,702 cases and 54 deaths between January and December [63]. According to a report from the Vietnamese Ministry of Health, a 2.5-fold increase in the number of dengue cases was noted in the 2019 dengue outbreak, compared to cases in 2018 [63]. It has been reported that the dengue virus (mostly serotypes 1–4) has been highly distributed across Vietnam, from the southern region into the central and northern regions of the country. For instance, Nha Trang city in the central region of Vietnam recorded 12,655 dengue fever cases between 2006 and 2016 [64]. The capital city, Hanoi, (northern region) has witnessed many significant dengue outbreaks over the last decade. The largest outbreak was recorded in 2017 with 37,651 cases and seven deaths [8]. The incidence rate of the dengue virus varies for each province and region, and the most affected cases are recorded in the southern part of the country compared to other regions [65,66]. To date, Vietnam has recorded an increase of about 15,000 dengue cases compared to statistics in the past 10 days, raising the total number of cases in 2022 as of July 2022 to 92,000 cases and 36 deaths [67,68]. The main hotspot areas for dengue fever are in southern Vietnam, specifically Ho Chi Minh with 21,750 cases, an increase of more than 181% compared to the same period last year, and leading to nine deaths [67,69], followed by the provinces of Binh Duong (5000 cases and eight deaths) [70], Dong Nai (3500 cases and three deaths), and An Giang (4400 cases) [71]. These provinces have all witnessed an increasing number of infections. Due to the high population growth and rapid urbanisation, the biggest city, Ho Chi Minh, is well-known as a critical urban centre for the transmission of the dengue virus.
Aedes aegypti (Figure 4a) and Ae. albopictus (Figure 4b) are two main vectors that cause dengue fever in Vietnam. Ae. aegypti is a dominant vector in urban regions of Vietnam, mainly breeding in flower vases, jars, and plastic buckets. Ae. albopictus breeds with lower density in both urban and peri-urban areas than Ae. aegypti, due to climate change, migration, and urbanisation. The factors influencing the distribution of the dengue virus in Vietnam have been found to be industrialisation, urbanisation, and climate change [72].

3.3. Zika Virus Infection

Zika virus is an arbovirus (Flavivirus genus) with a rapid geographic spread [73]. It was first isolated from the blood samples of a rhesus monkey, in the Ziika Forest of Uganda, in 1947, during epidemiological studies of yellow fever [74,75]. However, the first case in humans was isolated in a Nigerian female (10 years old) in 1954 [76] and, outside the African continent, it was first identified in SEA (Malaysia 1966) and Indonesia (1977) [77,78]. However, the largest outbreak in humans was reported on the island of Yap in 2007, where 75% of the population was infected [79,80]. Later, new epidemics broke out in French Polynesia (in late 2013) [81], the South Pacific (during 2014 and 2016), the region of the Americas (in 2015), and Brazil (in 2015), leading the WHO to declare “congenital Zika syndrome” as a global public health emergency in February 2016 [78].
Serological screening during these epidemics identified that the Aedes species, including Aedes hensilli in Yap island, Aedes polynesiensis and Ae. aegypti in French Polynesia, and Aedes albopictus and Ae. aegypti in much of the Americas, are the probable vectors of Zika infection [73]. However, Ae. aegypti is the leading vector in urban areas, while Ae. albopictus occurs in both urban and rural areas [82]. In addition, the Zika virus has also been rarely isolated from Anopheles, Culex, and Mansonia species [83]. In recent ages, some evidence has been found that the Zika virus can also be transmitted by perinatal transmission, transfusions, and sexually [75]. The general clinical symptoms of the Zika virus are arthritis or arthralgia, conjunctivitis, fever, Guillain-Barré syndrome, headache, muscle and joint pain, myalgia, rash, retro-orbital pain, tiredness, and vomiting [84,85].
Vietnam is one of the top five countries that have been recognised as sentinel indicators for Zika virus transmission [86]. In Vietnam, the first Zika infection was identified by Real-Time PCR in two children from the Long An province and Ho Chi Minh City in 2013 [87]. Later, it was identified in two females from Nha Trang city and Ho Chi Minh City in April 2016 [88]. During this first outbreak in 2016, around ten provinces in the Central Highlands and southern regions were strongly affected with 212 cases [88]. Furthermore, the number of cases dropped significantly to 24 cases in 2017, and one case in 2018 [88,89]. All cases reported in Vietnam were recognised to be local, vector-borne infections [89]
In Vietnam, the Aedes species is the main vector reported to cause transmission of the Zika virus [89]. The entomological report during the 2016 outbreak noted that the Zika virus was mainly transmitted by the Ae. aegypti vector, which mostly survives in water stored at home [89,90]. In addition, the significant growth of the density of the vector was found to be due to (a) the impact of urbanisation; (b) climate change; (c) lack of awareness of the importance of eliminating the breeding areas of mosquitoes [91].

3.4. Japanese Encephalitis

Japanese encephalitis is caused by a Flavivirus, which is the most common vector-borne disease in Asia and Pacific countries. It affects 67,900 people every year all over the globe [91]. Around 75% of these cases are reported among children 0–14 years old. The general clinical symptoms of viral encephalitis are disorientation, headache, high fever, neck stiffness, seizures, spastic paralysis, and coma [91,92]. Some serological screening studies have reported that the encephalitis virus may cause severe symptoms including abortion and stillbirth in animals such as horses and dogs [93]. Generally, pigs and birds act as reservoirs of the Japanese encephalitis virus, whereas humans and other animals are considered dead-end hosts [93,94]. The enzootic transmission cycle of Japanese encephalitis involves mosquitoes, birds, and pigs. However, there is no evidence that mosquitoes play a significant role in the epidemiology of the encephalitis virus [94].
In the 1930s, the first isolate of the Japanese encephalitis virus was identified from Culex tritaeniorhynchus and 30 other mosquito species were later detected [95]. However, mosquitoes from Culex tritaeniorhynchus, Culex gelidus, Culex fuscocephala, Culex vishnui, and Culex quinquefasciatus (Figure 4c) are well-recognised vectors and capable of transmitting flavivirus both naturally and experimentally [96,97], while mosquitoes from Aedes, Anopheles, Armigeres, and Mansonia genera are proven to transmit it experimentally [95,98,99]. Favourable breeding areas for these mosquito species are found to be rice fields, wastewater, and irrigation systems [94,100,101]. Encephalitis is, therefore, most common in countryside areas.
In Vietnam, the Japanese encephalitis virus circulated in both rural and urban areas. In 1951, the first case of Japanese encephalitis virus was isolated in Vietnam [102]. Until 2003, the encephalitis virus was endemic throughout Vietnam, with 1000–3000 cases annually [94,103]. Later, the incidence rate of the encephalitis virus in the Vietnamese population reduced dramatically after the implementation of immunisation and Japanese encephalitis vaccination programmes [102]. In Vietnam, the population of Culex species was predominant and its abundance was significantly connected with the density of cattle [104]. Cx. tritaeniorhynchus, Cx. vishnui s.l., and Cx. quinquefasciatus are the major vectors that cause encephalitis in Vietnam [105,106]. Species in the Cx. vishnui subgroup, including Cx. tritaeniorhynchus, Cx. vishnui, and Cx. pseudovishnui, breed locally on a large scale in aquatic habitats, i.e., rice areas, puddles, ditches, and cisterns. The most common breeding habitat is the rice-field ecosystem [107]. Culex quinquefasciatus is a member of the Culex pipiens complex.

3.5. Lymphatic Filariasis

Lymphatic filariasis (LF) is a rapidly spreading and neglected tropical disease that causes permanent disruption of the human lymphatic system. It is widely distributed in tropical and subtropical countries in Africa, America, Asia, and the western Pacific [108,109]. Globally, the infection of lymphatic filariasis increased significantly from 120 million cases in 1997 to 56 million cases in 2017 [110]. This disease is caused by mosquito-borne parasitic filarial worms, namely, Brugia malayi, B. timori, and Wuchereria bancrofti, which are transmitted by some mosquito species. About 90% of lymphatic filariasis cases are caused by W. bancrofti and other cases by Brugia species [111]. The WHO recommended antihelmintic treatment to eliminate lymphatic filariasis.
Aedes, Culex (predominantly Cx. quinquefasciatus) and Anopheles species are the principal vectors of lymphatic filariasis causing infections with W. bancrofti [112]. Mansonia species transmit the disease through Brugia malayi and B. timori. In 1997, the WHO declared lymphatic filariasis as the second leading disease that causes long-term or permanent disability globally. Integrated vector management programmes have been promoted by the WHO to improve cost-effectiveness, efficacy, ecological soundness, and vector control sustainability [112]. However, the total global burden of this disease continues to grow and its prevalence of endemicity has been confirmed in 76 countries [111].
Lymphatic filariasis (LF) used to be endemic in many parts of Vietnam in the early 1900s, putting millions of people at risk [113,114]. Infections were only caused by Brugia malayi and Wuchereria bancrofti, in which B. malayi made up the majority (over 90%) [113,115]. An estimated 5%–10% of the population became infected in several areas [116]. The prevalence of the disease gradually declined to only 1%–3% in endemic areas [116]. In 2018, Vietnam declared the elimination of LF through the support of the WHO and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) neglected tropical disease (NTD) programme. To maintain these results, Vietnam continues to conduct operational research to monitor and evaluate, having been recognised by the WHO as having eliminated the disease.

4. Other Mosquito-Borne Diseases

4.1. Yellow Fever

Yellow fever (Flavivirus) is a common mosquito-borne viral disease distributed mostly in South American and African countries. The clinical features of this disease range from mild febrile illness to lethal symptoms including haemorrhages and liver damage. Annually, 80%–90% of cases are reported from about 44 African countries via epizootic outbreaks [117]. This disease was transmitted to other nations including the United States via slave transport ships in the middle of the 18th century [118]. In 1946, the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) initiated an eradication campaign to eliminate the vectors causing yellow fever in urban areas of American countries. Unfortunately, this elimination campaign was interrupted and many of the American countries were re-infested by vectors including Ae. aegypti, Ae. africanus, and Haemagogus janthinomys [118,119]. The main vectors that transmit the yellow fever virus are found to be Aedes sp. in Africa, Haemagogus sp. in South America, and Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus in Brazil. In general, Haemagogus leucocelaenus and Sabethes albiprivus are highly susceptible to the yellow fever virus [119].
The disease has not been seen in Vietnam and other Asia counties, except for some suspected cases due to introduction from endemic areas. There have been warnings about the introduction and adaptation to the local Aedes mosquito strain of yellow fever virus in some parts of Asia, but this has not been properly verified. Yellow fever belongs to group A in the Law on Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases in Vietnam [120,121].

4.2. Chikungunya Disease

Chikungunya is an alphavirus (Togaviridae) that causes chronic musculoskeletal pain and acute fever in humans. In 1953, chikungunya was first reported in Tanzania and was characterised by severe fever and crippling joint pain [122]. Later, this virus became endemic in Africa through frequent sporadic outbreaks that were reported in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Nigeria, Kenya, Uganda, Senegal, South Africa, and Zimbabwe [123]. In a short time, the disease spread to tropical and temperate zones of Asia through mosquito vectors. In 1958, the first outbreak in Asia was recorded in Bangkok and further spread to Cambodia, Malaysia, Vietnam, and Taiwan in the following years [124]. In recent years, chikungunya cases have been reported in Australia, the Caribbean, South America, Europe, the US, the Middle East, and the Pacific region through travellers from affected countries [125,126]. Chikungunya disease is highly debilitating and its epidemics have a significant economic impact. For instance, within nine months of the first chikungunya infection in the Caribbean island of Saint Martin, it had spread to 22 countries by October 2013 [122].
In southeast Asia, Cambodia has recently appeared in 21 provinces with cases of Chikungunya fever with the rapid spread of the disease on a large scale, the Cambodian government has enhanced the implementation of strict epidemic prevention measures [127]. Vietnam consisted of 10 provinces bordering Cambodia. From 2017 up to now, the southern region has had a total of 22 points of surveillance for Chikungunya virus disease integrated with Dengue hemorrhagic fever surveillance. Currently, there have been no recorded cases of Chikungunya virus infection in some neighbouring localities. The risk of the Chikungunya epidemic in Vietnam is not high [128]. There was no clinical chikungunya case was declared and no CHIKV was found in human febrile patients, the detection of CHIKV in mosquito haplotypes bound to the worldwide movements, to areas with major chikungunya outbreaks, indicates that the threat should be taken seriously and a dedicated surveillance program should be implemented [129]. Dengue and chikungunya, and perhaps other Aedes-borne diseases, appear as global threats that should not be addressed at a national or even regional scale but rather at a global scale, with worldwide dimension characterized by permanent exchanges and movements [129].
The extensive spread and frequent epidemics causing severe illness have led to the need for effective drug therapy. Generally, analgesics, anti-inflammatory, antiviral, and antipyretics agents are administered for the treatment of chikungunya fever [130]. In 1984, chloroquine phosphate was observed to be an effective therapeutic agent for chronic chikungunya arthritis [131]. Later, various chikungunya vaccines were developed and used, causing fewer side effects [132,133].
The serological characterisation of blood samples collected in epidemic areas in Tanganyika and Thailand reported Ae. aegypti to be the major vector of the chikungunya virus [134,135]. Similarly, experimental studies identified Ae. albopictus as the potential vector in Indian Ocean islands [136]. The transmission of the chikungunya virus has differed in Africa and Asia. In Africa, the chikungunya virus is sustained in a sylvatic cycle of Aedes africanus, Ae. aegypti and Ae. furcifer-taylori, while the Asian virus is maintained in a mosquito-human-mosquito cycle of Mansonia and Culex sp. [136]. However, the Anopheles and Culex mosquito vectors need further investigation, as they failed to spread the chikungunya virus experimentally [135].

5. Mosquito Population Control Strategies

The mosquito control strategy in Vietnam has implemented a number of different methods to control vectors. In the 2000s, measures to improve the environment, clear sewers, clear bushes, etc., were an effective strategy in terms of the economy and savings for the state budget. However, once an epidemic occurs, chemical spraying is applied thoroughly and effectively on a large scale and plays a decisive role. In addition, biological methods have also been applied in Vietnam since the 1990s, although with little effect. They are still applied and include methods such as releasing guppies, carp, and tilapia to eat larvae in ponds, lakes, and ornamental pots [137]. Currently, the use of Wolbachia-carrying mosquitoes appears to be the most effective means of preventing Aedes mosquitoes. Trials in Nha Trang in Khanh Hoa showed a significant reduction in the number of mosquitoes in the population, as well as a reduction in the number of dengue cases [138].

5.1. Mechanical Methods and Environmental Improvements

Generally, every stagnation group has appropriate areas to breed, mechanical methods eliminate such places in order to minimise the birth of new spores. In addition, by improving the environment the growth of disease-transmitting insects is interrupted and limited [139]. Environmental improvement aims to be detrimental to the disease-causing species, and the ecological imbalance, and maintains this imbalance for as long as possible. For instance, source reduction: limited ponds, cleaning waste, opening sewers, and covering the types of water storage containers (buckets, tanks, drums, and jars), to limit the growth and breeding sites of mosquitoes [140,141]. Overall, mechanical methods and environmental improvement not only kill the vectors but also prevent them from coming into contact with animals and humans. These methods promote high awareness, are inexpensive, and very effective, with the biggest advantages of not causing ecological contamination, and leading to sustainable and proactive effects [142].

5.2. Chemical Methods

Over the last few years, chemical agents such as organochloride, pyrethroids, organophosphorus, thiacloprid, imidacloprid, N,N-diethyl-meta-toluamide, thiamethoxam, p-menthane-3,8-diol, fendona (α-cypermethrin), and synthetic chrysanthemum drugs have been given top priority for the inhibition of disease-transmitting vectors [142]. These methods not only limit the vector population but also are remarkably effective at controlling outbreaks in Vietnam. For example, indoor residual spray (IRS) and insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) are currently preferred approaches to malaria vector control [11]. While outdoor and indoor spatial spraying (fogging) is to be used for dengue, zika, and JE vector control [12,143]. The main advantages of these chemical methods are that they are quick-acting and are highly effective, even in large areas. However, this method is limited by the chemical resistance of vectors and environmental pollution [144].

5.3. Biological Methods

In this method, either natural enemies of insects are used to destroy vectors (prey) or disease-causing organisms are used to infect with mosquito diseases [145]. For instance, the use of fish to kill larvae, and the release of Toxorhynchites mosquito larvae and/or microbes (such as Bacillus thuringiensis, MESOCYCLOPS) to eat the larvae of Aedes, Anopheles, Ceolomomyces, Culex, Culicinomyces, Entomophthora, Lagenidium and Tolypocladium [137,138,146,147,148]. Truong et al., 2011, conducted a project about the assessment of the replacement potential of Ae. aegypti carrying the biological agent Wolbachia starting from April 2013, about 100 mosquitoes carrying Wolbachia were released every week in each plot for about 12–18 weeks to replace the population of mosquito transmitted natural disease. Although it is still in the testing process, the results show that this is a safety measure, mosquitoes carrying Wolbachia bacteria do not cause any problems for human health or the ecological environment and effectively control the spread of Wolbachia bacteria [149]. Biological methods have the advantage of not polluting the environment and are non-toxic to animals and humans. On the other hand, this method is less effective [142].

5.4. Genetic Methods

Currently, genetically modified mosquitoes are using as a tool to kill the mosquitoes that transmit dengue fever in Malaysia, Brazil, and Vietnam [150]. In this method, male mosquitoes are genetically engineered and released into the wild to mate with female mosquitoes. The larvae produced after mating with these modified mosquitoes will eventually moult or die at the four instar [151]. This method has been shown to be effective in controlling the transmission of dengue fever. However, genetic methods remain controversial with regards to the emergence of novel species [150]. In case, the Sterile Insect Technique (SIT), the first step of SIT method is to create a generation of sterile male mosquitoes by irradiation and then release them into the wild to mate with female mosquitoes [152]. When released into a population, sterile male mosquitoes mate with female mosquitoes; These female mosquitoes will lay eggs that cannot hatch or develop into larvae, pupa, and adult mosquitoes (cancerous eggs). Since female mosquitoes only mate once during their lifetime, mating with sterile male mosquitoes will make it impossible for them to produce the next generations and the population will dwindle. Commenting on this new method, experts said that the SIT method proved to be highly effective in a large area, limiting pollution compared to having to spray indoors and treat water sources to kill larvae with insecticide [152,153,154,155,156,157].

6. An Emerging Method for the Rapid and Reliable Identification of Mosquito Species

Mosquito-borne diseases are a major public health concern worldwide. For effective mosquito control, their accurate identification is a crucial step in differentiating mosquito vectors from non-vectors. Morphological identification is the “gold standard” method, which is widely used for discriminating between mosquitoes using their external characteristics. However, there are several drawbacks to this traditional method, such as the need for standard taxonomic keys, expert entomology knowledge, and the ability to classify species belonging to sibling and cryptic groups [158,159]. Interestingly, most of the significant malaria vectors in the SEA region are members of complexes in which the species are similar or indistinguishable using external morphology. Molecular biology methods such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR), enzyme electrophoresis, and DNA sequencing, have been used to distinguish between homogeneous species [160,161]. Nevertheless, these techniques are also limited due to being time-consuming, exorbitantly priced, and requiring primer-specific targeting for certain species [162,163,164].
Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) has revolutionised the field of clinical microbiology and mycology [162]. Recently, MALDI-TOF MS has been proposed as an alternative and innovative method of overcoming the drawbacks of the above two methods in medical entomology to identify arthropods [164]. This approach has routinely been applied in our laboratory for the rapid and accurate identification of arthropods, including mosquitoes at almost all stages such as eggs, larvae, and adults [165,166,167]. MALDI-TOF MS is an easy-to-use, time-saving, and affordable method compared to earlier methods, and a device may be purchased for medical microbiology and then used in entomology. Its operation is based on the identification of acidic extraction of proteins from an organ of interest. The mass/charge ratio of each protein is measured as it passes across an electric field after the propulsion of the protein molecules from ultraviolet laser desorption. The mass/charge ratio of the proteins generated is a unique protein mass spectrum of the specific sample known as the “protein signature” for reliable species identification. This spectrum is then compared to a database of reference profiles containing the spectra of species that have been officially validated using morphology and molecular techniques.
In Vietnam, MALDI-TOF MS was firstly applied to identify mosquitoes collected in eight areas of the Vietnam Central Highlands, including 22 mosquito species identified from extracted proteins from the legs. In particular, MALDI-TOF MS is able to distinguish between closely related mosquito species, which are impossible to classify using morphology, as was the case of the Anopheles minimus [168,169] and Culex pipiens complexes [166], which have been reported as being challenging to distinguish from others using morphology and molecular techniques [165,170,171,172]. This innovative technique is capable of successfully identifying Vietnamese mosquitoes at the species level, as well as within the sibling and complex groups. It indicates that MALDI-TOF MS could be used to prevent mosquito misidentification by morphology.

7. Conclusion and Perspectives

Recently, the collection of mosquitoes in Vietnam has mainly focussed on vector species related to the transmission of infectious diseases that cause global health problems. Eighty-nine mosquito species were recognised prior to 1970 and 192 species have been described from 1970 to the present [38]. However, the checklist of Vietnamese mosquitoes is far from being complete as long as further investigations on mosquitoes are carried out. Molecular biology tools have proven to greatly enhance the accurate identification of the microorganisms known to be associated with mosquitoes such as bacteria, protozoa, and arbovirus [173,174,175]. These methods not only confirm the morphological identification but also identify species and contribute to the detection of mosquito-borne microorganisms.
A large number of vectors of the genera Aedes, Anopheles, and Culex have been identified as mosquitoes that transmit diseases caused by parasites, bacteria, and viruses. Interestingly, outbreaks of dengue, Zika, and Japanese encephalitis have occurred in Vietnam and around the world where are Aedes spp. mosquitoes are prevalent. Following these viruses, we can hypothesise that a further pathogen transmitted by Anopheles and Aedes spp. mosquitoes probably appear in Vietnam as Rickettsia felis [176]. In fact, an increasing number of reports have implicated R. felis, an obligate intracellular bacterial pathogen that is able to cause disease in humans [176,177,178]. The first report of R. felis as a human pathogen detected it in two acute undifferentiated fever (AUF) patients and one afebrile adult patient in central Vietnam [179]. The cat flea Ctenocephalides felis was first considered to be the only confirmed vector of R. felis [176]. Nevertheless, we recently discovered that Anopheles gambiae, a major malaria vector in sub-Saharan Africa, was a potential vector for R. felis [178]. Additionally, R. felis has been detected in Anopheles sinensis, Aedes albopictus, and Culex pipiens pallens mosquitoes from China, where these vectors bite human beings [180]. Therefore, further studies are needed to determine the range of mosquitoes hosting R. felis in Vietnam.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, P.P. and X.Q.N.; methodology, P.P. and L.N.H.; software, L.N.H., L.B.T. and H.S.N.; validation, X.Q.N., V.H.H. and P.P.; formal analysis, L.N.H.; resources, P.P., L.N.H. and X.Q.N.; data curation, L.N.H., P.P. and X.Q.N.; writing—original draft preparation, L.N.H.; writing—review and editing, P.P., L.N.H. and X.Q.N.; visualization, P.P.; supervision, X.Q.N., V.H.H. and P.P.; project administration, P.P.; funding acquisition, P.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by the Institut Hospitalo-Universitaire (IHU) Méditerranée Infection, the National Research Agency under the “Investissements d’avenir” programme, reference ANR-10-IAHU-03, the Région Provence Alpes Côte d’Azur and European ERDF PRIMI funding. LNH received a PhD scholarship from IHU Méditerranée Infection. The funders had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

We are sincerely grateful to the staff of the Entomological Department of the Institute of Malariology, Parasitology and Entomology in Quy Nhon (IMPE-QN), Vietnam, for providing the photos of breeding and resting sites as well as for photographing the external features of the major mosquito vectors in the Central Highlands of Vietnam. We would like to thank the editor and reviewers for their thoughtful reading and for improving our manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Becker, N.; Petrić, D.; Zgomba, M.; Boase, C.; Madon, M.; Dahl, C.; Kaiser, A. Mosquitoes and Their Control, 2nd ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2010; ISBN 9783540928744. [Google Scholar]
  2. Gubler, D.J. Dengue, Urbanization and Globalization: The Unholy Trinity of the 21 St Century. Trop. Med. Health 2011, 39, 3–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. Tandina, F.; Niaré, S.; Laroche, M.; Koné, A.K.; Diarra, A.Z.; Ongoiba, A.; Berenger, J.M.; Doumbo, O.K.; Raoult, D.; Parola, P. Using MALDI-TOF MS to Identify Mosquitoes Collected in Mali and Their Blood Meals. Parasitology 2018, 145, 1170–1182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Azari-Hamidian, S.; Norouzi, B.; Harbach, R.E. A Detailed Review of the Mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae) of Iran and Their Medical and Veterinary Importance. Acta Trop. 2019, 194, 106–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Tolle, M.A. Mosquito-Borne Diseases. Curr. Probl. Pediatr. Adolesc. Health Care 2009, 39, 97–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Hartman, A. Rift Valley Fever. Clin. Lab. Med. 2017, 37, 285–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. World Health Organization Vector-Borne Diseases. Available online: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/vector-borne-diseases (accessed on 30 June 2021).
  8. Nguyen-Tien, T.; Lundkvist, Å.; Lindahl, J. Urban Transmission of Mosquito-Borne Flaviviruses–a Review of the Risk for Humans in Vietnam. Infect. Ecol. Epidemiol. 2019, 9, 1660129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Manh, N.D.; Thanh, N.V.; Quang, H.H.; Van, N.T.T.; San, N.N.; Phong, N.C.; Birrell, G.W.; Edstein, M.D.; Edgel, K.A.; Martin, N.J.; et al. Pyronaridine-Artesunate (Pyramax) for Treatment of Artemisinin- and Piperaquine-Resistant Plasmodium falciparum in the Central Highlands of Vietnam. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2021, 65, e0027621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Pham, K.; Hotez, P.J. Vietnam: Neglected Tropical Diseases in an Emerging and Accelerating Economy. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2022, 16, e0010140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Do Manh, C.; Beebe, N.W.; Thi Van, V.N.; Le Quang, T.; Lein, C.T.; Van Nguyen, D.; Xuan, T.N.; Le Ngoc, A.; Cooper, R.D. Vectors and Malaria Transmission in Deforested, Rural Communities in North-Central Vietnam. Malar. J. 2010, 9, 259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Ohba, S.-Y.; Huynh, T.T.T.; Le, L.L.; Ngoc, H.T.; Hoang, S.L.; Takagi, M. Mosquitoes and Their Potential Predators in Rice Agroecosystems of the Mekong Delta, Southern Vietnam. J. Am. Mosq. Control Assoc. 2011, 27, 384–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Quang Bui, P.; Hong Huynh, Q.; Thanh Tran, D.; Thanh Le, D.; Quang Nguyen, T.; Van Truong, H.; Khim, N.; Witkowski, B.; Cong Tran, D.; Bustos, M.D.; et al. Pyronaridine-Artesunate Efficacy and Safety in Uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum Malaria in Areas of Artemisinin-Resistant Falciparum in Viet Nam (2017–2018). Clin. Infect. Dis. 2020, 70, 2187–2195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Nguyen, T.Q.; Nguyen, M.D.; Pham, V.X.; Ro, H.M.; Edstein, M.D.; Chow, W.K.; Martin, N.J.; Hertz, J.C.; Motoki, M.T. Entomological Survey in Two Communes with Residual Malaria Transmission in Gia Lai Province in the Central Highlands of Vietnam. Malar. J. 2021, 20, 403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Canavati, S.E.; Kelly, G.C.; Vo, T.H.; Tran, L.K.; Ngo, T.D.; Tran, D.T.; Edgel, K.A.; Martin, N.J. Mosquito Net Ownership, Utilization, and Preferences among Mobile and Migrant Populations Sleeping in Forests and Farms in Central Vietnam: A Cross-Sectional Study. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2021, 104, 1917–1924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Quang, H.H.; Chavchich, M.; Trinh, N.T.M.; Edgel, K.A.; Edstein, M.D.; Martin, N.J. Multidrug-Resistant Plasmodium Falciparum Parasites in the Central Highlands of Vietnam Jeopardize Malaria Control and Elimination Strategies. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2021, 65, e01639-20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Peeters Grietens, K.; Xuan, X.N.; Van Bortel, W.; Duc, T.N.; Ribera, J.M.; Ba Nhat, T.; Van, K.P.; Le Xuan, H.; D’Alessandro, U.; Erhart, A. Low Perception of Malaria Risk among the Ra-Glai Ethnic Minority in South-Central Vietnam: Implications for Forest Malaria Control. Malar. J. 2010, 9, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  18. Thanh, P.V.; Van Hong, N.; Van Van, N.; Van Malderen, C.; Obsomer, V.; Rosanas-Urgell, A.; Grietens, K.P.; Xa, N.X.; Bancone, G.; Chowwiwat, N.; et al. Epidemiology of Forest Malaria in Central Vietnam: The Hidden Parasite Reservoir. Malar. J. 2015, 14, 86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  19. Hii, J.; Rueda, L.M. Malaria Vectors in the Greater Mekong Subregion: Overview of Malaria Vectors and Remaining Challenges. Southeast Asian J. Trop. Med. Public Health 2013, 44 (Suppl. S1), 73–165, discussion 306–307. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  20. Verhaeghen, K.; Van Bortel, W.; Trung, H.D.; Sochantha, T.; Coosemans, M. Absence of Knockdown Resistance Suggests Metabolic Resistance in the Main Malaria Vectors of the Mekong Region. Malar. J. 2009, 8, 84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. World Health Organization (WHO). World Malaria Report 2011; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2011; Available online: http://www.who.int/malaria/world_malaria_report_2011/9789241564403_eng.pdf (accessed on 15 September 2021).
  22. Ministry of Health Vietnam. National Strategy for Malaria Control and Elimination in the Period 2011-2020 and Orientation to 2030. Available online: https://www.apmen.org/sites/default/files/all_resources/Vietnam%20National%20Strategy%20for%20Malaria%20control%20_%20Elimination%202011-2020.pdf (accessed on 18 November 2021).
  23. Müller, O.; Lu, G.Y.; von Seidlein, L. Geographic Expansion of Artemisinin Resistance. J. Travel Med. 2019, 26, taz030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Ataíde, R.; Powell, R.; Moore, K.; McLean, A.; Phyo, A.P.; Nair, S.; White, M.; Anderson, T.J.; Beeson, J.G.; Simpson, J.A.; et al. Declining Transmission and Immunity to Malaria and Emerging Artemisinin Resistance in Thailand: A Longitudinal Study. J. Infect. Dis. 2017, 216, 723–731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. GCRF. How Space Technology Can Predict Dengue Outbreaks|Global Challenges Research Fund & Newton Fund. Available online: https://www.newton-gcrf.org/impact/stories-of-change/how-space-technology-can-predict-dengue-outbreaks/ (accessed on 11 October 2022).
  26. Nguyen, L.T.; Le, H.X.; Nguyen, D.T.; Ho, H.Q.; Chuang, T.-W. Impact of Climate Variability and Abundance of Mosquitoes on Dengue Transmission in Central Vietnam. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. World Health Organization. Comprehensive Guidelines for Prevention and Control of Dengue and Dengue Haemorrhagic Fever; WHO Regional Publication for South-Asia: New Delhi, India, 2011; pp. 159–168. [Google Scholar]
  28. World Bank Group; Asian Development Bank. Climate Risk Country Profile: Vietnam; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  29. The IPCC Sixth Assessment Report on Climate Change Impacts—2022—Population and Development Review—Wiley Online Library. Available online: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/padr.12497 (accessed on 11 October 2022).
  30. Chapot, L.; Nguyen-Tien, T.; Pham-Thanh, L.; Nguyen-Viet, H.; Craven, L.; Lindahl, J.F. A Mixed-Methods Approach to Understanding Knowledge of Mosquito-Borne Infections and Barriers for Protection in Hanoi, Vietnam. Trop. Med. Infect. Dis. 2020, 5, 66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Parrish, D.W. The Occurrence and Known Human-Disease Relationships of Mosquitoes on Usaf Installations In The Republic of Vietnam. Epidemiol. Flight (5th) Apo San Fr. 1968, 96528. Available online: https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/AD0677195 (accessed on 27 December 2021).
  32. Reinert, J.F. Contributions to the Mosquito Fauna of Southeast Asia. V. Genus Aedes, Subgenus Diceromyia Theobald in Southeast Asia; Walter Reed Army Inst of Research: Washington DC, USA, 1970. [Google Scholar]
  33. Tyson, W. Contributions to the Mosquito Fauna of Southeast Asia. VIII. Genus Aedes, Subgenus Mucidus Theobald in Southeast Asia. Contrib. Am. Entomol. Inst. (Ann. Arbor.) 1970, 6, 53. [Google Scholar]
  34. Thoa, N.; Vien, N.; Mai, T.; Xuan, N. Japanese Encephalitis Vectors: Isolation of Virus from Culicine Mosquitoes in the Saigon Area. Southeast Asian J. Trop. Med. Public Health 1974, 5, 408–412. [Google Scholar]
  35. Thuan, L.K. Anopheles Meigen Mosquito (Diptera: Culicidae) Transmits Malaria in Central Vietnam (Latitude 11–16 North); Ministry of Health: Hanoi, Vietnam, 1988.
  36. Vu, D.H. Muoi Aedes Meigen (Cilidae, Diptera) o mien Bac Viet Nam. In Luan an Pho Tien Si Khoa Hoc Sinh Hoc; Truong Dai hoc Tong hop Ha Noi: Hanoi, Vietnam, 1984; Volume 155. [Google Scholar]
  37. Bui, P.; Darsie, R.F. Tentative Checklist of the Mosquitoes of Vietnam Employing New Classification for Tribe Aedini (Diptera, Culicidae). J. Am. Mosq. Control. Assoc. 2008, 24, 187–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Nguyen, V.D. Checklist of the Known Species of Culicidae Found in Vietnam. Hoi Nghi Khoa Hoc Toan Quoc Ve Sinh Thai va Tai Nguyen Sinh Vat Lan thu 6. 2016. Available online: http://iebr.ac.vn/database/HNTQ6/504.pdf (accessed on 5 May 2021).
  39. Reinert, J.F. Aedes Consonensis, a New Species of the Subgenus Neomacleaya from South Vietnam (Diptera: Culicidae); Walter Reed Army Inst of Research: Washington DC, USA, 1973. [Google Scholar]
  40. Harbach, R.E. The Culicidae (Diptera): A Review of Taxonomy, Classification and Phylogeny*. Zootaxa 2007, 1668, 591–638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Snow, R.W.; Guerra, C.A.; Noor, A.M.; Myint, H.Y.; Hay, S.I. The Global Distribution of Clinical Episodes of Plasmodium Falciparum Malaria. Nature 2005, 434, 214–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Hung, L.Q.; de Vries, P.J.; Giao, P.T.; Nam, N.V.; Binh, T.Q.; Chong, M.T. Control of Malaria: A Successful Experience from Viet Nam. Bull. World Health Organ. 2002, 7, 660–666. [Google Scholar]
  43. Martin, N.J.; Nam, V.S.; Lover, A.A.; Phong, T.V.; Tu, T.C.; Mendenhall, I.H. The Impact of Transfluthrin on the Spatial Repellency of the Primary Malaria Mosquito Vectors in Vietnam: Anopheles dirus and Anopheles minimus. Malar. J. 2020, 19, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Pham, V.T. Epidemiology of Plasmodium vivax Malaria in Central Vietnam. Available online: https://dial.uclouvain.be/pr/boreal/en/object/boreal%3A202970/datastream/PDF_01/view (accessed on 17 September 2021).
  45. Lynch, C.; Hewitt, S. Malaria in the Asia-Pacific: Burden, Success and Challenges. In Proceedings of the Malaria 2012: Saving Lives in the Asia Pacific, Sydney, NSW, Australia, 1 October 2012. [Google Scholar]
  46. Vu, V.H.; Nguyen, T.H.B.; Vu, D.C. Nghien Cuu Thanh Phan Loai, Phan Bo, Tap Tinh, Vai Tro Truyen Sot Ret Cua Muoi Anopheles va Hieu Luc Cua Kem Xua, Huong Diet Muoi NIMPE Tai Huyen Dong Xuan, Tinh Phu Yen, 2017–2019. Available online: http://nimpe.vn/userfiles/file/DaotaoSDH/Vu%20Viet%20Hung/Luan_an_Vu_Viet_Hung.pdf (accessed on 8 October 2021).
  47. Ngo, K.K.; Nguyen, X.Q.; Nguyen, V.C.; Nguyen, T.M.D. Vector Abundance and Species Composition of Anopheles Mosquitoin Central Region and Central West Highlands, Viet Nam. Int. J. Health Clin. Res. 2018, 8, 22–29. [Google Scholar]
  48. Edwards, H.M.; Chinh, V.D.; Le Duy, B.; Thanh, P.V.; Thang, N.D.; Trang, D.M.; Chavez, I.; Hii, J. Characterising Residual Malaria Transmission in Forested Areas with Low Coverage of Core Vector Control in Central Viet Nam. Parasites Vectors 2019, 12, 454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  49. Van Bortel, W.; Trung, H.D.; Thuan, L.K.; Sochantha, T.; Socheat, D.; Sumrandee, C.; Baimai, V.; Keokenchanh, K.; Samlane, P.; Roelants, P.; et al. The Insecticide Resistance Status of Malaria Vectors in the Mekong Region. Malar. J. 2008, 7, 102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  50. Abeyasinghe, R.; Vu, D.C.; Tran, C.D.; Habib, N.; Hewitt, S.; Nguyen, M.H.; Le, X.H.; Kato, M.; Knox, T.; Kim, L.; et al. National Malaria Programme Review—Viet Nam. Available online: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789290618423 (accessed on 17 March 2022).
  51. Obsomer, V.; Defourny, P.; Coosemans, M. The Anopheles dirus Complex: Spatial Distribution and Environmental Drivers. Malar. J. 2007, 6, 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Takano, K.T.; Nguyen, N.T.H.; Nguyen, B.T.H.; Sunahara, T.; Yasunami, M.; Nguyen, M.D.; Takagi, M. Partial Mitochondrial DNA Sequences Suggest the Existence of a Cryptic Species within the Leucosphyrus Group of the Genus Anopheles (Diptera: Culicidae), Forest Malaria Vectors, in Northern Vietnam. Parasites Vectors 2010, 3, 41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Van Long, B.; Allen, G.; Brauny, M.; Linh, L.T.K.; Pallerla, S.R.; Huyen, T.T.T.; Van Tong, H.; Toan, N.L.; Quyet, D.; Son, H.A.; et al. Molecular Surveillance and Temporal Monitoring of Malaria Parasites in Focal Vietnamese Provinces. Malar. J. 2020, 19, 458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Kawamoto, F.; Miyake, H.; Kaneko, O.; Kimura, M.; Nguyen, T.D.; Nguyen, T.D.; Liu, Q.; Zhou, M.; Le, D.D.; Kawai, S.; et al. Sequence Variation in the 18S RRNA Gene, a Target for PCR-Based Malaria Diagnosis, in Plasmodium Ovale from Southern Vietnam. J. Clin. Microbiol. 1996, 34, 2287–2289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Eede, P.; Van, H.; Overmeir, C.; Vythilingam, I.; Duc, N.; Hung, L.; Nguyen Manh, H.; Anné, J.; D’Alessandro, U.; Erhart, A. Human Plasmodium knowlesi Infections in Young Children in Central Vietnam. Malar. J. 2009, 8, 249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Maeno, Y. Molecular Epidemiology of Mosquitoes for the Transmission of Forest Malaria in South-Central Vietnam. Trop. Med. Health 2017, 45, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Marchand, R.P.; Culleton, R.; Maeno, Y.; Quang, N.T.; Nakazawa, S. Co-Infections of Plasmodium knowlesi, P. falciparum, and P. vivax among Humans and Anopheles dirus Mosquitoes, Southern Vietnam. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2011, 17, 1232–1239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Harrison, B.A. Medical Entomology Studies. XIII: The Myzomyia Series of Anopheles (Cellia) in Thailand, with Emphasis on Intra-Interspecific Variations (Diptera: Culicidae). Contrib. Am. Entomol. Inst. 1979, 17, 1–195. [Google Scholar]
  59. Dusfour, I.; Blondeau, J.; Harbach, R.E.; Vythilingham, I.; Baimai, V.; Trung, H.D.; Sochanta, T.; Bangs, M.J.; Manguin, S. Polymerase Chain Reaction Identification of Three Members of the Anopheles sundaicus I (Diptera: Culicidae) Complex, Malaria Vectors in Southeast Asia. J. Med. Entomol. 2007, 44, 723–731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  60. World Health Organization (WHO). Dengue and Severe Dengue. Available online: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/dengue-and-severe-dengue (accessed on 27 December 2021).
  61. ECDC. Factsheet about Dengue. Available online: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/dengue-fever/facts (accessed on 11 October 2022).
  62. Mustafa, M.S.; Rasotgi, V.; Jain, S.; Gupta, V. Discovery of Fifth Serotype of Dengue Virus (Denv-5): A New Public Health Dilemma in Dengue Control. Med. J. Armed Forces India 2015, 71, 67–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  63. Vietnam Reports Big Increase in Dengue Fever in 2019—Outbreak News Today. Available online: http://outbreaknewstoday.com/vietnam-reports-big-increase-in-dengue-fever-in-2019/ (accessed on 10 July 2021).
  64. Quyen, D.; Le, N.T.; Van Anh, C.T.; Nguyen, N.B.; Van Hoang, D.; Montgomery, J.L.; Kutcher, S.C.; Le, N.H.; Hien, N.T.; Kien, D.T.H.; et al. Epidemiological, Serological, and Virological Features of Dengue in Nha Trang City, Vietnam. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2018, 98, 402–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  65. Lee, H.S.; Nguyen-Viet, H.; Nam, V.S.; Lee, M.; Won, S.; Duc, P.P.; Grace, D. Seasonal Patterns of Dengue Fever and Associated Climate Factors in 4 Provinces in Vietnam from 1994 to 2013. BMC Infect. Dis. 2017, 17, 218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  66. Rabaa, M.A.; Simmons, C.P.; Fox, A.; Le, M.Q.; Nguyen, T.T.T.; Le, H.Y.; Gibbons, R.V.; Nguyen, X.T.; Holmes, E.C.; Aaskov, J.G. Dengue Virus in Sub-Tropical Northern and Central Viet Nam: Population Immunity and Climate Shape Patterns of Viral Invasion and Maintenance. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2013, 7, 2581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. NewsDesk. Vietnam Records 15K Additional Dengue Cases in 10 Days, Country Total Now 92,000. Outbreak News Today. 2022. Available online: http://outbreaknewstoday.com/vietnam-records-15k-additional-dengue-cases-in-10-days-country-total-now-92000/ (accessed on 7 July 2022).
  68. SGGP Dengue Toll Rises to 36 in Vietnam, Case Count Now over 92,000. Available online: https://sggpnews.org.vn/content/OTU5Mzk=.html (accessed on 7 July 2022).
  69. VietnamPlus Thanh pho Ho Chi Minh: 9 Truong Hop tu Vong do sot Xuat Huyet|Y te|Vietnam (VietnamPlus). Available online: https://www.vietnamplus.vn/thanh-pho-ho-chi-minh-9-truong-hop-tu-vong-do-sot-xuat-huyet/799612.vnp (accessed on 7 July 2022).
  70. Vietnam Posts English Binh Duong Becomes a Hot Spot for Dengue Fever. Available online: https://vietnam.postsen.com/news/38983/Binh-Duong-becomes-a-hot-spot-for-dengue-fever.html (accessed on 7 July 2022).
  71. VNS Dengue Fever Rises in Dong Nai—Viet Nam|ReliefWeb. Available online: https://reliefweb.int/report/viet-nam/dengue-fever-rises-dong-nai (accessed on 7 July 2022).
  72. Lambrechts, L.; Scott, T.W.; Gubler, D.J. Consequences of the Expanding Global Distribution of Aedes albopictus for Dengue Virus Transmission. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2010, 4, e646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Chen, L.H.; Hamer, D.H. Zika Virus: Rapid Spread in the Western Hemisphere. Ann. Intern. Med. 2016, 164, 613–615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  74. GW, D.; SF, K.; AJ, H. Zika Virus. I. Isolations and Serological Specificity. Trans. R. Soc. Trop. Med. Hyg. 1952, 46, 509–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Musso, D.; Gubler, D.J. Zika Virus. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2016, 29, 487–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  76. MacNamara, F.N. Zika Virus: A Report on Three Cases of Human Infection during an Epidemic of Jaundice in Nigeria. Trans. R. Soc. Trop. Med. Hyg. 1954, 48, 139–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Hayes, E.B. Zika Virus Outside Africa. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2009, 15, 1347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Musso, D.; Ko, A.I.; Baud, D. Zika Virus Infection—After the Pandemic. N. Engl. J. Med. 2019, 381, 1444–1457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Weaver, S.C.; Costa, F.; Garcia-Blanco, M.A.; Ko, A.I.; Ribeiro, G.S.; Saade, G.; Shi, P.Y.; Vasilakis, N. Zika Virus: History, Emergence, Biology, and Prospects for Control. Antivir. Res. 2016, 130, 69–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Hamel, R.; Liégeois, F.; Wichit, S.; Pompon, J.; Diop, F.; Talignani, L.; Thomas, F.; Desprès, P.; Yssel, H.; Missé, D. Zika Virus: Epidemiology, Clinical Features and Host-Virus Interactions. Microbes Infect. 2016, 18, 441–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Musso, D.; Bossin, H.; Mallet, H.P.; Besnard, M.; Broult, J.; Baudouin, L.; Levi, J.E.; Sabino, E.C.; Ghawche, F.; Lanteri, M.C.; et al. Zika Virus in French Polynesia 2013–14: Anatomy of a Completed Outbreak. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2018, 18, e172–e182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Vasilakis, N.; Weaver, S.C. Flavivirus Transmission Focusing on Zika. Curr. Opin. Virol. 2017, 22, 30–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  83. Boyer, S.; Calvez, E.; Chouin-Carneiro, T.; Diallo, D.; Failloux, A.B. An Overview of Mosquito Vectors of Zika Virus. Microbes Infect. 2018, 20, 646–660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Jamali Moghadam, S.R.; Bayrami, S.; Jamali Moghadam, S.; Golrokhi, R.; Golsoorat Pahlaviani, F.; SeyedAlinaghi, S.A. Zika Virus: A Review of Literature. Asian Pac. J. Trop. Biomed. 2016, 6, 989–994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  85. Chan, J.F.W.; Choi, G.K.Y.; Yip, C.C.Y.; Cheng, V.C.C.; Yuen, K.Y. Zika Fever and Congenital Zika Syndrome: An Unexpected Emerging Arboviral Disease. J. Infect. 2016, 72, 507–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  86. Wilder-Smith, A.; Chang, C.R.; Leong, W.Y. Zika in Travellers 1947–2017: A Systematic Review. J. Travel Med. 2018, 25, 1947–2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  87. Quyen, N.T.H.; Kien, D.T.H.; Rabaa, M.; Tuan, N.M.; Vi, T.T.; Tan, L.V.; Hung, N.T.; Tuan, H.M.; Tram, T.V.; Ha, N.L.D.; et al. Chikungunya and Zika Virus Cases Detected against a Backdrop of Endemic Dengue Transmission in Vietnam. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2017, 97, 146–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Bui, T.C.; Huynh, X.V.; Nguyen, H.; Nguyen, K.T.; Nguyen, C.D.; Pham, N.D. Zika Virus Outbreaks and Treatment in Pregnant Women in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Int. J. Gynecol. Obstet. 2018, 141, 390–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Chu, D.-T.; Ngoc, V.T.N.; Tao, Y. Zika Virus Infection in Vietnam: Current Epidemic, Strain Origin, Spreading Risk, and Perspective. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2017, 36, 2041–2042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Nguyen-Tien, T.; Probandari, A.; Ahmad, R.A. Barriers to Engaging Communities in a Dengue Vector Control Program: An Implementation Research in an Urban Area in Hanoi City, Vietnam. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2019, 100, 964–973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  91. Wang, H.; Liang, G. Epidemiology of Japanese Encephalitis: Past, Present, and Future Prospects. Ther. Clin. Risk Manag. 2015, 11, 435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Campbell, G.L.; Hills, S.L.; Fischer, M.; Jacobson, J.A.; Hoke, C.H.; Hombach, J.M.; Marfin, A.A.; Solomon, T.; Tsai, T.F.; Tsu, V.D.; et al. Estimated Global Incidence of Japanese Encephalitis: A Systematic Review. Bull. World Health Organ. 2011, 89, 766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Burns, K.F. Congenital Japanese B Encephalitis Infection of Swine. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med. 1950, 75, 621–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  94. Erlanger, T.E.; Weiss, S.; Keiser, J.; Utzinger, J.; Wiedenmayer, K. Past, Present, and Future of Japanese Encephalitis—Volume 15, Number 1—January 2009—Emerging Infectious Diseases Journal—CDC. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2009, 15, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Endy, T.P.; Nisalak, A. Japanese Encephalitis Virus: Ecology and Epidemiology. Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol. 2002, 267, 11–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. LIU, W.; Gibbons, R.V.; Kari, K.; Clemens, J.D.; Nisalak, A.; Marks, F.; Xu, Z.Y. Risk Factors for Japanese Encephalitis: A Case-Control Study. Epidemiol. Infect. 2010, 138, 1292–1297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  97. Keiser, J.; Maltese, M.F.; Erlanger, T.E.; Bos, R.; Tanner, M.; Singer, B.H.; Utzinger, J. Effect of Irrigated Rice Agriculture on Japanese Encephalitis, Including Challenges and Opportunities for Integrated Vector Management. Acta Trop. 2005, 95, 40–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Chen, W.-J.; Dong, C.-F.; Chiou, L.-Y.; Chuang, W.-L. Potential Role of Armigeres Subalbatus (Diptera: Culicidae) in the Transmission of Japanese Encephalitis Virus in the Absence of Rice Culture on Liu-Chiu Islet, Taiwan. J. Med. Entomol. 2000, 37, 108–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Thenmozhi, V.; Rajendran, R.; Ayanar, K.; Manavalan, R.; Tyagi, B.K. Long-Term Study of Japanese Encephalitis Virus Infection in Anopheles subpictus in Cuddalore District, Tamil Nadu, South India. Trop. Med. Int. Health 2006, 11, 288–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  100. Epstein, P.R. West Nile Virus and the Climate. J. Urban Health 2001, 78, 367–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  101. Whelan, P.; Hayes, G.; Tucker, G.; Carter, J.; Wilson, A.; Haigh, B. The Detection of Exotic Mosquitoes in the Northern Territory of Australia. Arbovirus Res. Aust. 2001, 8, 395–404. [Google Scholar]
  102. Yen, N.T.; Duffy, M.R.; Hong, N.M.; Hien, N.T.; Fischer, M.; Hills, S.L. Surveillance for Japanese Encephalitis in Vietnam, 1998–2007. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2010, 83, 816–819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Kuwata, R.; Nga, P.T.; Yen, N.T.; Hoshino, K.; Isawa, H.; Higa, Y.; Hoang, N.V.; Trang, B.M.; Loan, D.P.; Phong, T.V.; et al. Surveillance of Japanese Encephalitis Virus Infection in Mosquitoes in Vietnam from 2006 to 2008. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2013, 88, 681–688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  104. Hasegawa, M.; Tuno, N.; Yen, N.T.; Nam, V.S.; Takagi, M. Influence of the Distribution of Host Species on Adult Abundance of Japanese Encephalitis Vectors—Culex vishnui Subgroup and Culex gelidus—In a Rice-Cultivating Village in Northern Vietnam. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2008, 78, 159–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  105. Lindahl, J.; Chirico, J.; Boqvist, S.; Thu, H.T.V.; Magnusson, U. Occurrence of Japanese Encephalitis Virus Mosquito Vectors in Relation to Urban Pig Holdings. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2012, 87, 1076–1082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  106. Ha, T.V.; Kim, W.; Nguyen-Tien, T.; Lindahl, J.; Nguyen-Viet, H.; Thi, N.Q.; Nguyen, H.V.; Unger, F.; Lee, H.S. Spatial Distribution of Culex Mosquito Abundance and Associated Risk Factors in Hanoi, Vietnam. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2021, 15, e0009497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  107. Ohba, S.; Van Soai, N.; Van Anh, D.T.; Nguyen, Y.T.; Takagi, M. Study of Mosquito Fauna in Rice Ecosystems around Hanoi, Northern Vietnam. Acta Trop. 2015, 142, 89–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  108. Deshpande, A.; Miller-Petrie, M.K.; Johnson, K.B.; Abdoli, A.; Abrigo, M.R.M.; Adekanmbi, V.; Adetokunboh, O.O.; Adinarayanan, S.; Ahmadpour, E.; Ahmed, M.B.; et al. The Global Distribution of Lymphatic Filariasis, 2000–2018: A Geospatial Analysis. Lancet Glob. Health 2020, 8, e1186–e1194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Ottesen, E.A.; Duke, B.O.; Karam, M.; Behbehani, K. Strategies and Tools for the Control/Elimination of Lymphatic Filariasis. Bull. World Health Organ. 1997, 75, 491. [Google Scholar]
  110. Debrah, L.B.; Mohammed, A.; Osei-Mensah, J.; Mubarik, Y.; Agbenyega, O.; Ayisi-Boateng, N.K.; Pfarr, K.; Kuehlwein, J.M.; Klarmann-Schulz, U.; Hoerauf, A.; et al. Morbidity Management and Surveillance of Lymphatic Filariasis Disease and Acute Dermatolymphangioadenitis Attacks Using a Mobile Phone-Based Tool by Community Health Volunteers in Ghana. PLOS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2020, 14, e0008839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Melrose, W.D. Lymphatic Filariasis: New Insights into an Old Disease. Int. J. Parasitol. 2002, 32, 947–960. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Van den Berg, H.; Kelly-Hope, L.A.; Lindsay, S.W. Malaria and Lymphatic Filariasis: The Case for Integrated Vector Management. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2013, 13, 89–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Meyrowitsch, D.W.; Toan, N.D.; Hao, H.T.; Dan, N.T.; Michael, E. A Review of the Present Status of Lymphatic Filariasis in Vietnam. Acta Trop. 1998, 70, 335–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. WHO. Three More Countries Eliminate Lymphatic Filariasis. Available online: https://www.who.int/westernpacific/news/item/08-10-2018-three-more-countries-eliminate-lymphatic-filariasis (accessed on 24 May 2022).
  115. Tran, V.D. Benh Giun Chi Bach Huyet—Benh Ky Sinh Trung. Available online: https://benhkysinhtrung.vn/benh-giun-chi-bach-huyet/ (accessed on 24 May 2022).
  116. GDPM. General Departerment of Preventive Medicine Le Cong bo Loai Tru Benh Giun Chi Bach Huyet Tai Vietnam. Available online: https://vncdc.gov.vn/le-cong-bo-loai-tru-benh-giun-chi-bach-huyet-tai-viet-nam-nd14898.html (accessed on 24 May 2022).
  117. Monath, T.P.; Vasconcelos, P.F.C. Yellow Fever. J. Clin. Virol. 2015, 64, 160–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Bryan, C.S.; Moss, S.W.; Kahn, R.J. Yellow Fever in the Americas. Infect. Dis. Clin. N. Am. 2004, 18, 275–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Yen, P.-S.; Amraoui, F.; Rúa, A.V.; Failloux, A.-B. Aedes aegypti Mosquitoes from Guadeloupe (French West Indies) Are Able to Transmit Yellow Fever Virus. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0204710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  120. General Departerment of Preventive Medicine Benh Sot Vang. Available online: https://vncdc.gov.vn/benh-sot-vang-nd14497.html (accessed on 25 October 2022).
  121. WHO. Countries with Risk of Yellow Fever Transmission and Countries Requiring Yellow Fever Vaccination (May 2021). Available online: https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/countries-with-risk-of-yellow-fever-transmission-and-countries-requiring-yellow-fever-vaccination-(may-2021) (accessed on 25 October 2022).
  122. Morrison, T.E. Reemergence of Chikungunya Virus. J. Virol. 2014, 88, 11644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  123. Edelman, R.; Tacket, C.O.; Wasserman, S.S.; Bodison, S.A.; Perry, J.G.; Mangiafico, J.A. Phase II Safety and Immunogenicity Study of Live Chikungunya Virus Vaccine TSI-GSD-218. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2000, 62, 681–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  124. Aikat, B.; Konar, N.; Banerjee, G. Haemorrhagic Fever in Calcutta Area. Indian J. Med. Res. 1964, 52, 660–675. [Google Scholar]
  125. Powers, A.M.; Logue, C.H. Changing Patterns of Chikungunya Virus: Re-Emergence of a Zoonotic Arbovirus. J. Gen. Virol. 2007, 88, 2363–2377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Parola, P.; Musso, D. Zika, Dengue, Chikungunya and Yellow Fever Infections in Europe?—Winter Is over, Warm Days Are Coming—So Hedge Your Bets. Travel Med. Infect. Dis. 2020, 35, 101614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. CRISIS24 Cambodia: Thousands Infected as Chikungunya Outbreak Spreads September 28. Available online: https://crisis24.garda.com/alerts/2020/09/cambodia-thousands-infected-as-chikungunya-outbreak-spreads-september-28 (accessed on 25 October 2022).
  128. Le, H.N. Benh Chikungunya: Phong Bang Cac Bien Phap Phong Benh Sot Xuat Huyet. Available online: https://hcdc.vn/hoidap/index/chitiet/cad2cd5204e43a3fdb7731dbc4f0606d (accessed on 25 October 2022).
  129. Pham Thi, K.L.; Briant, L.; Gavotte, L.; Labbe, P.; Perriat-Sanguinet, M.; Cornillot, E.; Vu, T.D.; Nguyen, T.Y.; Tran, V.P.; Nguyen, V.S.; et al. Incidence of Dengue and Chikungunya Viruses in Mosquitoes and Human Patients in Border Provinces of Vietnam. Parasites Vectors 2017, 10, 556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  130. Sudeep, A.B.; Parashar, D. Chikungunya: An Overview. J. Biosci. 2008, 33, 443–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Brighton, S. Chloroquine Phosphate Treatment of Chronic Chikungunya Arthritis. An Open Pilot Study—PubMed. S. Afr. Med. J. 1984, 66, 217–218. [Google Scholar]
  132. Tan, F.L.; Yin, J.Q. RNAi, a New Therapeutic Strategy against Viral Infection. Cell Res. 2004, 14, 460–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Cullen, B.R. Viruses and MicroRNAs. Nat. Genet. 2006, 38, S25–S30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Pavri, K. Presence of Chikungunya Antibodies in Human Sera Collected from Calcutta and Jamshedpur before 1963. Indian J. Med. Res. 1964, 52, 698–702. [Google Scholar]
  135. Shah, K.; Gilotra, S.K.; Gibbs, C., Jr.; Rozeboom, L. Laboratory Studies of Transmission of Chikungunya Virus by Mosquitoes: A Preliminary Report. Indian J. Med. Res. 1964, 52, 703–709. [Google Scholar]
  136. Diallo, M.; Thonnon, J.; Traore-Lamizana, M.; Fontenille, D. Vectors of Chikungunya Virus in Senegal: Current Data and Transmission Cycles. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 1999, 60, 281–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  137. Nam, V.S.; Yen, N.T.; Holynska, M.; Reid, J.W.; Kay, B.H. National Progress in Dengue Vector Control in Vietnam: Survey for Mesocyclops (Copepoda), Micronecta (Corixidae), and Fish as Biological Control Agents. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2000, 62, 5–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  138. Hien, N.T.; Anh, D.D.; Le, N.H.; Yen, N.T.; Phong, T.V.; Nam, V.S.; Duong, T.N.; Nguyen, N.B.; Huong, D.T.T.; Hung, L.Q.; et al. Environmental Factors Influence the Local Establishment of Wolbachia in Aedes aegypti Mosquitoes in Two Small Communities in Central Vietnam. Gates Open Res. 2022, 5, 147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Sikka, V.; Chattu, V.K.; Popli, R.K.; Galwankar, S.C.; Kelkar, D.; Sawicki, S.G.; Stawicki, S.P.; Papadimos, T.J. The Emergence of Zika Virus as a Global Health Security Threat: A Review and a Consensus Statement of the INDUSEM Joint Working Group (JWG). J. Glob. Infect. Dis. 2016, 8, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Barrera, R.; Amador, M.; Acevedo, V.; Caban, B.; Felix, G.; Mackay, A.J. Use of the CDC Autocidal Gravid Ovitrap to Control and Prevent Outbreaks of Aedes Aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae). J. Med. Entomol. 2014, 51, 145–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  141. Tsunoda, T.; Kawada, H.; Huynh, T.T.; Le Luu, L.; Le, S.H.; Tran, H.N.; Vu, H.T.Q.; Le, H.M.; Hasebe, F.; Tsuzuki, A.; et al. Field Trial on a Novel Control Method for the Dengue Vector, Aedes aegypti by the Systematic Use of Olyset® Net and Pyriproxyfen in Southern Vietnam. Parasites Vectors 2013, 6, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  142. Singh, R.K.; Dhama, K.; Khandia, R.; Munjal, A.; Karthik, K.; Tiwari, R.; Chakraborty, S.; Malik, Y.S.; Bueno-Marí, R. Prevention and Control Strategies to Counter Zika Virus, a Special Focus on Intervention Approaches against Vector Mosquitoes—Current Updates. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  143. ASIMEC. Thoi Diem Tot Nhat De Phun Thuoc Diet Muoi Phong Sot Xuat Huyet. Available online: https://asimec.vn/thoi-diem-tot-nhat-de-phun-thuoc-diet-muoi-phong-sot-xuat-huyet (accessed on 26 October 2022).
  144. Maciel-de-Freitas, R.; Avendanho, F.C.; Santos, R.; Sylvestre, G.; Araújo, S.C.; Lima, J.B.P.; Martins, A.J.; Coelho, G.E.; Valle, D. Undesirable Consequences of Insecticide Resistance Following Aedes aegypti Control Activities Due to a Dengue Outbreak. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e92424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Nguyen, T.H.; Nguyen, H.L.; Nguyen, T.Y.; Vu, S.N.; Tran, N.D.; Le, T.N.; Vien, Q.M.; Bui, T.C.; Le, H.T.; Kutcher, S.; et al. Field Evaluation of the Establishment Potential of w Melpop Wolbachia in Australia and Vietnam for Dengue Control. Parasites Vectors 2015, 8, 563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Callaway, E. Infected Mosquitoes Fight Zika. Nature 2016, 539, 17–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  147. Walker, T.; Johnson, P.H.; Moreira, L.A.; Iturbe-Ormaetxe, I.; Frentiu, F.D.; McMeniman, C.J.; Leong, Y.S.; Dong, Y.; Axford, J.; Kriesner, P.; et al. The w Mel Wolbachia Strain Blocks Dengue and Invades Caged Aedes aegypti Populations. Nature 2011, 476, 450–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Vu, S.N.; Nguyen, T.Y.; Tran, V.P.; Truong, U.N.; Le, Q.M.; Le, V.L.; Le, T.N.; Bektas, A.; Briscombe, A.; Aaskov, J.G.; et al. Elimination of Dengue by Community Programs Using Mesocyclops (Copepoda) against Aedes aegypti in Central Vietnam. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2005, 72, 67–73. [Google Scholar]
  149. Truong, Q.H.; Truong, U.N.; Nguyen, V.T.; Nguyen, V.H.; Nguyen, D.C. Đanh Gia Cac Tac Đong Khong Mong Muon Co the Xay Ra Khi Phong Tha Muoi Aedes Aegypti Mang Wolbachia Nham Phong Chong Sot Xuat Huyet Tai Vietnam. Available online: http://www.eliminatedengue.com/library/publication/document/july_2011_ra_report_vn.pdf (accessed on 25 October 2022).
  150. Vythilingam, I.; Sam, J.I.-C.; Chan, Y.F.; Khaw, L.T.; Sulaiman, W.Y.W. New Paradigms for Virus Detection, Surveillance and Control of Zika Virus Vectors in the Settings of Southeast Asia. Front. Microbiol. 2016, 7, 1452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  151. Alphey, L.; Alphey, N. Five Things to Know about Genetically Modified (GM) Insects for Vector Control. PLoS Pathog. 2014, 10, e1003909. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  152. Klassen, W.; Curtis, C.F.; Hendrichs, J. History of the Sterile Insect Technique. In Sterile Insect Technique; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2021; ISBN 978-1-00-303557-2. [Google Scholar]
  153. Dyck, V.A.; Hendrichs, J.; Robinson, A.S. (Eds.) Sterile Insect Technique: Principles and Practice in Area-Wide Integrated Pest Management, 2nd ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2021; ISBN 978-1-00-303557-2. [Google Scholar]
  154. Gilles, J.R.L.; Schetelig, M.F.; Scolari, F.; Marec, F.; Capurro, M.L.; Franz, G.; Bourtzis, K. Towards Mosquito Sterile Insect Technique Programmes: Exploring Genetic, Molecular, Mechanical and Behavioural Methods of Sex Separation in Mosquitoes. Acta Trop. 2014, 132, S178–S187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Yamada, H.; Parker, A.G.; Oliva, C.F.; Balestrino, F.; Gilles, J.R.L. X-Ray-Induced Sterility in Aedes albopictus (Diptera: Culicidae) and Male Longevity Following Irradiation. J. Med. Entomol. 2014, 51, 811–816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  156. Tur, C.; Almenar, D.; Benlloch-Navarro, S.; Argilés-Herrero, R.; Zacarés, M.; Dalmau, V.; Pla, I. Sterile Insect Technique in an Integrated Vector Management Program against Tiger Mosquito Aedes albopictus in the Valencia Region (Spain): Operating Procedures and Quality Control Parameters. Insects 2021, 12, 272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Walker, C. The Application of Sterile Insect Technique against the Tomato Leafminer Liriomyza Bryoniae. 2012. Available online: http://spiral.imperial.ac.uk/handle/10044/1/11133 (accessed on 25 October 2022).
  158. 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, 139–208. [Google Scholar]
  159. Rattanarithikul, R.; Harrison, B.A.; Harbach, R.E.; Panthusiri, P.; Coleman, R.E. Illustrated Keys to the Mosquitoes of Thailand IV. Anopheles. Southeast Asian J. Trop. Med. Public Health 2006, 37, 1–128. [Google Scholar]
  160. Green, C.A.; Gass, R.F.; Munstermann, L.E.; Baimai, V. Population-Genetic Evidence for Two Species in Anopheles minimus in Thailand. Med. Vet. Entomol. 1990, 4, 25–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Lauri, A.; Mariani, P.O. Potentials and Limitations of Molecular Diagnostic Methods in Food Safety. Genes Nutr. 2009, 4, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  162. Huynh, L.N.; Diarra, A.Z.; Pham, Q.L.; Le-Viet, N.; Berenger, J.M.; Ho, V.H.; Nguyen, X.Q.; Parola, P. Morphological, Molecular and MALDI-TOF MS Identification of Ticks and Tick-Associated Pathogens in Vietnam. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2021, 15, e0009813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Favrot, C. Polymerase Chain Reaction: Advantages and Drawbacks. In Proceedings of the 3. Congresso Latinoamer-icano de Dermatologia Veterinaria, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 26–27 November 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Yssouf, A.; Almeras, L.; Raoult, D.; Parola, P. Emerging Tools for Identification of Arthropod Vectors. Future Microbiol. 2016, 11, 549–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Huynh, L.N.; Diarra, A.Z.; Nguyen, H.S.; Tran, L.B.; Do, V.N.; Ly, T.D.A.; Ho, V.H.; Nguyen, X.Q.; Parola, P. MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometry Identification of Mosquitoes Collected in Vietnam. Parasites Vectors 2022, 15, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Dieme, C.; Yssouf, A.; Vega-Rúa, A.; Berenger, J.-M.; Failloux, A.-B.; Raoult, D.; Parola, P.; Almeras, L. Accurate Identification of Culicidae at Aquatic Developmental Stages by MALDI-TOF MS Profiling. Parasites Vectors 2014, 7, 544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Yssouf, A.; Socolovschi, C.; Flaudrops, C.; Ndiath, M.O.; Sougoufara, S.; Dehecq, J.-S.; Lacour, G.; Berenger, J.-M.; Sokhna, C.S.; Raoult, D.; et al. Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption Ionization—Time of Flight Mass Spectrometry: An Emerging Tool for the Rapid Identification of Mosquito Vectors. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e72380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  168. Harbach, R.E.; Parkin, E.; Chen, b.; Roger, K. Butlin Anopheles (Cellia) minimus Theobald (Diptera: Culicidae): Neotype Designation, Characterization, and Systematics. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 2006, 108, 198–209. [Google Scholar]
  169. Niare, S.; Tandina, F.; Davoust, B.; Doumbo, O.; Raoult, D.; Parola, P.; Almeras, L. Accurate Identification of Anopheles gambiae Giles Trophic Preferences by MALDI-TOF MS. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2018, 63, 410–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  170. Shaikevich, E.V.; Vinogradova, E.B.; Bouattour, A.; Gouveia de Almeida, A.P. Genetic Diversity of Culex pipiens Mosquitoes in Distinct Populations from Europe: Contribution of Cx. quinquefasciatus in Mediterranean Populations. Parasites Vectors 2016, 9, 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  171. Reuben, R.; Tewari, S.C.; Hiriyan, J.; Akiyama, J. Illustrated Keys to Species of Culex Associated with Japanese Encephalitis in Southeast Asia (Diptera: Culicidae). Mosq. Syst. 1994, 26, 75–96. [Google Scholar]
  172. Batovska, J.; Blacket, M.J.; Brown, K.; Lynch, S.E. Molecular Identification of Mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae) in Southeastern Australia. Ecol. Evol. 2016, 6, 3001–3011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  173. Diarra, A.Z.; Laroche, M.; Berger, F.; Parola, P. Use of MALDI-TOF MS for the Identification of Chad Mosquitoes and the Origin of Their Blood Meal. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2019, 100, 47–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  174. Bamou, R.; Diarra, A.Z.; Mayi, M.P.A.; Djiappi-Tchamen, B.; Antonio-Nkondjio, C.; Parola, P. Wolbachia Detection in Field-Collected Mosquitoes from Cameroon. Insects 2021, 12, 1133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  175. Laroche, M.; Almeras, L.; Pecchi, E.; Bechah, Y.; Raoult, D.; Viola, A.; Parola, P. MALDI-TOF MS as an Innovative Tool for Detection of Plasmodium Parasites in Anopheles Mosquitoes. Malar. J. 2017, 16, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  176. Parola, P.; Musso, D.; Raoult, D. Rickettsia Felis: The next Mosquito-Borne Outbreak? Lancet Infect. Dis. 2016, 16, 1112–1113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  177. Angelakis, E.; Mediannikov, O.; Parola, P.; Raoult, D. Rickettsia felis: The Complex Journey of an Emergent Human Pathogen. Trends Parasitol. 2016, 32, 554–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Dieme, C.; Bechah, Y.; Socolovschi, C.; Audoly, G.; Berenger, J.-M.; Faye, O.; Raoult, D.; Parola, P. Transmission Potential of Rickettsia felis Infection by Anopheles gambiae Mosquitoes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2015, 112, 8088–8093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  179. Le-Viet, N.; Le, V.-N.; Chung, H.; Phan, D.-T.; Phan, Q.-D.; Cao, T.-V.; Abat, C.; Raoult, D.; Parola, P. Prospective Case-Control Analysis of the Aetiologies of Acute Undifferentiated Fever in Vietnam. Emerg. Microbes Infect. 2019, 8, 339–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  180. Zhang, J.; Lu, G.; Li, J.; Kelly, P.; Li, M.; Wang, J.; Huang, K.; Qiu, H.; You, J.; Zhang, R.; et al. Molecular Detection of Rickettsia felis and Rickettsia bellii in Mosquitoes. Vector-Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2019, 19, 802–809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Insects 13 01076 g001 550
Figure 1. Distribution map of the major vectors.
Figure 1. Distribution map of the major vectors.
Insects 13 01076 g001
Insects 13 01076 g002 550
Figure 2. Landscapes of larval breeding and adult resting habitats of Aedes aegypti, Aedes albopictus, Culex quinquefasciatus.
Figure 2. Landscapes of larval breeding and adult resting habitats of Aedes aegypti, Aedes albopictus, Culex quinquefasciatus.
Insects 13 01076 g002
Insects 13 01076 g003 550
Figure 3. Photographs of three mosquito species which are known to be major malaria vectors in Vietnam: (a) Anopheles dirus; (b) Anopheles minimus; (c) Anopheles epiroticus.
Figure 3. Photographs of three mosquito species which are known to be major malaria vectors in Vietnam: (a) Anopheles dirus; (b) Anopheles minimus; (c) Anopheles epiroticus.
Insects 13 01076 g003
Insects 13 01076 g004 550
Figure 4. Photographs of three mosquito species which are potential vectors of several viruses, including dengue, Zika, and Japanese encephalitis in Vietnam: (a) Aedes aegypti; (b) Aedes albopictus; (c) Culex quinquefasciatus.
Figure 4. Photographs of three mosquito species which are potential vectors of several viruses, including dengue, Zika, and Japanese encephalitis in Vietnam: (a) Aedes aegypti; (b) Aedes albopictus; (c) Culex quinquefasciatus.
Insects 13 01076 g004
Table
Table 1. Checklist of Anopheles, Aedes, and Culex species reported in Vietnam.
Table 1. Checklist of Anopheles, Aedes, and Culex species reported in Vietnam.
GenusSpecies
Before 1970 [34,35,36]1970-Present [30,31,32,33,37]
AnophelesAn. aconitusAn. philippinensisAn. aberransAn. harrisoniAn. paraliae
An. annularisAn. sinensisAn. alongensisAn. indefinitusAn. pseudojamesi
An. argyropusAn. splendidusAn. asiaticusAn. insulaeflorumAn. pseudowillmori
An. barbirostrisAn. subpictusAn. baezaiAn. interruptusAn. pursati
An. campestrisAn. tessellatusAn. baileyiAn. jamesiiAn. rampae
An. crawfordiAn.umbrosusAn. barbumbrosusAn. kochiAn. sawadwongporni
An. introlatusAn. vagusAn. bengalensisAn. letiferAn. separatus
An. jeyporiensisAn. varunaAn. cucphuongensiAn. lindesayiAn. sintonoides
An. karwari An. culicifaciesAn. monstrosusAn. stephensi
An. lesteriAn. dangiAn. nimpeAn. takasagoensis
An. maculatusAn. dirus *An. nitidusAn. vietnamensis
An. minimus *An. donaldiAn. nivipesAn. whartoni
An. nigerrimusAn. dravidicusAn. notanandaiAn. willmori
An. pallidusAn. epiropticus * An. palmatus
An. peditaeniatusAn. gigasAn. pampanai
AedesAe. eegypti *Ae. mediolineatusAe. alongiAe. helenaeAe. novonivveus
Ae. albolineatusAe. nivensAe. annandaleiAe. hirsutipleuraAe. pampagensis
Ae. albopictus *Ae. niveoscutellumAe. andamanensisAe. gardnerii imitatorAe. patriciae
Ae. alboscutellatusAe. ostentatioAe. agrestisAe. ibisAe. poecilus
Ae. amesiiAe. pseudalbopictusAe. caecusAe. jamesiiAe. prominens
Ae. assamensisAe. taeniorhynchoitesAe. cancricomesAe. macfarlaneiAe. saxicola
Ae. aureostriatusAe. tonkinensilsAe. chrysolineatusAe. malayensisAe. thailandensis
Ae. duxAe. vallistrisAe. culicinusAe. manhiAe. uniformis
Ae. imprimensAe. vexansAe. desmotesAe. mediopunctatusAe. vittatus
Ae. laniger Ae. eldridgeiAe. niveoidesAe. w-albus
Ae. lineatopennis Ae. elsiae
CulexCx. annulusCx. peytoniCx. alienusCx. malayi
Cx. bitaeniorhynchusCx. pseudosinensisCx. alisCx. mimulus
Cx. brevipalpisCx. pseudovishnuiCx. bernardiCx. minutissimus
Cx. fuscanusCx. quadripalpisCx. bicornutusCx. murrelli
Cx. fuscocephalaCx. quinquefasciatus *Cx. cinctellusCx. pallidothorax
Cx. fuscocephalusCx. raptorCx. curtipalpisCx. scanloni
Cx. gelidusCx. reidiCx. edwardsiCx. sumatranus
Cx. incomptusCx. rubithoracisCx. foliatusCx. variatus
Cx. khazaniCx. sinensisCx. fragilisCx. viridiventer
Cx. mimeticusCx. sitiensCx. hutchinsoniCx. vishnui
Cx. minorCx. tritaeniorhynchus *Cx. infantulusCx. wilfredi
Cx. nigropunctatusCx. whiteiCx. infula
Cx. pholsterCx. whitmoreiCx. macdonaldi
* Species as a main vector.
Table
Table 2. Checklist of mosquito species reported in Vietnam, excluding the genera of Anopheles, Aedes, and Culex.
Table 2. Checklist of mosquito species reported in Vietnam, excluding the genera of Anopheles, Aedes, and Culex.
GenusSpecies
Before 1970 [31,35]1970-Present [30,31,32,33]
AedeomyiaAd. Catasticta-
ArmigeresArm. flavusArm. annulitarsisArm. durhamiArm. moultoni
Arm. subalbatusArm. aureolineatusArm. kuchingensisArm. pectinatus
Arm. cingulatusArm. longipalpis
Arm. dolichocephalusArm. magnus
Coquillettidia-Cq. crassipesCq. ochraceaCq. nigrosignata
FicalbiaFi. minima-
Heizmannia-Hz. communisHz. greeniiHz. scintillans
Hz. complexHz. persimilis
Hz. covelliHz. reidi
HodgesiaHo. malayi-
Kimia-Km. decorabilis
Lutzia-Lt. raptorLt. fuscanusLt. halifaxiiLt. vorax
MalayaMl. jacobsoniMl. genurostrisMalaya sp.
MansoniaMa. annuliferaMa. annulata
Ma. crassipesMa. bonneae
Ma. nigrosignataMa. dives
Ma. ochraceaMa. indiana
Ma. uniformis *
Mimomyia-Mi. chamberlaini metallicaMi. hybridaMi. luzonensis
Ochlerotatus Och. assamensisOch. macfarlaneiOch. saxicola
Och. aureostriatusOch. mikrokopionOch. scatophgoides
Och. chrysolineatusOch. niveoidesOch. tonkinensis
Och. dissimilisOch. niveusOch. vigilax
Och. elsiaeOch. novoniveusOchlerotatus sp.1
Och. khazaniOch. poiciliusOchlerotatus sp.2
Och. lanigerOch. prominensOchlerotatus sp.3
Och. longirostrisOch. pseudotaeniatusOchlerotatus sp.4
Orthopodomyia-Or. albipesOr. andamanensisOr. anopheloides
Topomyia-To. GracilisTopomyia sp.1Topomyia sp.2
ToxorhynchitesTx. splendensTx. albipesTx. KempiToxorhynchites sp.
TripteroidesTp. aranoidesTp. powelliTp. similisTp. tenax
Tp. proximusTp. tarsalis
Udaya-Ud. argyrurus
UranotaeniaUra. annandaleiUra. bicolorUra. koliUra. spiculosa
Ura. campestrisUra. bimaculataUra. lateralisUranotaenia sp.
Ura. macfarlaneiUra. bimaculialaUra. longirostris
Ura. maximaUra. demeilloniUra. lutescens
Ura. obscuraUra. edwardsiUra. nivipleura
Ura. reconditaUra. hongayiUra. rampae
Verrallina-Ver. andamanensisVer. consonensisVer. unca
Ver. butleriVer. duxVer. vallistris
Ver. clavataVer. nigrotarsis
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Huynh, L.N.; Tran, L.B.; Nguyen, H.S.; Ho, V.H.; Parola, P.; Nguyen, X.Q. Mosquitoes and Mosquito-Borne Diseases in Vietnam. Insects 2022, 13, 1076. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13121076

AMA Style

Huynh LN, Tran LB, Nguyen HS, Ho VH, Parola P, Nguyen XQ. Mosquitoes and Mosquito-Borne Diseases in Vietnam. Insects. 2022; 13(12):1076. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13121076

Chicago/Turabian Style

Huynh, Ly Na, Long Bien Tran, Hong Sang Nguyen, Van Hoang Ho, Philippe Parola, and Xuan Quang Nguyen. 2022. "Mosquitoes and Mosquito-Borne Diseases in Vietnam" Insects 13, no. 12: 1076. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13121076

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop