Complementing community science with xenomonitoring: understanding the eco-epidemiology of Dirofilaria immitis infection in dogs and mosquitoes
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Dirofilariosis is an emerging mosquito-borne disease that particularly affects domestic dogs worldwide but also causes symptoms in humans. Monitoring the distribution of emerging pathogens is essential for understanding the environmental and ecological factors influencing their transmission, which can be used to develop better prevention strategies. METHODS: We applied both community science and molecular xenomonitoring to assess the occurrence of Dirofilaria immitis in domestic dogs and mosquitoes. RESULTS: As part of the community science approach, we collected infection data from 1491 dogs from owners across Hungary, using a questionnaire survey. We found that 321 dogs (21.5%) tested positive for current or past dirofilariosis infection, with the highest prevalence observed in the southeastern (47.8%) and the eastern regions (43.4%) of the country. Age and living conditions affected infection status, with older dogs (aged 5-10 years and over 10 years) and those kept exclusively outdoors showing significantly higher infection rates. Molecular xenomonitoring revealed D. immitis infection in Aedes albopictus, Aedes koreicus, and Aedes vexans, with the highest minimum infection rate (MIR) in Ae. koreicus (28.5). Similar to community science results, the highest infection rates were observed in the southeastern and eastern regions (MIR: 14.9 and 11.6, respectively), but the two approaches generally provided overall similar geographical patterns. CONCLUSIONS: While xenomonitoring did not detect infections in Central Transdanubia, community science successfully provided host infection data, demonstrating its usefulness in assessing the presence and distribution of the disease. Finally, we emphasize the value of using an integrative approach, combining community science and xenomonitoring for monitoring dirofilariosis, especially in areas where direct pathogen screening is unavailable.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The results are consistent with previous studies reporting no clear breed or sex pre-disposition beyond differences attributable to management practices, such as those observed between hunting or working dogs and companion animals.
“Regarding intrinsic host factors, the results are consistent with previous studies reporting no clear breed or sex pre-disposition beyond differences attributable to management practices, such as those observed between hunting or working dogs and companion animals (4, 5, 10, 12, 26–29).”
From Deciphering the socio-environmental factors associated with realized heartworm transmission risk in dogs from Portugal and Spain (2026) · cites this paper as [27]
The Results (page not available) report similar infection prevalence in female and male dogs, and substantially higher prevalence in dogs kept outdoors than indoors. The Methods list weight, age and indoor/outdoor lifestyle as predictors; the paper does not assess breed predisposition or compare hunting or working dogs with companion animals. Its sex figures are descriptive rather than a reported test of predisposition. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 53 · Cited by 10
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [44]Fok É, Szabó Z, Farkas R. The first autochthonous case of a dog infected with Dirofilaria repens in Hungary. Kisállatorvoslás. 1998;4:218–9.
- Authors
- Szentivanyi, T., V. González, L., Klein, Á., Soltész, Z., & Garamszegi, L. Z.
- Affiliations
- HUN-REN Centre for Ecological Research (HU)
- Venue
- Parasites & Vectors
- Published
- 2025-06-20
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 233-233
- ISSN
- 1756-3305 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC12181931
- OpenAlex
- W4411491596
- Cited by
- 10
- References
- 53
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 3
- FWCI
- 7.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Parasites & Vectors (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Repository of the Academy's Library (Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences) (acceptedVersion)
- University of Debrecen Electronic Archive (University of Debrecen) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- Hungary’s National Research, Development and Innovation Office (K-135841)
- HUN-REN Centre for Ecological Research
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Parasitic Diseases Research and Treatment
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Research on Leishmaniasis Studies
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Parasitology › Vector-borne infectious diseases
- Keywords
- Dirofilaria immitis, dirofilariasis, canine heartworm disease, mosquito-borne diseases, xenomonitoring, citizen science, Aedes albopictus, Aedes koreicus, Aedes vexans, infection prevalence, eco-epidemiology, disease surveillance, Hungary
- MeSH terms
- Mosquito Vectors, Aedes, Animals, Dirofilaria immitis, Dirofilariasis, Dog Diseases, Dogs, Female, Humans, Hungary, Male, Surveys and Questionnaires, Prevalence
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
