Background: The required efforts, feasibility and predicted success of an intervention strategy against an infectious disease are partially determined by its basic reproduction number, R0. In its simplest form R0 can be understood as the product of the infectious period, the number of infectious contacts and the per-contact transmission probability, which in the case of vector-transmitted diseases necessarily extend to the vector stages. As vectors do not usually recover from infection, they remain infectious for life, which places high significance on the vector's life expectancy. Current methods for estimating the R0 for a vector-borne disease are mostly derived from compartmental modelling frameworks assuming constant vector mortality rates. We hypothesised that some of the assumptions underlying these models can lead to unrealistic high vector life expectancies with important repercussions for R0 estimates.
Methodology and principal findings: Here we used a stochastic, individual-based model which allowed us to directly measure the number of secondary infections arising from one index case under different assumptions about vector mortality. Our results confirm that formulas based on age-independent mortality rates can overestimate R0 by nearly 100% compared to our own estimate derived from first principles. We further provide a correction factor that can be used with a standard R0 formula and adjusts for the discrepancies due to erroneous vector age distributions.
Conclusion: Vector mortality rates play a crucial role for the success and general epidemiology of vector-transmitted diseases. Many modelling efforts intrinsically assume these to be age-independent, which, as clearly demonstrated here, can lead to severe over-estimation of the disease's reproduction number. Our results thus re-emphasise the importance of obtaining field-relevant and species-dependent vector mortality rates, which in turn would facilitate more realistic intervention impact predictions.