Malarial Mice Smell Better to Mosquitoes
Mice infected with the parasites that cause their type of malaria produce odorous compounds that attract mosquitoes, increasing the odds that the parasites will be spread to the next victims
By Karen Hopkin
SUBSCRIBE TO Science Quickly
On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
Getting malaria stinks. Literally. According to a new study, malaria victims give off odors that attracts mosquitoes. And the insects that feed on the infected sufferer are then more likely to spread the disease. The work appears in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. [Consuelo M. De Moraes et al, Malaria-induced changes in host odors enhance mosquito attraction]
Malaria is caused by plasmodium parasites, which are transmitted by mosquitoes. A decade ago, scientists found that Kenyan kids infected with plasmodium were more attractive to mosquitos than were kids who were parasite-free. But they did not know what drew the bloodsuckers to the unfortunate infected children.
To find out, researchers took mice that harbored the rodent version of malaria and put the animals in a wind chamber. And they found that mosquitos flocked toward the infected animals, attracted by their smell alone.
By chemically analyzing the animals’ scents, the researchers found that the parasites boost the levels of a variety of odorous compounds that attract mosquitoes. So plasmodium is manipulating both its victim and its carrier to get itself spread far and wide.
The finding may help with malaria prevention: if we can mask or harness the eau d’ infection, maybe we could nose the mosquitoes away from people.
—Karen Hopkin
[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]
Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism
Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.
When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.
Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber
