Presence records of Aedes vexans (Diptera: Culicidae) in Germany

Data Records

The data in this occurrence resource has been published as a Darwin Core Archive (DwC-A), which is a standardized format for sharing biodiversity data as a set of one or more data tables. The core data table contains 6,422 records.

This IPT archives the data and thus serves as the data repository. The data and resource metadata are available for download in the downloads section. The versions table lists other versions of the resource that have been made publicly available and allows tracking changes made to the resource over time.

Versions

The table below shows only published versions of the resource that are publicly accessible.

How to cite

Researchers should cite this work as follows:

Pothmann P, Werner D, Kampen H, Thulke H (2026). Presence records of Aedes vexans (Diptera: Culicidae) in Germany. Version 1.4. Pensoft Publishers. Occurrence dataset. https://ipt.pensoft.net/resource?r=aedesvexansgermany&v=1.4

Rights

Researchers should respect the following rights statement:

The publisher and rights holder of this work is Pensoft Publishers. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC-BY-NC 4.0) License.

GBIF Registration

This resource has been registered with GBIF, and assigned the following GBIF UUID: c6cc34ba-cc20-44c9-b43b-7b48f20bc37b.  Pensoft Publishers publishes this resource, and is itself registered in GBIF as a data publisher endorsed by GBIF Bulgaria.

Keywords

Occurrence; Observation

Contacts

Geographic Coverage

N/A

Taxonomic Coverage

No Description available

Temporal Coverage

Project Data

In response to increasingly frequent outbreaks of mosquito-borne diseases in Europe and the need to update historic distribution data, a nationwide mosquito monitoring programme was launched in Germany in 2011 (Werner et al. 2020). The project aims to systematically document the occurrence, distribution, and spatiotemporal dynamics of culicid species across the country. It combines active monitoring with a passive approach through the citizen science project “Mückenatlas”. Between 2011 and 2019, approximately 516000 mosquito specimens were collected and analysed, with the resulting occurrence records being stored and maintained in the German mosquito database CulBase. In total, 52 species from seven genera were identified, including several species not recorded for decades, and newly established invasive species. The monitoring revealed both the introduction of invasive species and shifts in distribution patterns of native taxa, likely associated with globalization and climate change (Werner et al. 2020). The data collected within the project provides an updated inventory of the German mosquito fauna and serves as a foundation for vector surveillance and risk assessment. Due to its importance for the early detection of invasive species and potential disease vectors, the monitoring programme is aimed to be perpetuated to ensure long-term continuation (Werner et al. 2020).

The personnel involved in the project:

Sampling Methods

Mosquitoes were collected using both active and passive surveillance approaches. Active sampling of adult mosquitoes was conducted during the vegetative seasons (April–October) using CO₂-baited BG Sentinel and EVS traps at numerous sites across Germany, with varying spatial intensity between 2011 and 2019, including targeted trapping following West Nile virus emergence. Additional adults were collected by aspirating resting females in animal shelters and zoos, sampling hibernation sites, and netting from vegetation or animal and human bait. Larvae and pupae were sampled nationwide from natural and artificial breeding sites (Werner et al. 2020). Passive sampling was conducted through the citizen science project “Mückenatlas,” launched in 2012, in which citizens submitted mosquitoes from their private surroundings for identification (Werner et al. 2020). All submitted specimens were subsequently identified by skilled entomologists. Active monitoring was carried out by experts using standardized trapping and collection methods. Most adult mosquitoes were sampled using CO₂-baited traps. These traps were typically activated for 24 hours per week and could yield multiple individuals. Additional active collection techniques included aspirating and sweep netting to capture resting or flying mosquitoes, while human-bait and animal-bait collections targeted host-seeking female specimens. The aquatic mosquito stages were sampled using the dipping technique. For a very small number of records, the sampling method was not documented. Morphologically, all mosquitoes were identified as adults. Thus, collected aquatic stages were often carried along in water from their breeding sites and kept until adult emergence. Morphological identification of adults followed standard keys (Mohrig 1969, Schaffner et al. 2001, Becker et al. 2010). Some aquatic stages as well as damaged adults and adults of cryptic and closely related species were identified genetically (Folmer et al. 1994, Proft et al. 1999, Hébert et al. 2003, Rudolf et al. 2013, Kronfeld et al. 2014). After identification, a database record was created in CulBase for each occurrence, including information on the federal state, geographic coordinates (latitude and longitude), sampling time or period, species identification, number of individuals collected, sex, developmental stage, habitat type, and collection method. For a detailed description of the sampling design, data collection, and results, see Werner et al. (2020).

Method step description:

1. In the Sampling Description section, the methods used to collect mosquito occurrences are described in detail. All collected occurrence records are stored in the CulBase database. From this database, all records of Ae. vexans were extracted for publication in this dataset.

Collection Data

Bibliographic Citations

1. Becker, N., Petrić, D., Zgomba, M., Boase, C., Madon, M. B., Dahl, C., & Kaiser, A. (2020). Mosquitoes: Identification, ecology and control (3rd ed.). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11623-1 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11623-1
2. Becker, N., Petrić, D., Zgomba, M., Boase, C., Madon, M., Dahl, C., & Kaiser, A. (2010). Mosquitoes and their control (2nd ed.). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92874-4 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92874-4
3. Franklinos, L. H. V., Jones, K. E., Redding, D. W., & Abubakar, I. (2019). The effect of global change on mosquito-borne disease. The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 19(9), e302–e312. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(19)30161-6 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(19)30161-6
4. Kampen, H., & Walther, D. (2018). Vector potential of mosquito species (Diptera: Culicidae) occurring in Central Europe. In G. Benelli & H. Mehlhorn (Eds.), Mosquito-borne diseases (Parasitology Research Monographs, Vol. 10). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94075-5_5 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94075-5_5
5. Kampen, H., Holicki, C. M., Ziegler, U., Groschup, M. H., Tews, B. A., & Werner, D. (2020). West Nile virus mosquito vectors (Diptera: Culicidae) in Germany. Viruses, 12(5), 493. https://doi.org/10.3390/v12050493 https://doi.org/10.3390/v12050493
6. Kerkow, A., Wieland, R., Früh, L., Kampen, H., & Walther, D. (2020). Can data from native mosquitoes support determining invasive species habitats? Modelling the climatic niche of Aedes japonicus japonicus (Diptera, Culicidae) in Germany. Parasitology Research, 119, 31–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00436-019-06513-5 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00436-019-06513-5
7. Kronefeld, M., Werner, D., & Kampen, H. (2014). PCR identification and distribution of Anopheles daciae (Diptera, Culicidae) in Germany. Parasitology Research, 113, 2079–2086. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00436-014-3857-1 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00436-014-3857-1
8. Martinet, J.-P., Ferté, H., Failloux, A.-B., Schaffner, F., & Depaquit, J. (2019). Mosquitoes of North-Western Europe as potential vectors of arboviruses: A review. Viruses, 11, 1059. https://doi.org/10.3390/v11111059 https://doi.org/10.3390/v11111059
9. Mohrig, W. (1969). Die Culiciden Deutschlands. Anzeiger für Schädlingskunde, 42, 126–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02050649 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02050649
10. Pernat, N., Kampen, H., Ruland, F., et al. (2021). Drivers of spatio-temporal variation in mosquito submissions to the citizen science project ‘Mückenatlas’. Scientific Reports, 11, 1356. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-80365-3 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-80365-3
11. Pernat, N., Zscheischler, J., Kampen, H., Ostermann-Miyashita, E. F., & Jeschke, J. M. (2022). How media presence triggers participation in citizen science—The case of the mosquito monitoring project ‘Mückenatlas’. PLOS ONE, 17(2), e0262850. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0262850 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0262850
12. Pothmann, P., Kampen, H., Werner, D., & Thulke, H.-H. (2025). Systematic review of variable selection bias in species distribution models for Aedes vexans (Diptera: Culicidae). Insects, 16, 1061. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects16101061 https://doi.org/10.3390/insects16101061
13. Proft, J., Maier, W., & Kampen, H. (1999). Identification of six sibling species of the Anopheles maculipennis complex (Diptera: Culicidae) by a polymerase chain reaction assay. Parasitology Research, 85, 837–843. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004360050642 https://doi.org/10.1007/s004360050642
14. Rudolf, M., Czajka, C., Börstler, J., Melaun, C., Jöst, H., et al. (2013). First nationwide surveillance of Culex pipiens complex and Culex torrentium mosquitoes demonstrated the presence of Culex pipiens biotype pipiens/molestus hybrids in Germany. PLOS ONE, 8(9), e71832. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0071832 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0071832
15. Schaffner, F., Angel, G., Geoffroy, B., Hervy, J.-P., Rhaiem, A., & Brunhes, J. (2001). The mosquitoes of Europe: An identification and training programme. IRD Editions & EID Méditerranée.
16. Walther, D., & Kampen, H. (2017). The citizen science project ‘Mueckenatlas’ helps monitor the distribution and spread of invasive mosquito species in Germany. Journal of Medical Entomology, 54(6), 1790–1794. https://doi.org/10.1093/jme/tjx166 https://doi.org/10.1093/jme/tjx166
17. Werner, D., Kowalczyk, S., & Kampen, H. (2020). Nine years of mosquito monitoring in Germany, 2011–2019, with an updated inventory of German culicid species. Parasitology Research, 119, 2765–2774. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00436-020-06775-4 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00436-020-06775-4
18. Wieland, R., Kerkow, A., Früh, L., Kampen, H., & Walther, D. (2017). Automated feature selection for a machine learning approach toward modeling a mosquito distribution. Ecological Modelling, 352, 108–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2017.02.029 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2017.02.029
19. Wieland, R., Kuhls, K., Lentz, H. H. K., Conraths, F., Kampen, H., & Werner, D. (2021). Combined climate and regional mosquito habitat model based on machine learning. Ecological Modelling, 452, 109594. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2021.109594 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2021.109594
20. Kampen, H., & Walther, D. (2018). Vector potential of mosquito species (Diptera: Culicidae) occurring in Central Europe. In G. Benelli & H. Mehlhorn (Eds.), Mosquito-borne diseases: Implications for public health (Parasitology Research Monographs, pp. 41–68). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94075-5_5 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94075-5_5
21. Folmer, O., Black, M., Hoeh, W., Lutz, R., & Vrijenhoek, R. (1994). DNA primers for amplification of mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I from diverse metazoan invertebrates. Molecular Marine Biology and Biotechnology, 3(5), 294–299.

Additional Metadata