# Clashing in Murky Waters: On Amphibian Mosquito Suppression

**Authors:** S. P. Boerlijst, A. Ummels, A. M. Spitzen‐van der Sluijs, J. Spitzen, R. W. Bouman, E. Boelee, P. M. van Bodegom, M. Schrama

PMC · DOI: 10.1002/ece3.73127 · Ecology and Evolution · 2026-03-07

## TL;DR

Amphibians are more effective at controlling mosquito populations than aquatic insects, and their presence can deter mosquitoes from laying eggs.

## Contribution

This study demonstrates that European amphibians are highly efficient mosquito predators and can influence mosquito oviposition behavior.

## Key findings

- Amphibians consumed 4–8 times more mosquito larvae per individual than aquatic insects.
- Mosquito oviposition was deterred by the presence of amphibian predators.
- Amphibian predation and oviposition deterrence suggest their potential as natural mosquito control agents.

## Abstract

Mosquito‐borne diseases are on the rise globally due to the shifting distribution of key disease vector species. Due to increased global trade and travel and increasing temperatures and changing precipitation patterns, the spread of mosquitoes and the increasing burden of their accompanying diseases like malaria, yellow fever, and dengue persist. Seeking sustainable control measures, there's growing interest in natural control, particularly through predators like amphibians, a globally threatened vertebrate group. However, the effectiveness of different natural predators and their role in an ecological context remains poorly understood. This study compares the predator efficiency of common European amphibian species to common aquatic insect mosquito predators. Focusing on the cosmopolitan mosquito 
Culex pipiens
 s.l., known for transmitting pathogens like West Nile virus, we assessed predator rates, sex‐specific efficiency in amphibians, and the impact of predator presence on mosquito oviposition behavior. Amphibians proved to be more effective mosquito predators than aquatic insects, consuming up to 4–8 times as many larvae per individual compared to the aquatic insects. No difference was detected between the two amphibian species, nor their sexes or the levels of eutrophication. Predator cues deterred oviposition behavior across the entire experimental setup, thus suggesting the ability of mosquitoes to react to a (purported) landscape of fear. The combined effect of deterring egg laying and lowering mosquito survival highlights the potential of natural predation, and particularly that of amphibian species as natural larval control agents, thus emphasizing the importance of conserving these threatened species and facilitating them in urban and rural environments.

This study compares the predator efficiency of common European amphibian species to common invertebrate mosquito predators. Focusing on the cosmopolitan mosquito Culex pipiens, known for transmitting pathogens like West Nile virus, we assessed predator rates, sex‐specific efficiency in amphibians, and the impact of predator presence on mosquito oviposition behavior. The combined effect of deterring egg laying and lowering mosquito survival highlight the potential of natural predation, and particularly those of amphibian species as natural larval control agents, once highlighting the importance of conserving these—globally threatened—species and facilitating them in urban and rural environments.

## Linked entities

- **Diseases:** malaria (MONDO:0005136), yellow fever (MONDO:0020502), dengue (MONDO:0005502)
- **Species:** Culex pipiens (taxon 7175), Mus musculus (taxon 10090)

## Full-text entities

- **Diseases:** Avian malaria (MESH:D008289), yellow fever (MESH:D015004), malaria (MESH:D008288), Mosquito-borne diseases (MESH:D000079426), Dirofilariasis (MESH:D004184), dengue (MESH:D003715), Japanese encephalitis (MESH:D004672)
- **Chemicals:** polypropylene (MESH:D011126), K2O (MESH:C068440), organophosphates (MESH:D010755), Bti (-), water (MESH:D014867), salt (MESH:D012492), oxygen (MESH:D010100), neonicotinoids (MESH:D000073943), pyrethroids (MESH:D011722), N (MESH:D009584), P2O5 (MESH:C012500)
- **Species:** Bos taurus (bovine, species) [taxon 9913], PX clade (clade) [taxon 569578], Culex pipiens (common house mosquito, species) [taxon 7175], Lissotriton vulgaris (common newt, species) [taxon 8324], Notonecta glauca (species) [taxon 260537], Coleoptera (beetles, order) [taxon 7041], West Nile virus (no rank) [taxon 11082], Culiseta annulata (species) [taxon 332058], Odonata (dragonflies & damselflies, order) [taxon 6961], Caudata (salamanders, order) [taxon 8293], Aedes (subgenus) [taxon 149531], Culex (subgenus) [taxon 53527], Aedes sp. (species) [taxon 37951], Anopheles maculipennis (species) [taxon 41429], Bacteria Latreille et al. 1825 (Bacteria stick insect, genus) [taxon 629395], Culex pipiens pipiens (subspecies) [taxon 38569], Agabus bipustulatus (species) [taxon 107770], Pelophylax esculentus [taxon 8401], Culex pipiens sensu lato (species) [taxon 2874183], Anura (anurans, order) [taxon 8342], Lagenaria siceraria (bottle gourd, species) [taxon 3668]
- **Mutations:** C-35 C

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12966807/full.md

## Figures

4 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12966807/full.md

## References

111 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12966807/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12966807