| Literature DB >> 18817574 |
Cyrille Czeher1, Rabiou Labbo, Ibrahim Arzika, Jean-Bernard Duchemin.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: At the end of 2005, a nationwide long-lasting insecticide-treated net (LLIN) distribution targeting the most vulnerable populations was implemented throughout Niger. A large number of studies in Africa have reported the existence of anopheline populations resistant to various insecticides, partly due to knockdown resistance (kdr) mutations, but few operational wide-scale control programmes were coupled with the monitoring of such mutations. The distribution of the kdr-west (kdr-w) Leu-Phe mutation was studied in Anopheles gambiae s.l. populations from Niger and temporal variations were monitored following the nationwide LLIN implementation.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2008 PMID: 18817574 PMCID: PMC2562389 DOI: 10.1186/1475-2875-7-189
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Malar J ISSN: 1475-2875 Impact factor: 2.979
Figure 1Map of the study area and collection sites.
kdr-w allelic frequency in An. gambiae M forms by site and year.
| 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | overall | |||||
| Sites | n | kdr freq (%) | n | kdr freq (%) | n | kdr freq (%) | n | kdr freq (%) |
| [95% CI] | [95% CI] | [95% CI] | [95% CI] | |||||
| Firgoune | 47 | 0.00 | 17 | 0.00 | 29 | 10.34 | 93 | 3.23 |
| [0.0–3.8] | [0.0–10.3] | [3.9–21.2] | [1.2–6.9] | |||||
| Garey | 54 | 0.00 | 35 | 0.00 | - | 89 | 0.00 | |
| [0.0–3.4] | [0.0–5.1] | [0.0–2.1] | ||||||
| Banizoumbou | 55 | 0.00 | 52 | 2.88 | 26 | 7.69 | 133 | 2.63 |
| [0.0–3.3] | [0.6–8.2] | [2.1–18.5] | [1.1–5.3] | |||||
| Zindarou | 49 | 1.02 | 71 | 0.70 | 65 | 4.62 | 185 | 2.16 |
| [0.0–5.6] | [0.0–3.9] | [1.7–9.8] | [0.9–4.2] | |||||
| Maichilmi | 77 | 0.00 | 10 | 5.00 | - | 87 | 0.57 | |
| [0.0–2.4] | [0.1–24.9] | [0.0–3.2] | ||||||
| Maikogo | 86 | 0.58 | 19 | 7.89 | 34 | 8.82 | 139 | 3.60 |
| [0.0–3.2] | [1.7–21.4] | [3.3–18.2] | [1.7–6.5] | |||||
| Fararatt | 71 | 0.70 | 53 | 0.94 | 19 | 7.89 | 143 | 1.75 |
| [0.0–3.9] | [0.0–5.1] | [1.7–21.4] | [0.6–4.0] | |||||
| Bermo | 42 | 0.00 | 4 | 0.00 | - | 46 | 0.00 | |
| [0.0–4.3] | [0.0–36.9] | [0.0–3.9] | ||||||
| Tchake | 32 | 1.56 | 3 | 0.00 | - | 35 | 1.43 | |
| [0.0–8.4] | [0.0–45.9] | [0.0–7.7] | ||||||
| Falenko | 13 | 0.00 | - | - | 13 | 0.00 | ||
| [0.0–13.2] | [0.0–13.2] | |||||||
| Damagaram | 6 | 8.33 | 5 | 10.00 | - | 11 | 9.09 | |
| [0.2–38.5] | [0.3–44.5] | [1.1–29.2] | ||||||
| Guidimouni | 3 | 0.00 | 1 | 50.00 | 4 | 87.50 | 8 | 50.00 |
| [0.0–15.9] | [1.3–98.7] | [47.3–99.7] | [24.6–75.3] | |||||
| Total | 537 | 0.47 | 272 | 2.02 | 177 | 9.04 | 986 | 2.43 |
| [0.2–1.1] | [1.0–3.6] | [6.3–12.5] | [1.8–3.2] | |||||
Six out of 12 villages were analysed in 2007. The study sites are presented following their longitudinal position, from West to East. Two sites (Goudoumaria and Bosso) where too few An. gambiae s.s. were found are not shown. n: specimens sample size. Kdr freq: kdr-w allelic frequency (percentage). 95% CI: 95% Confidence Interval
kdr-w allelic frequency in An. gambiae M forms by site, year and method of collection.
| 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | overall | ||||||
| Sites | Collection | n | freq kdr (%) | n | freq kdr (%) | n | freq kdr (%) | n | freq kdr (%) |
| Firgoune | ILC | 24 | 0.00 | 5 | 0.00 | 21 | 14.29 | 50 | 6.00 |
| IRC | 23 | 0.00 | 8 | 0.00 | 8 | 0.00 | 39 | 0.00 | |
| total indoor | 47 | 0.00 | 13 | 0.00 | 29 | 10.34 | 89 | 3.37 | |
| Banizoumbou | ILC | 12 | 0.00 | 18 | 5.56 | - | 30 | 3.33 | |
| IRC | 35 | 0.00 | 24 | 2.08 | 26 | 7.69 | 85 | 2.94 | |
| total indoor | 47 | 0.00 | 42 | 3.57 | 26 | 7.69 | 115 | 3.04 | |
| Zindarou | ILC | 22 | 0.00 | 52 | 0.96 | 50 | 5.00 | 124 | 2.42 |
| IRC | 6 | 0.00 | 2 | 0.00 | 15 | 3.33 | 23 | 2.17 | |
| total indoor | 28 | 0.00 | 54 | 0.93 | 65 | 4.62 | 147 | 2.38 | |
| Maikogo | ILC | 45 | 1.11 | 8 | 12.50 | 27 | 11.11 | 80 | 5.63 |
| IRC | 15 | 0.00 | 7 | 7.14 | 7 | 0.00 | 29 | 1.72 | |
| total indoor | 60 | 0.83 | 15 | 10.00 | 34 | 8.82 | 109 | 4.59 | |
| Fararatt | ILC | 35 | 0.00 | 15 | 0.00 | 7 | 14.29 | 57 | 1.75 |
| IRC | 32 | 0.00 | 31 | 1.61 | 10 | 5.00 | 73 | 1.37 | |
| total indoor | 67 | 0.00 | 46 | 1.09 | 17 | 8.82 | 130 | 1.54 | |
| total | ILC | 140 | 0.36 | 99 | 3.03 | 105 | 9.05 | 344 | 3.67 |
| IRC | 111 | 0.00 | 72 | 2.08 | 40 | 2.50 | 223 | 1.81 | |
| total indoor | 251 | 0.20 | 171 | 2.63 | 145 | 7.24 | 567 | 2.88 | |
The table presents data from the five sites analysed for the three years and with sufficient sample size. n: sample size. freq kdr: kdr-w allelic frequency (percentage). ILC: Indoor Landing Collections. IRC: Indoor Resting Collections
Figure 2. Averaged kdr frequency over all rural sites (13 villages in 2005 and 2006, 6 villages in 2007). ILC: Indoor Landing Collections. IRC: Indoor Resting Collections
Figure 3View of the Gountou Yena stream. Picture taken in Niamey during early wet season (june 2008), showing the small stream surrounded by small-scale gardening areas (top-left) where kdr frequency within An. gambiae M form larvae was particularly high