| Literature DB >> 19664282 |
Kevin Y Njabo1, Anthony J Cornel, Ravinder N M Sehgal, Claire Loiseau, Wolfgang Buermann, Ryan J Harrigan, John Pollinger, Gediminas Valkiūnas, Thomas B Smith.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The mosquito vectors of Plasmodium spp. have largely been overlooked in studies of ecology and evolution of avian malaria and other vertebrates in wildlife.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19664282 PMCID: PMC3152766 DOI: 10.1186/1475-2875-8-193
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Malar J ISSN: 1475-2875 Impact factor: 2.979
Figure 1Sampling locations of mosquitoes in the lowland forest areas of Cameroon. Areas where Coquillettidia sp were recorded are indicated by filled triangles.
Figure 2Mosquito trapping methods used in this study. A – CDC Light trap hung from dead tree in grassland along Nyong River, Ndibi; B – Net trap placed in grassland along Nyong River; C – Collecting mosquitoes resting in grass and on tree branches by sweep net. Mosquitoes were aspirated out from the sweep net and then placed into holding cages for identification and preservation. D – Ehrenberg bird trap hung in branches of dead tree in along edge of Nyong River grassland.
Number of female Coquillettidia mosquitoes collected versus the four collecting modes in the two main sites, Ndibi and Nkouak
| Species | CDC Light Traps (76.4%) | Net traps (9.4%) | Lard cans (12.8%) | Sweep net collections (1.3%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1147 | 156 | 196 | 12 | |
| 218 | 15 | 28 | 8 | |
| 11 | 0 | 7 | 3 | |
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Figure 3Habitat preferences for . Overall, there was a significant preference for shaded areas (p = 0.04). No C. pseudoconopas was collected in Ndibi and Plasmodium DNA isolations were not associated with any of the four microhabitats. Collections from the other sites represent less than 5% of the total and are not included in the analysis.
Proportion of vectors pools that were screened by PCR for malaria parasites by species.
| PCR Screen | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Species | Negative | Positive | Total | Proportion positive | MLE/1000 | Number of individuals |
| 143 | 77 | 220 | 0.35 | 84.04 | 1082 | |
| 25 | 6 | 31 | 0.19 | 35.54 | 183 | |
| 3 | 2 | 5 | 0.4 | 112.22 | 20 | |
| Total | 173 | 85 | 256 | 1285 | ||
MLE represents Maximum likelihood estimates of infection rates
Figure 4Proportion of infected pools of the eight . Because sites sampled are more than 100 km apart, populations are considered independent. * indicates significant differences in proportion of infected pools between both habitats. Lineages PV11 and PV12 were the most common while the others were relatively rare.
Figure 5Giemsa-stained sporozoite of . Note a prominent centrally located nucleus. (Scale bar = 5 μm).
Figure 6Bayesian phylogeny of the 8 lineages of . Names of the lineages and GenBank accession numbers of the sequences are given after the species names of parasites. Bayesian support are indicated above the branches while ML Bootstrap support, based on 100 replications are shown below the branches. The vector species in which the parasites were found (including parasites already known) is indicated under 'Vector Species.'