Literature DB >> 20382098

Species identification of plant tissues from the gut of An. sergentii by DNA analysis.

Amy Junnila1, Gunter C Müller, Yosef Schlein.   

Abstract

There are three commonly used assays to identify plant material in insect guts: the cold anthrone test for fructose, the cellulose staining test for visualizing plant tissue and gas chromatography for seeking unique sugar content profiles. Though sugar and cellulose tests can distinguish between the general sources of sugar meal (nectar versus tissue), they cannot identify the species of plant sources. Even gas chromatography profiles can be problematic; there are reported instances of intra-specific variation as well as inter-specific and intergeneric variation that can mar results. Here, we explore the potential for DNA analysis to help resolve this issue. First, Anopheles sergentii were exposed to branches of two species of highly attractive flowering bushes in the laboratory and the great majority ( approximately 90-98%) were positive for sugar from nectar while very few were positive for cellulose ( approximately 0.5-8%) and DNA (6-19%). Moreover, laboratory An. sergentii showed opposing preferences, tending to obtain sugar from nectar of one plant (Tamarix nilotica) but to feed more on tissue from the other (Ochradenus baccatus). An. sergentii are exposed to a wide variety of plants in their natural desert habitats and in the absence of flowers in the dry season, they resort to feeding specifically on tissues of a few plants. According to DNA analysis the favorite plants were Suaeda asphaltica, Malva nicaeensis and Conyza dioscoridis, which are succulents that account for less than 1% of vegetation in the area. 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20382098     DOI: 10.1016/j.actatropica.2010.04.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Trop        ISSN: 0001-706X            Impact factor:   3.112


  10 in total

1.  Effects of plant-community composition on the vectorial capacity and fitness of the malaria mosquito Anopheles gambiae.

Authors:  Christopher M Stone; Bryan T Jackson; Woodbridge A Foster
Journal:  Am J Trop Med Hyg       Date:  2012-08-27       Impact factor: 2.345

2.  Detecting ingested plant DNA in soil-living insect larvae.

Authors:  Karin Staudacher; Corinna Wallinger; Nikolaus Schallhart; Michael Traugott
Journal:  Soil Biol Biochem       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 7.609

3.  Insights from the genome annotation of Elizabethkingia anophelis from the malaria vector Anopheles gambiae.

Authors:  Phanidhar Kukutla; Bo G Lindberg; Dong Pei; Melanie Rayl; Wanqin Yu; Matthew Steritz; Ingrid Faye; Jiannong Xu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-05-19       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  The specific host plant DNA detection suggests a potential migration of Apolygus lucorum from cotton to mungbean fields.

Authors:  Qian Wang; Wei-Fang Bao; Fan Yang; Bin Xu; Yi-Zhong Yang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-06-06       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Host plant forensics and olfactory-based detection in Afro-tropical mosquito disease vectors.

Authors:  Vincent O Nyasembe; David P Tchouassi; Christian W W Pirk; Catherine L Sole; Baldwyn Torto
Journal:  PLoS Negl Trop Dis       Date:  2018-02-20

6.  Sugar prevalence in Aedes albopictus differs by habitat, sex and time of day on Masig Island, Torres Strait, Australia.

Authors:  T Swan; E Ritmejerytė; B Sebayang; R Jones; G Devine; M Graham; F A Zich; K M Staunton; T L Russell; T R Burkot
Journal:  Parasit Vectors       Date:  2021-10-09       Impact factor: 3.876

7.  Comparative assessment of diverse strategies for malaria vector population control based on measured rates at which mosquitoes utilize targeted resource subsets.

Authors:  Gerry F Killeen; Samson S Kiware; Aklilu Seyoum; John E Gimnig; George F Corliss; Jennifer Stevenson; Christopher J Drakeley; Nakul Chitnis
Journal:  Malar J       Date:  2014-08-28       Impact factor: 2.979

8.  The invasive shrub Prosopis juliflora enhances the malaria parasite transmission capacity of Anopheles mosquitoes: a habitat manipulation experiment.

Authors:  Gunter C Muller; Amy Junnila; Mohamad M Traore; Sekou F Traore; Seydou Doumbia; Fatoumata Sissoko; Seydou M Dembele; Yosef Schlein; Kristopher L Arheart; Edita E Revay; Vasiliy D Kravchenko; Arne Witt; John C Beier
Journal:  Malar J       Date:  2017-07-05       Impact factor: 2.979

9.  Sugar feeding patterns of New York Aedes albopictus mosquitoes are affected by saturation deficit, flowers, and host seeking.

Authors:  Kara Fikrig; Sonile Peck; Peter Deckerman; Sharon Dang; Kimberly St Fleur; Henry Goldsmith; Sophia Qu; Hannah Rosenthal; Laura C Harrington
Journal:  PLoS Negl Trop Dis       Date:  2020-10-26

10.  Sugar Feeding Patterns for Aedes aegypti and Culex quinquefasciatus (Diptera: Culicidae) Mosquitoes in South Texas.

Authors:  Mark F Olson; Selene Garcia-Luna; Jose G Juarez; Estelle Martin; Laura C Harrington; Micky D Eubanks; Ismael E Badillo-Vargas; Gabriel L Hamer
Journal:  J Med Entomol       Date:  2020-07-04       Impact factor: 2.435

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.