| Literature DB >> 20553597 |
Annabel F V Howard1, Constantianus J M Koenraadt, Marit Farenhorst, Bart G J Knols, Willem Takken.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Entomopathogenic fungi are being investigated as a new mosquito control tool because insecticide resistance is preventing successful mosquito control in many countries, and new methods are required that can target insecticide-resistant malaria vectors. Although laboratory studies have previously examined the effects of entomopathogenic fungi against adult mosquitoes, most application methods used cannot be readily deployed in the field. Because the fungi are biological organisms it is important to test potential field application methods that will not adversely affect them. The two objectives of this study were to investigate any differences in fungal susceptibility between an insecticide-resistant and insecticide-susceptible strain of Anopheles gambiae sensu stricto, and to test a potential field application method with respect to the viability and virulence of two fungal speciesEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20553597 PMCID: PMC2898789 DOI: 10.1186/1475-2875-9-168
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Malar J ISSN: 1475-2875 Impact factor: 2.979
Different formulation/substrate application methods used to infect adult malaria vector mosquitoes in previous studies.
| Fungus | Formulation | Substrate | Mosquito species | Lab or field | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dry conidia | Laboratory | [ | |||
| Dry conidia | Agar plate | Laboratory | [ | ||
| Dry conidia | Plastic tube | Laboratory | [ | ||
| Dry conidia | Tissue paper | Laboratory | [ | ||
| Ondina oil | Cardboard | Laboratory | [ | ||
| Ondina oil | Paper and netting | Laboratory | [ | ||
| Ondina oil/ShellSol T | Cage mesh | Laboratory | [ | ||
| Ondina oil/ShellSol T | Cardboard pot | Laboratory | [ | ||
| Ondina oil/ShellSol T | Direct application | Laboratory | [ | ||
| ShellSol T | Cardboard | Laboratory | [ | ||
| ShellSol T | Proofing paper | Laboratory | [ | ||
| Coconut oil | Filter paper | Laboratory | [ | ||
| Dry conidia | Laboratory | [ | |||
| Dry conidia | Agar plate | Laboratory | [ | ||
| Dry conidia | Plastic tube | Laboratory | [ | ||
| Enerpar oil | Proofing paper | Laboratory | [ | ||
| Enerpar/Ondina oil | Black cotton cloth | Field | [ | ||
| Ondina oil | Paper and netting | Laboratory | [ | ||
| Ondina oil | Cardboard | Laboratory | [ | ||
| Ondina oil | Clay pot | Laboratory | [ | ||
| Ondina oil/ShellSol T | Cage mesh | Laboratory | [ | ||
| Ondina oil/ShellSol T | Cardboard pot | Laboratory | [ | ||
| ShellSol T | Cardboard | Laboratory | [ | ||
| ShellSol T | Proofing paper | Laboratory | [ | ||
| Sunflower oil | Cotton netting | Laboratory | [ | ||
| Sunflower oil | Filter paper | Laboratory | [ | ||
| Vegetable oil | Black cotton sheets | Field | [ | ||
| Vegetable oil | Mud wall | Field | [ | ||
Only studies using B. bassiana and/or M. anisopliae were included in this table
Figure 1Effect of entomopathogenic fungal infection on . Mean cumulative proportional survival (±SEM) of Anopheles gambiae s.s. SKK (dashed red) and An. gambiae s.s. VKPER (solid black) mosquitoes after exposure to Metarhizium anisopliae-treated (filled squares), Beauveria bassiana-treated (filled triangles) or control (open circles) netting 2 (top) or 7 (bottom) days after net treatment.
Survival analysis of two strains of Anopheles gambiae s.s. exposed to two species of entomopathogenic fungi.
| Days after fungal treatment | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SKK | 3.18 (2.31, 4.37) | <0.0001 | 2.60 (1.94, 3.48) | <0.0001 | |
| VKPER | 17.10 (9.68, 30.20) | <0.0001 | 29.94 (12.72, 70.46) | <0.0001 | |
| SKK | 11.01 (7.43, 16.32) | <0.0001 | 7.38 (5.21, 10.45) | <0.0001 | |
| VKPER | 32.25 (17.63, 59.02) | <0.0001 | 43.52 (18.02, 105. 11) | <0.0001 | |
Data show Cox Regression Hazard Ratio outcomes (95% CI)
Statistical p-values are relative to the relevant control
SKK = the insecticide-susceptible An. gambiae s.s. SKK strain
VKPER = the insecticide-resistant An. gambiae s.s. VKPER strain