| Literature DB >> 24460952 |
Theresia E Nkya, Idir Akhouayri, Rodolphe Poupardin, Bernard Batengana, Franklin Mosha, Stephen Magesa, William Kisinza, Jean-Philippe David1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Resistance of mosquitoes to insecticides is a growing concern in Africa. Since only a few insecticides are used for public health and limited development of new molecules is expected in the next decade, maintaining the efficacy of control programmes mostly relies on resistance management strategies. Developing such strategies requires a deep understanding of factors influencing resistance together with characterizing the mechanisms involved. Among factors likely to influence insecticide resistance in mosquitoes, agriculture and urbanization have been implicated but rarely studied in detail. The present study aimed at comparing insecticide resistance levels and associated mechanisms across multiple Anopheles gambiae sensu lato populations from different environments.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24460952 PMCID: PMC3913622 DOI: 10.1186/1475-2875-13-28
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Malar J ISSN: 1475-2875 Impact factor: 2.979
Figure 1Geographical location of sampled populations. Populations are indicated by stars. Urbanization level is indicated by light (medium) and dark (high) grey. Intense agriculture area is shown by cross-hatching. District and city names are indicated.
Mosquito species distribution
| | | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lab strains | KIS | 50 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 50 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 |
| | IFA | 50 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 50 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
| Urban | ILA | 50 | 6.0 | 70 | 24 | 50 | 50 | 30 | 20 | 28 | 50 |
| | TEM | 50 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 45 | 0 | 93.3 | 6.7 | 0 | 96.7 |
| | KIN | 50 | 0 | 89.5 | 10 | 47 | 17 | 32 | 6.3 | 8.5 | 60.8 |
| Non-polluted | ZEN | 50 | 0 | 94 | 6 | 50 | 0 | 98 | 2 | 0 | 96 |
| | KIL | 49 | 6.1 | 71.4 | 22.4 | 49 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 3.5 | 85.7 |
| | MUH | 50 | 0 | 96 | 4 | 50 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 98 |
| Agriculture | RUN | 50 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 50 | 0 | 98 | 2 | 0 | 99 |
| | KIF | 50 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 50 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 100 |
| KAW | 50 | 0 | 98 | 2 | 49 | 0 | 92 | 8 | 0 | 95 | |
An. gamb: Anopheles gambiae senus stricto.
An. Arab: Anopheles arabiensis.
Resistance of larvae to deltamethrin, DDT and bendiocarb
| Lab strains | KIS | 6.8 (2.6-10.5) | 1 | 407.6 (284.7-786.8) | 1 | 29.1 (20.5-41.6) | 1 |
| | IFA | 22.9 (21.2-24.8) | 3.8 (2.3-8.1) | 135.2 (115.9-155.1) | 0.3 (0.2-0.4) | 29.6 (23.7-36.5) | 1.0 (0.9-1.2) |
| Urban | ILA | 49.3 (39.5-60.3) | 7.3 (5.7-15.1) | 738.0 (582.2-1011.0) | 73.5 (50.4-132.0) | ||
| | TEM | 104.6 (70.0-213.0) | 832.5 (654.1-1154.0) | 42.9 (31.8-61.5) | |||
| | KIN | 67.7 (50.4-101.3) | 722.8 (594.0-922.7) | 82.5 (60.1-137.2) | |||
| Non-polluted | ZEN | 27.0 (17.6-36.6) | 4.0 (3.4-6.7) | 655.9 (518.9-886.3) | 1.6 (1.0-1.8) | 43.6 (27.4-83.9) | |
| | KIL | 27.0 (16.9-38.8) | 4.0 (3.7-6.4) | 773.5 (651.7-930.6) | 58.9 (39.0-111.4) | ||
| | MUH | 30.4 (21.6-39.5) | 4.5 (3.7-8.2) | 633.8 (503.6-847.4) | 1.6 (1.0-1.8) | 63.0 (41.0-125.6) | |
| Agriculture | RUN | 34.6 (26.9-45.0) | 5.1 (4.3-10.3) | 175.6 (147.9-203.4) | 0.4 (0.3-0.5) | 37.5 (29.8-47.1) | 1.3 (1.1-1.5) |
| | KIK | 103.4 (83.5-136.8) | 172.0 (132.1-213.2) | 0.4 (0.3-0.5) | 103.4 (83.5-136.8) | ||
| KAW | 30.0 (18.2-49.8) | 4.4 (4.3-6.9) | 164.6 (132.3-197.6) | 0.4 (0.2-0.5) | 34.8 (26.9-45.6) | 1.2 (1.1-1.3) | |
LC50: lethal concentration for 50% of individuals (μg/L). RR50: resistance ratio based on LC50 values. RR50 values with CI95 intervals not overlapping those of both susceptible strains are shown in bold. Bioassays were performed on Anopheles gambiae sensu lato larvae.
Resistance of adults to deltamethrin, DDT and bendiocarb
| % | % | % | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lab strain | KIS | 5.7 (5.0-6.2) | 1.0 | 100 (0.0) | 24.2 (20.8-27.8) | 1.0 | 100 (0.0) | 95 (2.3) |
| | IFA | 12.4 (11.4-13.5) | 2.2 (2.1-2.3) | 100 (0.0) | 15.7 (6.7-24.9) | 0.6 (0.3-0.9) | 100 (0.0) | 95 (1.7) |
| Urban | ILA | 19.7 (17.6-21.7) | 100 (0.0) | 34.7 (32.6-36.8) | 94.5 (2.2) | |||
| | TEM | 22.5 (19.6-25.8) | 98 (1.2) | 52.3 (26.0-32.2 | 98 (1.2) | 54 (1.2) | ||
| | KIN | 10.0 (8.4-11.6) | 1.8 (1.7-1.8) | 100 (0.0) | 27.8 (25.8-30.1) | 95 (3.0) | ||
| Non-polluted | ZEN | 8.0 (5.8-10.1) | 1.4 (1.2-1.6) | 100 (0.0) | 28.6 (26.7-30.6) | 95 (3.2) | ||
| | KIL | 7.7 (5.8-9.6) | 1.4 (1.1-1.5) | 100 (0.0) | 26.7 (24.7-28.6) | 1.1 (1.0-1.2) | 96 (2.3) | 55 (7.0) |
| | MUH | 8.9 (6.9-10.8) | 1.6 (1.4-1.7) | 100 (0.0) | 26.5 (24.5-28.6) | 1.1 (1.0-1.2) | 95 (3.5) | 63 (6.6) |
| Agriculture | RUN | 32.8 (30.6-34.9) | 86 (4.8) | 22.1 (19.3-24.7) | 0.9 (0.9-0.9) | 100 (0.0) | 52 (4.3) | |
| | KIK | 32.7 (30.8-34.6) | 84 (4.6) | 22.1 (21.1-23.0) | 0.9 (0.8-1.1) | 100 (0.0) | 54 (7.4) | |
| KAW | 30.2 (28.5-32.0) | 87 (5.3) | 22.9 (21.3-24.3) | 0.9 (0.9-1.0) | 100 (0.0) | 60 (2.8) | ||
KDT50: Knock down time for 50% of individuals (min). RR50: resistance ratio based on KDT50 values. RR50 values with CI95 intervals not overlapping those of both susceptible strains are shown in bold. For bendiocarb, % mortality after 10 min exposure is indicated with populations showing less than 50% mortality in bold. Bioassays were performed on Anopheles gambiae sensu lato adults.
L1014S kdr mutation frequencies
| | | | LL | LS | SS | S frequency (%) | N |
| Urban | ILA | 3 | 3 | 22 | 84 | 28 | |
| | | 45 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 45 | |
| | TEM | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| | | 92 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 92 | |
| | KIN | 3 | 3 | 5 | 59 | 11 | |
| | | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 79 | |
| Non-polluted | ZEN | 91 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 91 | |
| | KIL | 79 | 1 | 0 | 0.6 | 79 | |
| | MUH | 92 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 92 | |
| Agriculture | RUN | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | |
| | KIK | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | |
| KAW | 95 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 95 | ||
LL; fully susceptible individuals, LS; heterozygote resistance individuals,
SS; homozygote resistance individuals.
Figure 2Genes differentially transcribed in any area. Clustering analysis was performed on the 416 transcripts showing a significant differential expression in any area compared to the reference strain Ifakara (P ≤ 0.001 and FC ≥ 3). Clustering of transcripts and conditions were based on differences between mean Log2 ratios in each area versus reference using Euclidean distance and complete linkage algorithm. Colour scale (green to red) indicates fold change versus reference strain. The number of transcripts represented in each cluster is shown within bracket. Gene Ontology (GO) term enrichment analyses were performed for each main cluster with all terms belonging to the category ‘molecular function’. GO terms showing an adjusted P value ≤ 0.05 were considered significantly enriched compared to all detected transcripts (hypergeometric test followed by Benjamini and Hockberg multiple testing correction). Colour scale (white to orange) indicates enrichment significance. Few non-significant GO terms are displayed for clarity.
Figure 3Candidate genes differentially transcribed in any area. Clustering analysis was performed on the 27 transcripts showing a significant differential expression in any area and potentially involved in insecticide resistance. Clustering of transcripts was based on differences between mean Log2 ratios in each area versus reference using Euclidean distance and complete linkage algorithm. Colour scale (green to red) indicates fold change versus reference strain. Stars indicate a significant differential transcription compared to the susceptible reference strain Ifakara (P ≤ 0.001 and FC ≥ 3).
Figure 4Genes with expression profiles associated with deltamethrin resistance. Clustering analysis was performed on the 46 transcripts showing a correlation between their expression profile and deltamethrin resistance (RR50) and kdr mutation frequency. Clustering of transcripts was based on differences between mean Log2 ratios in each population versus reference using Euclidean distance and complete linkage algorithm. Colour scale (green to red) indicates fold change versus reference strain. + and - indicate a positive (r > 0.85) or negative (r < -0.85) correlation with deltamethrin resistance or kdr mutation frequency.