| Literature DB >> 26765951 |
Célestine M Atyame1,2, Pierrick Labbé3, Cyrille Lebon1,4, Mylène Weill3, Riccardo Moretti5, Francesca Marini5, Louis Clément Gouagna1,4, Maurizio Calvitti5, Pablo Tortosa1,2.
Abstract
The global expansion of Aedes albopictus together with the absence of vaccines for most of the arboviruses transmitted by this mosquito has stimulated the development of sterile-male strategies aiming at controlling disease transmission through the suppression of natural vector populations. In this context, two environmentally friendly control strategies, namely the Sterile Insect Technique (SIT) and the Wolbachia-based Incompatible Insect Technique (IIT) are currently being developed in several laboratories worldwide. So far however, there is a lack of comparative assessment of these strategies under the same controlled conditions. Here, we compared the mating capacities, i.e. insemination capacity, sterilization capacity and mating competitiveness of irradiated (35 Gy) and incompatible Ae. albopictus males at different ages and ratios under laboratory controlled conditions. Our data show that there was no significant difference in insemination capacity of irradiated and incompatible males, both male types showing lower capacities than untreated males at 1 day but recovering full capacity within 5 days following emergence. Regarding mating competitiveness trials, a global observed trend is that incompatible males tend to induce a lower hatching rate than irradiated males in cage controlled confrontations. More specifically, incompatible males were found more competitive than irradiated males in 5:1 ratio regardless of age, while irradiated males were only found more competitive than incompatible males in the 1:1 ratio at 10 days old. Overall, under the tested conditions, IIT seemed to be slightly more effective than SIT. However, considering that a single strategy will likely not be adapted to all environments, our data stimulates the need for comparative assessments of distinct strategies in up-scaled conditions in order to identify the most suitable and safe sterilizing technology to be implemented in a specific environmental setting and to identify the parameters requiring fine tuning in order to reach optimal release conditions.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26765951 PMCID: PMC4713058 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0146834
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Insemination capacity of irradiated and incompatible males caged with females for 24 h.
| Male | Age at release | Number of females | Percentage of inseminated females (N) | Percentage of filled spermathecae (N) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| LR | 1 day-old | 57 | 74% (42) | 26% (15) | 12% (7) | 58% (33) | 4% (2) |
| LRi | 1 day-old | 54 | 46% (25) | 54% (29) | 4% (2) | 43% (23) | 0% (0) |
| AR | 1 day-old | 56 | 34% (19) | 66% (36) | 21% (12) | 13% (7) | 0% (0) |
| LR | 5 day-old | 47 | 100% (47) | 0% (0) | 0% (0) | 89% (42) | 11% (5) |
| LRi | 5 day-old | 57 | 91% (52) | 9% (5) | 2% (1) | 86% (49) | 4% (2) |
| AR | 5 day-old | 54 | 91% (49) | 9% (5) | 9% (5) | 80% (43) | 2% (1) |
| LR | 10 day-old | 56 | 93% (52) | 7% (4) | 0% (0) | 88% (49) | 5% (3) |
| LRi | 10 day-old | 56 | 95% (53) | 5% (3) | 4% (2) | 89% (50) | 2% (1) |
| AR | 10 day-old | 52 | 90% (47) | 10% (5) | 6% (3) | 83% (43) | 2% (1) |
Three types of males (i.e. LR = wild type, LRi = wild type irradiated and ARwPLR = incompatible) aged of 1, 5 or 10 days were compared.
Sterilizing capacity of irradiated and incompatible males.
| Crosses | 1 day-old | 5 day-old | 10 day-old | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (males × females) | N. eggs | Hatching rate (95% CI) | N. eggs | Hatching rate (95% CI) | N. eggs | Hatching rate 95% CI | |
| Sterile | LRi × LR | 1772 | 0.061 (0.051–0.073) | 2600 | 0.046 (0.038–0.055) | 3243 | 0.081 (0.072–0.091) |
| AR | 1271 | 0 (-) | 3799 | 0 (-) | 2693 | 0 (-) | |
| Fertile | LR × LR | 2365 | 0.770 (0.752–0.787) | 2972 | 0.561 (0.543–0.579) | 2606 | 0.833 (0.818–0.847) |
Males (N = 20) were allowed to mate with females (N = 20) for 24 h. Three replications were performed for each type of cross and two series of eggs were collected. LR = wild type, LRi = wild type irradiated, ARwPLR = incompatible. The hatching rates are indicated with their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Note that the two batches were pooled as there was no significant difference (see text).
Mating competitiveness of irradiated (LRi) and incompatible (ARwPLR) Ae. albopictus males in cages containing either a 1:1 or a 5:1 ratio with respect to wild-type males (LR).
| Ratio | Male age | Crosses | Number of eggs | Number of hatched eggs | Hatching rate (95% CI) | Fried index C (95% CI) | Induced sterility (IS) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1:1 | 1-day-old | ♂LRi×♂LR×♀LR | 2329 | 1846 | 0.793 (0.775–0.809) | -0.031 (0.073–0.078) | -0.029 |
| ♂AR | 1907 | 960 | 0.503 (0.481–0.526) | 0.530 (0.154–0.181) | 0.346 | ||
| 5-day-old | ♂LRi×♂LR×♀LR | 2091 | 687 | 0.327 (0.309–0.349) | 0.824 (0.299–0.397) | 0.415 | |
| ♂AR | 3644 | 1188 | 0.326 (0.311–0.341) | 0.723 (0.251–0.311) | 0.419 | ||
| 10-day-old | ♂LRi×♂LR×♀LR | 3833 | 1456 | 0.380 (0.365–0.395) | 1.516 (0.369–0.514) | 0.544 | |
| ♂AR | 2028 | 1033 | 0.509 (0.488–0.531) | 0.635 (0.156–0.185) | 0.388 | ||
| 5:1 | 1-day-old | ♂LRi×♂LR×♀LR | 2444 | 1269 | 0.519 (0.499–0.539) | 0.109 (0.034–0.041) | 0.326 |
| ♂AR | 2664 | 989 | 0.371 (0.353–0.390) | 0.215 (0.051–0.063) | 0.518 | ||
| 5-day-old | ♂LRi×♂LR×♀LR | 3173 | 592 | 0.187 (0.173–0.201) | 0.533 (0.173–0.303) | 0.668 | |
| ♂AR | 4048 | 546 | 0.135 (0.125–0.146) | 0.633 (0.179–0.268) | 0.760 | ||
| 10-day-old | ♂LRi×♂LR×♀LR | 2413 | 1218 | 0.505 (0.485–0.525) | 0.155 (0.040–0.050) | 0.394 | |
| ♂AR | 2564 | 440 | 0.172 (0.158–0.187) | 0.770 (0.177–0.255) | 0.794 |
The hatching rates and the values of the Fried index’s (C) are indicated with their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).
Fig 1Wing size of males.
LR = wild type males, LRi = wild type irradiated males and ARwPLR = incompatible males. N = number of mosquitoes measured. a and b represent statistical group (LRT).