| Literature DB >> 27827429 |
Amélie Vantaux1,2, Thierry Lefèvre1,2, Anna Cohuet1,2, Kounbobr Roch Dabiré2,3, Benjamin Roche4, Olivier Roux1,2.
Abstract
Exposure to stress during an insect's larval development can have carry-over effects on adult life history traits and susceptibility to pathogens. We investigated the effects of larval nutritional stress for the first time using field mosquito vectors and malaria parasites. In contrast to previous studies, we show that larval nutritional stress may affect human to mosquito transmission antagonistically: nutritionally deprived larvae showed lower parasite prevalence for only one gametocyte carrier; they also had lower fecundity. However, they had greater survival rates that were even higher when infected. When combining these opposing effects into epidemiological models, we show that larval nutritional stress induced a decrease in malaria transmission at low mosquito densities and an increase in transmission at high mosquito densities, whereas transmission by mosquitoes from well-fed larvae was stable. Our work underscores the importance of including environmental stressors towards understanding host-parasite dynamics to improve disease transmission models and control.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27827429 PMCID: PMC5101500 DOI: 10.1038/srep36778
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Effect of larval diet (high- or low-food treatment) and female infection status on (a) the proportion of gravid females (± 95% CI) and (b) on the mean number of eggs (±se) in Anopheles coluzzii mosquitoes. Numbers in bars indicate sample size. Different letters indicate significant differences between infection status (Tukey’s post-hoc tests, P < 0.05). Asterisks indicate significant differences between larval diet (P < 0.05).
Figure 2Effect of larval diet (high- or low-food treatment) and infection status on Anopheles coluzzii survival rates (larval diet: X21 = 5.08, P = 0.02; infection status: X22 = 18.9, P < 0.0001; infection status * larval diet: χ2 = 7.9, P = 0.02).
Figure 3Effect of larval diet (high- or low-food treatment) and gametocyte carrier on parasite prevalence (proportion of infected females ± 95% CI).
Numbers in bars indicate sample size. Asterisks indicate significant differences between larval diet (P < 0.05).
Figure 4Effect of larval diet (high- or low-food treatment) on the theoretically expected size of the outbreak in a human population over one season (i.e. the percentage of individuals that were infected at the end of the season) after one infectious human is introduced into the population at different adult mosquito densities (ratio = adult mosquito/human densities; low: r = 1; medium: r = 10 and high: r = 100).
Larval food quantity (mg/larva/day).
| Larval stage | High food | Low food |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.075 | 0.05 |
| 2 | 0.1 | 0.05 |
| 3 | 0.2 | 0.1 |
| 4 | 0.3 | 0.15 |