| Literature DB >> 29463241 |
Catharine Prussing1, Marta Moreno2, Marlon P Saavedra3, Sara A Bickersmith4, Dionicia Gamboa3,5, Freddy Alava6, Carl D Schlichting7, Kevin J Emerson8, Joseph M Vinetz2,3, Jan E Conn9,10.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In Loreto Department, Peru, a successful 2005-2010 malaria control programme (known as PAMAFRO) included massive distribution of long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs). Additional local distribution of LLINs occurred in individual villages, but not between 2012 and 2015. A 2011-2012 study of the primary regional malaria vector Anopheles darlingi detected a trend of increased exophagy compared with pre-PAMAFRO behaviour. For the present study, An. darlingi were collected in three villages in Loreto in 2013-2015 to test two hypotheses: (1) that between LLIN distributions, An. darlingi reverted to pre-intervention biting behaviour; and, (2) that there are separate sub-populations of An. darlingi in Loreto with distinct biting behaviour.Entities:
Keywords: Anopheles darlingi; Biting behaviour; LLINs; NextRAD genotyping; Peruvian Amazon; Population genetic structure
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29463241 PMCID: PMC5819687 DOI: 10.1186/s12936-018-2234-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Malar J ISSN: 1475-2875 Impact factor: 2.979
Fig. 1Field study localities in Loreto Department, Peru. Villages of Lupuna (LUP) and Cahuide (CAH) in the peri-Iquitos region, and Santa Emilia (SEM), which is more remote. Iquitos is marked by a star
Fig. 2Summary of Anopheles darlingi collected monthly, biting outside (exophagic) and inside (endophagic) from 2013 to 2015 in the Peruvian villages of Lupuna (LUP) and Cahuide (CAH), and in 2015 in Santa Emilia (SEM). The month of collection of each Plasmodium-infected An. darlingi is represented by an arrow, with the colour of the arrow indicating whether the mosquito was exophagic or endophagic and the texture indicating the species of Plasmodium. Specimens were not tested for Plasmodium in 2013. The months during which IRS was conducted in each village are indicated by black bars
Fig. 3Average proportion of Anopheles darlingi collected per hour, biting outside (exophagic) and inside (endophagic), in Lupuna (LUP) and Cahuide (CAH) in 2013–2015 and Santa Emilia (SEM) in 2015. Confidence intervals not shown (for clarity). The hour of collection of each Plasmodium-infected An. darlingi is represented by an arrow, with the colour of the arrow indicating whether the mosquito was exophagic or endophagic and the texture indicating the species of Plasmodium. Specimens were not tested for Plasmodium in 2013
Exophagic and endophagic Anopheles darlingi Plasmodium infection rate in Lupuna (LUP), Cahuide (CAH), and Santa Emilia (SEM), 2014–2015
| Locality | Year | Exophagic | Endophagic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | No inf | IR | N | No inf | IR | ||
| LUP | 2014 | 878 | 4 | 0.46 | 356 | 4 | 1.12 |
| 2015 | 481 | 2 | 0.42 | 293 | 2 | 0.68 | |
| CAH | 2014 | 510 | 6 | 1.18 | 231 | 2 | 0.87 |
| 2015 | 253 | 3 | 1.19 | 183 | 0 | 0.00 | |
| SEM | 2014 | 343 | 3 | 0.87 | 493 | 2 | 0.41 |
| 2015 | 361 | 1 | 0.28 | 179 | 1 | 0.56 | |
N Number tested for Plasmodium infection, No inf Number of An. darlingi infected with Plasmodium parasites, IR infection rate
Negative binomial regression of abundance of Anopheles darlingi, Cahuide and Lupuna, 2013–2015 rainy season (January–June)
| Variable |
|
| SE | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 3.24 | 25.42 | 0.14 | < 0.0001 |
| Exophagic/endophagic (reference = endophagic) | ||||
| Exophagic | 1.11 | 3.05 | 0.11 | < 0.0001 |
| Year (reference = 2013) | ||||
| 2014 | − 1.30 | 0.27 | 0.20 | < 0.0001 |
| 2015 | − 1.45 | 0.24 | 0.20 | < 0.0001 |
| Time period (reference = 18.00–21.00) | ||||
| 21.00–00.00 | − 0.11 | 0.90 | 0.16 | 0.4784 |
| 00.00–03.00 | − 0.56 | 0.57 | 0.16 | 0.0004 |
| 03.00–06.00 | − 0.93 | 0.39 | 0.16 | < 0.0001 |
| Village (reference = Cahuide) | ||||
| Lupuna | − 0.41 | 0.66 | 0.11 | 0.0002 |
| Year × exophagic/endophagic | ||||
| 2014 Exophagic | − 0.20 | 0.82 | 0.16 | 0.2241 |
| 2015 Exophagic | − 0.67 | 0.51 | 0.17 | < 0.0001 |
| Year × village | ||||
| 2014 Lupuna | 0.84 | 2.31 | 0.16 | < 0.0001 |
| 2015 Lupuna | 0.97 | 2.62 | 0.17 | < 0.0001 |
| Year × time period | ||||
| 2014 21.00–00.00 | − 0.58 | 0.56 | 0.23 | 0.0115 |
| 2015 21.00–00.00 | − 0.46 | 0.63 | 0.23 | 0.0451 |
| 2014 00.00–03.00 | − 0.13 | 0.88 | 0.23 | 0.5769 |
| 2015 00.00–03.00 | − 0.03 | 0.97 | 0.23 | 0.9116 |
| 2014 03.00–06.00 | 0.25 | 1.28 | 0.23 | 0.2838 |
| 2015 03.00–06.00 | − 0.11 | 0.89 | 0.24 | 0.6294 |
β Regression coefficient, e Exponentiated regression coefficient, SE Standard error
Fig. 4Ratio of Anopheles darlingi biting outside (exophagic) to inside (endophagic) per year, aggregated over the rainy season (January–June) in Cahuide (CAH) and Lupuna (LUP), 2013–2015
Fig. 5Results of STRUCTURE and PCA of 1021-locus SNP dataset, comparing endophagic and exophagic Anopheles darlingi. a STRUCTURE results depicting three inferred genetic clusters. Although the proportion of membership in each cluster varies across individual An. darlingi, all individuals have non-zero membership in all three clusters, indicating admixture and no significant structuring. b PCA, with colours reflecting endophagic vs exophagic individuals