| Literature DB >> 31443645 |
Joel O Odero1,2, Ulrike Fillinger3, Emily J Rippon4, Daniel K Masiga3, David Weetman4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Strategies for combatting residual malaria by targeting vectors outdoors are gaining importance as the limitations of primary indoor interventions are reached. Strategies to target ovipositing females or her offspring are broadly applicable because all mosquitoes require aquatic habitats for immature development irrespective of their biting or resting preferences. Oviposition site selection by gravid females is frequently studied by counting early instar larvae in habitats; an approach which is valid only if the number of larvae correlates with the number of females laying eggs. This hypothesis was tested against the alternative, that a higher abundance of larvae results from improved survival of a similar or fewer number of families.Entities:
Keywords: Anopheles arabiensis; Auto-dissemination; Larval control; Microsatellites; Sibship-reconstruction; Skip-oviposition
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31443645 PMCID: PMC6708163 DOI: 10.1186/s12936-019-2917-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Malar J ISSN: 1475-2875 Impact factor: 2.979
Details of microsatellite primer sequences used for the genotyping
| Plex | Marker (label) | Concentration (μM) | Chromosome | Genetic location | Forward sequence (5′–3′) | Reverse sequence (5′–3′) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CDC675-FAM [ | 1.75 | 2L | 24C | TCAAACTCGAACTCCTCAAC | TTTCCGTCGATAGTTTTCTG |
| CDC22-FAM [ | 1.75 | 2L | 22D | GGGCAAAGAGAAAGCAA | AGCTGTGTGGCAGGTTT | |
| CDC46-NED [ | 2.5 | 3L | 45C | GTGGTTGACCGATTTGTAAG | ATTTATTCACTCGCCAAGAA | |
| 2 | CDC18-FAM [ | 1.9 | 2R | 18C | CAGGAAGCGATGTGAAAGT | GGAGTGTTGTCGTTCATCTT |
| CDC28C-FAM [ | 2.3 | 2L | 28C | TGTGCCGGTTGAGAGAGA | GGGCGAGAACATTAACAA | |
| Ag2:79-NED [ | 1.9 | 2R | 11B | CGGGTAGCGCTAGAAGTATG | AGAGAAATGTGCCGAAGGGG | |
| 2RiS5-PET [ | 1.9 | 2R | 12C | TTCTCGAAAGACTGCTGCTG | ATTGGATCGAAAACGGTCTG | |
| 3 | CDC40B-FAM [ | 1.9 | 3L | 40B | ATGCATGCAAATCGGTAT | TATCGAGGCAAATCGGTA |
| CDC44-VIC [ | 2.3 | 3L | 44B | ATGCATGCAAATCGGTAT | TATCGAGGCAAATCGGTA | |
| CDC32-NED [ | 1.9 | 3R | 32A | GTTTGCTTGCTTGTTGTTGT | GTGCTCAACGCCTACAAAT | |
| CDC34-PET [ | 1.9 | 3R | 34B | AAAACTTTTCCCTCCCATTC | AAGTGCAGCAATTGACGAG | |
| 4 | Ag3:128-FAM [ | 1.9 | 3R | 29C | CGGGACGGCTAGATAAAGCG | CCGGGCGACATAACCCACCC |
| Ag2:143-VIC [ | 1.5 | 2L | 25D | CGTACGAGTGAGTGAGTTGG | CAAAAATAGCATCACGGCCG | |
| Ag2:46-NED [ | 2.7 | 2R | 7A | CGCCCATAGACAACGAAAGG | TGTACAGCTGCAGAACGAGC | |
| Ag3:249-NED [ | 1.9 | 3R | 30B | ATGTTCCGCACTTCCGACAC | GCGAGCTACAACAATGGAGC |
The markers were grouped into four PCR multiplexes
Fig. 1Flowchart of the experimental design and analysis methods used in the study
The number of mosquito families estimated using BAPS and COLONY in the artificial ponds
| POND | N | n | BAPS | COLONY |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 42 | 37 | 6 | 13 |
| C | 5 | 4 | 1 | 1 |
| D | 40 | 40 | 5 | 6 |
| E | 8 | 6 | 5 | 5 |
| F | 10 | 10 | 3 | 9 |
| G | 17 | 14 | 5 | 6 |
| H | 33 | 26 | 2 | 7 |
| I | 5 | 4 | 3 | 3 |
| J | 59 | 44 | 6 | 9 |
| K | 41 | 36 | 5 | 11 |
| L | 52 | 23 | 3 | 4 |
| M | 62 | 60 | 6 | 10 |
| N | 4 | 4 | 2 | 2 |
| O | 39 | 34 | 2 | 5 |
| P | 13 | 9 | 2 | 4 |
| Q | 16 | 16 | 4 | 5 |
| R | 10 | 8 | 5 | 6 |
| T | 10 | 10 | 3 | 5 |
N is the total number of An. arabiensis larvae from each pond, and n is the number successfully genotyped
Fig. 2Relationship between mosquito family clusters inferred using COLONY and BAPS with the total number of larvae from each artificial pond habitat
Fig. 3Pond setup and mosquito family distribution across the 18 ponds as inferred using BAPS. The colours represent families from a single mother
Fig. 4Pond setup and mosquito family distribution across the 18 ponds as inferred using COLONY. The colours represent families from a single mother with only families with two or more offspring visualized (n = 60)
The number of mosquito families estimated using BAPS and COLONY in the natural habitats
| Habitat | Habitat size (M) | N | n | BAPS | COLONY | Mean family size | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BAPS | COLONY | ||||||
| P1 | 0.6 | 28 | 18 | 9 | 13 | 2.0 | 1.4 |
| P5 | 0.3 | 36 | 22 | 13 | 20 | 1.7 | 1.1 |
| P6 | 1.4 | 37 | 25 | 14 | 19 | 1.8 | 1.3 |
| P7 | 1.3 | 66 | 10 | 6 | 9 | 1.7 | 1.1 |
| P8 | 6.9 | 191 | 97 | 21 | 75 | 4.6 | 1.3 |
| P9 | 2.6 | 55 | 51 | 17 | 37 | 3.0 | 1.4 |
| D1 | 11.0 | 33 | 30 | 16 | 25 | 1.9 | 1.2 |
| D2 | 5.8 | 109 | 60 | 19 | 42 | 3.2 | 1.4 |
| D3 | 1.9 | 41 | 15 | 9 | 12 | 1.7 | 1.3 |
| D9 | 3.7 | 33 | 24 | 14 | 18 | 1.7 | 1.3 |
N is the total number of An. arabiensis larvae from each habitat, and n is the number successfully genotyped. In the habitat column, prefix P is puddle habitats while D is drainage ditches
Fig. 5A regression curve comparing relationship between mosquito families inferred using COLONY and BAPS with the total number of larvae from natural habitats