| Literature DB >> 31500662 |
Hanano Yamada1,2, Hamidou Maiga3, Jose Juarez3, Danilo De Oliveira Carvalho3, Wadaka Mamai3, Adel Ali3, Nanwintoum Severin Bimbile-Somda3, Andrew Gordon Parker3, Dongjing Zhang4, Jeremy Bouyer3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The sterile insect technique (SIT) for use against mosquitoes consists of several steps including the production of the target species in large numbers, the separation of males and females, the sterilization of the males, and the packing, transport and release of the sterile males at the target site. The sterility of the males is the basis of the technique; for this, efficient and standardized irradiation methods are needed to ensure that the required level of sterility is reliably and reproducibly achieved. While several reports have found that certain biological factors, handling methods and varying irradiation procedures can alter the level of induced sterility in insects, few studies exist in which the methodologies are adequately described and discussed for the reproductive sterilization of mosquitoes. Numerous irradiation studies on mosquito pupae have resulted in varying levels of sterility. Therefore, we initiated a series of small-scale experiments to first investigate variable parameters that may influence dose-response in mosquito pupae, and secondly, identify those factors that potentially have a significantly large effect and need further attention.Entities:
Keywords: Aedes aegypti; Aedes albopictus; Anopheles arabiensis; Gammacell; Hypoxia; Induced sterility; Irradiation; SIT
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31500662 PMCID: PMC6734225 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-019-3698-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Fig. 1a A Gammacell 220 irradiation chamber containing a mosquito pupae holding canister consisting of stacked Petri dishes (pupae and dosimeters are in a central position). b Dose distribution map: a vertical section dose map of a GC220, with doses varying from 75 to 135% of the center dose (DUR = 1.8)
Fig. 2Comparison of radiosensitivity Ae. aegypti strains from different geographical origins. No difference was observed following irradiation at 40 Gy. The box plot shows the median and upper and lower quartiles
Fig. 3Comparison of radiosensitivity Ae. albopictus strains from different geographical origins. No difference was observed following irradiation at 30 Gy. The boxplot shows the median and upper and lower quartiles
Induced sterility in five varying age groups of Ae. aegypti pupae following irradiation at 40 Gy
| Control | Pupal age | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 45–50 h | 42–45 h | 26–42 h | 20–24 h | 10–24 h | ||
| No. of reps | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Gy | 0 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 |
|
| 1942 | 507 | 799 | 1203 | 793 | 1262 |
| avg (HR) | 0.80 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.01 |
| SE | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| IS | 0.00a | 93.45b | 95.37c | 96.44cd | 96.91d | 98.93e |
Abbreviations: n, total no. of eggs; avg HR, average hatch rate; reps, repetitions; SE, standard error; IS, induced sterility
Note: Values followed by different superscript letters are significantly different (P < 0.05)
Mean longevity and mean number of days required for the population to be reduced to 50 or 0% of the starting population size (P threshold value is 0.0033 when comparing all groups)
| Pupal age | Days to population reduction | Mean longevity (days) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50% | 90% | 100% | (mean ± SE) | |
| Control | 23.0 | 32.6 | 38.0 | 19.57 ± 3.0a |
| 45–50 h | 27.3 | 36.5 | 38.0 | 22.26 ± 3.3a |
| 42–45 h | 25.5 | 34.5 | 38.0 | 25.40 ± 1.8a |
| 26–42 h | 23.3 | 37.2 | 38.0 | 22.56 ± 2.3a |
| 20–24 h | 19.0 | 34.8 | 38.0 | 21.29 ± 2.9a |
| 10–24 h | 11.0 | 24.4 | 28.0 | 12.81 ± 1.9b* |
Note: Values followed by different superscript letters are significantly different from each other [log-rank (Mantel-Cox) test *P < 0.0033]
Fig. 4Effects of pupal size on dose-response in Ae. aegypti male pupae. No difference was observed following irradiation at 40 Gy. The boxplot shows the median and upper and lower quartiles
Fig. 5Effects of sample preparation and ambient conditions during exposure. A significant difference was detected between the dry and wet treatments (P < 0.005). The box plot shows the median and upper and lower quartiles. Dots indicate outlying data points
Induced sterility in adults following irradiation at pupal stage in either normoxic or hypoxic conditions, compared to unirradiated controls
| Strain | Treatment | No. of true reps (tech. reps) | Dose (Gy) | HR ± SD (%) | IS (%) | SE (IS) | SD (IS) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Control | 4 (3) | 0 | 85.41 ± 0.09 | 0.00a | 0.0253 | na |
| Normoxia | 4 (3) | 70 | 1.49 ± 0.01 | 98.25b | 0.0021 | 0.04 | |
| Hypoxia | 4 (3) | 70 | 5.67 ± 0.01 | 93.35c | 0.0043 | 0.04 | |
|
| Control | 4 (3) | 0 | 66.59 ± 5.56 | 0.00a | 2.7778 | na |
| Normoxia | 4 (3) | 35 | 14.32 ± 9.12 | 78.49b | 4.5574 | 0.04 | |
| Hypoxia | 4 (3) | 35 | 32.30 ± 5.09 | 51.49c | 2.5438 | 0.06 | |
|
| Control | 3 (3) | 0 | 70.32 ± 2.38 | 0.00a | 0.8131 | na |
| Normoxia | 3 (3) | 95 | 2.29 ± 0.59 | 96.74b | 0.3415 | 0.01 | |
| Hypoxia | 3 (3) | 95 | 6.76 ± 1.41 | 90.39c | 1.3763 | 0.01 |
Note: Values followed by different superscript letters are significantly different P < 0.0001. Abbreviations: HR, hatch rate; IS, induced sterility; reps, repetitions; SD, standard deviation; SE, standard error; na, not applicable