| Literature DB >> 32264900 |
Angela Hughes1, Geraldine M Foster1, Amy Guy1, Agnes Matope1, Mayumi Abe1, David Towers2, Philip J McCall3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) are losing efficacy against pyrethroid-resistant malaria vector populations throughout Africa. Safeguarding bed net efficacy, vital for effective malaria control, requires greater knowledge of mosquito-ITN interactions and how this impacts on the mosquito.Entities:
Keywords: Anopheles; Bednet; Behaviour; Bioassay; Control; ITN; Insecticide; Malaria; Mosquito; Pyrethroid; Vector
Year: 2020 PMID: 32264900 PMCID: PMC7140563 DOI: 10.1186/s12936-020-03213-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Malar J ISSN: 1475-2875 Impact factor: 2.979
Fig. 1Baited box test apparatus and example images. a The complete bioassay and video system with (left to right): LED (not visible inside clamp); diffuser; test chamber on adjustable table; camera and Nikon lens. Test chamber b without entry port (early version) and, c with entry port (blue ring). Sample still images from test videos (60 mm lens), showing: d resting post-landing, e probing, and f blood feeding pre-defaecation
Ethogram of the behavioural events distinguishable during feeding on human bait through insecticide-treated netting
The table shows the start and endpoint of each event, and how they were grouped for each ‘Activity’. Note that although events are presented in a sequence typifying an uninterrupted blood meal, individual mosquitoes could exit at any point and return to an earlier behaviour to resume the sequence or terminate. 5*: events 4 and 5 were combined in Study 2. The colours in the horizontal bar correspond with those in Figs. 2 and 3: grey sections with no border show activity prior to first net contact; coloured sections with black borders represent behaviours involving net contact. The labels are also shown as subtitles marking the event boundaries in the accompanying video
Fig. 2Activity of adult female Anopheles gambiae s.s. at untreated netting. The three Baited Box studies are shown separately, with behavioural events as defined in the ethogram in Table 1. Each line represents the responses and complete activity of a single mosquito, with duration of each behavioural event measured on the X-axis (0–28 min). On each chronogram, the initial grey-scale borderless sections represent activity prior to initial landing on the netting. The orange red and green segments with black borders are events that include contact with the test netting. In Study 1 (a), all events from initial net contact to proboscis insertion (Events 4 and 5) were combined into a single event. Throughout the test, mosquitoes were allowed to exit the release point and approach the operator thumb, probe, blood feed and depart from the test net without interference. In Studies 1 (a) and 2 (b), post-feeding resting on the net was limited to 3 min whereas in Study 3 (c), post-feeding resting could continue up to a total test duration of 20 min
Fig. 3Blood feeding behaviour of insecticide susceptible and insecticide resistant Anopheles gambiae at pyrethroid treated netting Stacked barcharts showing responses of pyrethroid susceptible Kisumu (K) and Tiassale (T) strains in Baited Box tests of untreated (UT), PermaNet (P2) or Olyset (O) netting in Study 1 (a), Study 2 (b) and Study 3 (c). Each stacked bar chart represents the mean durations of each coded behavioural event in each test (Study 1: n = 13 for untreated net and 7 for PermaNet, Study 2: n = 25 mosquitoes per group, Study 3: n = 20 mosquitoes per group). The percentage mortality at 24 h post testing for each treatment group is shown at the end of each bar. In Studies 1 and 2, post-feeding resting on the net was limited to 3 min whereas in Study 3, post-feeding resting could continue up to a total test duration of 20 min
Mosquito response rates in three studies with three different operators/hosts
| Response rate (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| No mosquitoes responding/no. tested | ||||
| Study | Study 1 | Study 2 | Study 3 | |
| Operator | AG | MA | AH | |
| Mosquito strain | Kisumu | Kisumu | Kisumu | Tiassalé |
| Treatment | ||||
| Untreated | 27% (13/48) | 76% (25/33) | 77% (20/26) | 67% (20/30) |
| PermaNet 2 | 18% (7/38) | 58% (25/43) | 61% (20/33) | 61% (20/33) |
| Olyset | 57% (25/44) | |||
| Total no. tested | 86 | 120 | 59 | 63 |
Within each study, there were no significant differences in responses to Untreated nets and PermaNet 2.0 or Olyset ITNs: Study 1: X2 (1, n = 86) = 0.89, p = 0.35, OR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.22–1.72); Study 2: (1, n = 75) = 2.57, p = 0.11, OR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.37–1.58); Study 3 (Kisumu) (1, n = 59) = 1.77, p = 0.18, OR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.35–1.76) and Study 3 (Tiassalé) (1, n = 63) = 0.25, p = 0.617, OR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.41–2.01)
Duration and percentage proportion of selected events for the IS Kisumu strain of Anopheles gambiae when exposed to PermaNet and Olyset in the Baited box test
| Eventa | 1 | 3 | 2, 3, 4, 5 | 6,7,8 | 4–9 | 9 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Activitya | Response lag time | Readiness to land | Appearance to blood feed start | Blood feed duration | Total net contact duration | Resting post feed |
| Net | Mean duration (minutes), SD, range, proportion of total assay length | |||||
| Study 1 | ||||||
| UT | 0.85 1.19 0–4.25 8% | 0.29 1.03 0–3.73 3% | 2.71 2.14 1.27–8.28 27% | 4.25 1.42 2.27–7.05 45% | 7.58 2.0 2.97–9.98 78% | 2.08 1.44 0–3 20% |
| P2 | 0.94 0.79 0.13–2.05 14% | 0.01 0.012 0–0.3 0.11% | 2.11 0.93 1.18–3.47 28% | 2.59 1.13 1.57–4.58, 34% | 5.82 2.3 2.4–7.95 73% | 2.14 1.46 0–3 24% |
| Study 2 | ||||||
| UT | 1.26 0.94 0.01–1.16 11% | 0.11 0.18 0–0.77 1% | 0.68 0.63 0.09–2.5 6% | 7.50 4.66 2.48–19.4 65% | 10.04 4.80 2.65–22.7 87% | 2.16 1.28 0–3 19% |
| P2 | 0.99 1.04 0.05–2.7 12% | 1.56 2.17 0.02–8.12 18% | 2.43 2.18 0.2–8.25 28% | 3.77 1.64 1.1–7.08 44% | 5.38 1.93 1.9–9.2, 63% | 1.38 1.14 0–3 16% |
| O | 0.89 1.10 0.02–0.35 10% | 1.69 2.10 0.02–8.07 20% | 2.76 2.44 0.3–8.5 32% | 4.45 1.61 1.7–7.5 51% | 5.33 1.98 2.2–9.7 61% | 0.57 0.93 0–3 7% |
| Study 3 | ||||||
| UT | 1.15 1.20 0.65–1.75 7% | 0.01 0.02 0–0.017 < 1.0% | 0.85 0.68 0.15–2.78 5% | 8.47 1.67 7.04–9.87 49% | 16.10 3.43 14.47–17.68 92% | 7.17 3.80 4.67–9.32 40% |
| P2 | 1.57 1.41 0.91–2.23 17% | 0.01 0.02 0–0.05 < 1.0% | 0.98 0.78 0.17–2.6 11% | 4.72 1.67 3.93–5.49 52% | 7.17 3.79 5.38–8.94 79% | 1.81 3.48 0.17–3.44 20% |
The proportion of recorded time spent on each event is shown as a percentage of total assay length. Untreated net data included for comparison purposes. (asee Table 2)