| Literature DB >> 34801086 |
Rosine Z Wolie1,2,3, Alphonsine A Koffi4,5, Ludovic P Ahoua Alou4,5, Eleanore D Sternberg6,7, Oulo N'Nan-Alla8, Amal Dahounto4, Florent H A Yapo4, Kpahe M H Kanh8, Soromane Camara4,5, Welbeck A Oumbouke4,9, Innocent Z Tia4,5,10, Simon-Pierre A Nguetta8, Matthew B Thomas6, Raphael NGuessan4,5,11.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is evidence that the knockdown resistance gene (Kdr) L1014F and acetylcholinesterase-1 gene (Ace-1R) G119S mutations involved in pyrethroid and carbamate resistance in Anopheles gambiae influence malaria transmission in sub-Saharan Africa. This is likely due to changes in the behaviour, life history and vector competence and capacity of An. gambiae. In the present study, performed as part of a two-arm cluster randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of household screening plus a novel insecticide delivery system (In2Care Eave Tubes), we investigated the distribution of insecticide target site mutations and their association with infection status in wild An. gambiae sensu lato (s.l.) populations.Entities:
Keywords: Acetylcholinesterase-1 gene G119S mutation; Anopheles coluzzii; Anopheles gambiae; Côte d’Ivoire; Knockdown resistance gene L1014F mutation; Malaria transmission; Resistance
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34801086 PMCID: PMC8605510 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-021-05079-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Fig. 1Anopheles gambiae sensu lato distribution by infection status. Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals (CIs). SET Screening plus In2Care Eave Tubes
Allelic frequencies of knockdown resistance gene (Kdr) L1014F mutation and acetylcholinesterase-1 gene (Ace-1) G119S mutation between study arms
| χ2 | χ2 | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SS | RS | RR | R (%) | SS | RS | RR | R (%) | ||||||
| Control | 421 | 35 | 182 | 204 | 70.10 | 0.15 (0.69) | 420 | 356 | 52 | 12 | 9.05 | 1.79 (0.195) | |
| SET | 210 | 21 | 89 | 100 | 68.81 | 210 | 184 | 24 | 2 | 6.67 | |||
| Control | 395 | 1 | 4 | 390 | 99.24 | 3.87 × 10–28 (1) | 394 | 264 | 94 | 36 | 21.07 | 3.29 (0.069) | |
| SET | 229 | 0 | 3 | 226 | 99.34 | 228 | 168 | 44 | 16 | 16.67 | |||
n Number of mosquitoes, SET screening plus In2Care Eave Tubes, SS susceptible homozygous genotype, RS heterozygous genotype, RR resistant homozygous genotype, R resistant
Genotypic and allelic frequencies of Kdr L1014F and Ace-1 G119S gene mutations in Anopheles gambiae and Anopheles coluzzii
| SNP per species | Genotypic frequenciesa [ | Allelic frequencies [ | OR (95% CI) | HWE χ2b ( | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RR | RS | SS | R | S | ||||
| | 631 | 304 (48.18) | 271 (42.95) | 56 (8.87) | 879 (69.65) | 383 (30.35) | 1 | 0.105 (0.744) |
| | 624 | 616 (98.72) | 7 (1.12) | 1 (0.16) | 1232(99.28) | 9 (0.72) | 59.64 (30.81–131.63) | 6.96 (0.008) |
| | 630 | 14 (2.22) | 76 (12.06) | 540 (85.72) | 104 (8.25) | 1156 (91.75) | 1 | 23.66 ( |
| | 622 | 52 (8.36) | 138 (22.19) | 432 (69.45) | 250 (20.10) | 994 (79.90) | 2.79 (2.17–3.60) | 51.48 ( |
SNP Single nucleotide polymorphism, n number of mosquitoes, x number of genotypes, y number of alleles, OR odds ratio, CI confidence interval, HWE Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium, S susceptible; for other abbreviations, see Table 1
aFor the genotypic frequency distribution, values were significantly different (P < 0.001) between An. coluzzii and An. gambiae
bdf = 2
Genotypic and allelic frequencies of Kdr L1014F and Ace-1R G119S gene mutations between infected and uninfected Anopheles gambiae and Anopheles coluzzii
| Species | Study arm | SNP/status | Genotypic frequencies [ | Allelic frequencies [ | OR (95% CI) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RR | RS | SS | R | S | |||||
| Control | Infected | 213 | 102 (47.89) | 96 (45.07) | 15 (7.04) | 300 (70.42) | 126 (29.58) | 1 | |
| Uninfected | 208 | 102 (49.04) | 86 (41.35) | 20 (9.62) | 290 (69.71) | 126 (30.29) | 1.03 (0.76–1.38) | ||
| SET | Infected | 92 | 40 (43.48) | 46 (50.00) | 6 (6.52) | 126 (68.48) | 58 (31.52) | 1 | |
| Uninfected | 118 | 60 (50.85) | 43 (36.44) | 15 (12.71) | 163 (69.07) | 73 (30.93) | 0.97 (0.62–1.5) | ||
| Control | Infected | 187 | 183 (97.86) | 3 (1.60) | 1 (0.53) | 369 (98.66) | 5 (1.35) | 1 | |
| Uninfected | 208 | 207 (99.52) | 1 (0.47) | 0 (0) | 415 (99.76) | 1 (0.24) | 0.17 (0.003–1.6) | ||
| SET | Infected | 119 | 117 (98.32) | 2 (1.68) | 0 (0) | 236 (99.16) | 2 (0.84) | 1 | |
| Uninfected | 110 | 109 (99.1) | 1 (0.9) | 0 (0) | 219 (99.55) | 1 (0.45) | 0.53 (0.009–10.4) | ||
| Control | Infected | 213 | 4 (1.88) | 23 (10.80) | 186 (87.32) | 31 (7.28) | 395 (92.72) | 1 | |
| Uninfected | 207 | 8 (3.86) | 29 (14.01) | 170 (82.13) | 45 (10.87) | 369 (89.13) | 0.64 (0.38–1.06) | ||
| SET | Infected | 92 | 0 (0) | 9 (9.78) | 83 (90.22) | 9 (4.89) | 175 (95.11) | 1 | |
| Uninfected | 118 | 2 (1.69) | 15 (12.71) | 15 (85.60) | 19 (8.05) | 217 (91.95) | 0.58 (0.22–1.40) | ||
| Control | Infected | 186 | 15 (8.06) | 42 (22.58) | 129 (69.35) | 72 (19.32) | 300 (80.64) | 1 | |
| Uninfected | 208 | 21 (10.10) | 52 (25.00) | 135 (64.90) | 94 (22.60) | 322 (77.40) | 0.82 (0.57–1.17) | ||
| SET | Infected | 119 | 7 (5.88) | 25 (21.01) | 87 (73.11) | 39 (16.39) | 199 (83.61) | 1 | |
| Uninfected | 109 | 9 (8.26) | 19 (17.43) | 81 (74.31) | 37 (16.97) | 181 (83.03) | 0.95 (0.56–1.62) | ||
For the genotypic frequency distribution, values between infected and uninfected groups did not differ significantly (p > 0.05). For abbreviations, see Tables 1 and 2
Fig. 2Frequencies of Kdr and Ace-1 genotypic combinations between infected and uninfected groups in each study arm. Error bars represent 95% CIs. For all combined genotypes, the first two alleles refer to Kdr genotypes and the last two refer to Ace-1 genotypes. RR Resistant homozygous genotype, RS heterozygous genotype, SS susceptible homozygous genotype; for other abbreviations, see Fig. 1