Infection of highly insecticide-resistant malaria vector Anopheles coluzzii with entomopathogenic bacteria Chromobacterium violaceum reduces its survival, blood feeding propensity and fecundity.
Anopheles coluzzii
Blood feeding
Burkina faso
Chromobacterium violaceum
Fecundity
Malaria
Journal
Malaria journal
ISSN: 1475-2875
Titre abrégé: Malar J
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101139802
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 Oct 2020
02 Oct 2020
Historique:
received:
06
02
2020
accepted:
17
09
2020
entrez:
3
10
2020
pubmed:
4
10
2020
medline:
11
5
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
This is now a concern that malaria eradication will not be achieved without the introduction of novel control tools. Microbiological control might be able to make a greater contribution to vector control in the future. The interactions between bacteria and mosquito make mosquito microbiota really promising from a disease control perspective. Here, the impact of Chromobacterium violaceum infections, isolated from both larvae and adult of wild-caught Anopheles gambiae sensu lato mosquitoes in Burkina Faso, was evaluated on mosquito survival, blood feeding and fecundity. To assess entomopathogenic effects of C. violaceum infection on mosquitoes, three different types of bioassays were performed in laboratory. These bioassays aimed to evaluate the impact of C. violaceum infection on mosquito survival, blood feeding and fecundity, respectively. During bioassays mosquitoes were infected through the well-established system of cotton ball soaked with 6% glucose containing C. violaceum. Chromobacterium violaceum kills pyrethroid resistant Anopheles coluzzii (LT80 of 8.78 days ± 0.18 at 10 These data showed important properties of Burkina Faso C. violaceum strains, which are highly virulent against insecticide-resistant An. coluzzii, and reduce both mosquito blood feeding and fecundity propensities. However, additional studies as the sequencing of C. violaceum genome and the potential toxins secreted will provide useful information render it a potential candidate for the biological control strategies of malaria and other disease vectors.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
This is now a concern that malaria eradication will not be achieved without the introduction of novel control tools. Microbiological control might be able to make a greater contribution to vector control in the future. The interactions between bacteria and mosquito make mosquito microbiota really promising from a disease control perspective. Here, the impact of Chromobacterium violaceum infections, isolated from both larvae and adult of wild-caught Anopheles gambiae sensu lato mosquitoes in Burkina Faso, was evaluated on mosquito survival, blood feeding and fecundity.
METHODS
METHODS
To assess entomopathogenic effects of C. violaceum infection on mosquitoes, three different types of bioassays were performed in laboratory. These bioassays aimed to evaluate the impact of C. violaceum infection on mosquito survival, blood feeding and fecundity, respectively. During bioassays mosquitoes were infected through the well-established system of cotton ball soaked with 6% glucose containing C. violaceum.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Chromobacterium violaceum kills pyrethroid resistant Anopheles coluzzii (LT80 of 8.78 days ± 0.18 at 10
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
These data showed important properties of Burkina Faso C. violaceum strains, which are highly virulent against insecticide-resistant An. coluzzii, and reduce both mosquito blood feeding and fecundity propensities. However, additional studies as the sequencing of C. violaceum genome and the potential toxins secreted will provide useful information render it a potential candidate for the biological control strategies of malaria and other disease vectors.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33008454
doi: 10.1186/s12936-020-03420-4
pii: 10.1186/s12936-020-03420-4
pmc: PMC7530970
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
352Références
Malar J. 2012 Nov 05;11:365
pubmed: 23126549
Sci Rep. 2019 Feb 14;9(1):2127
pubmed: 30765796
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 May 22;104(21):9047-51
pubmed: 17502606
Genome Announc. 2015 May 21;3(3):
pubmed: 25999572
Insect Mol Biol. 1998 May;7(2):179-84
pubmed: 9535162
Toxins (Basel). 2012 Sep;4(9):748-67
pubmed: 23105979
Parasitol Today. 1999 Mar;15(3):105-11
pubmed: 10322323
Insect Biochem Mol Biol. 2005 Jul;35(7):699-707
pubmed: 15894187
Carcinogenesis. 2006 Mar;27(3):508-16
pubmed: 16344270
Parasit Vectors. 2010 Sep 15;3:87
pubmed: 20843321
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Jul 31;109(31):12734-9
pubmed: 22802646
BMC Microbiol. 2012 Jan 18;12 Suppl 1:S4
pubmed: 22376056
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Jan 3;109(1):255-60
pubmed: 22123944
Lancet. 2016 Apr 23;387(10029):1785-8
pubmed: 26880124
PLoS One. 2011;6(8):e23591
pubmed: 21897846
J Exp Biol. 2003 Nov;206(Pt 21):3809-16
pubmed: 14506216
PLoS One. 2017 Mar 2;12(3):e0173098
pubmed: 28253316
Nat Commun. 2016 May 31;7:11772
pubmed: 27243367
Nat Commun. 2014 Jun 06;5:3985
pubmed: 24905191
PLoS One. 2012;7(11):e48412
pubmed: 23189131
J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 1987 Mar;3(1):20-5
pubmed: 3504891
Biocontrol (Dordr). 2018;63(1):61-69
pubmed: 29391855
Parasit Vectors. 2018 Apr 5;11(1):229
pubmed: 29622036
Microb Ecol. 2010 Oct;60(3):644-54
pubmed: 20571792
PLoS Pathog. 2014 Oct 23;10(10):e1004398
pubmed: 25340821
Sci Rep. 2017 Jun 13;7(1):3433
pubmed: 28611355
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2007 May;57(Pt 5):993-999
pubmed: 17473247
Trends Parasitol. 2016 Mar;32(3):174-176
pubmed: 26809567