Multiple Anopheles species complicate downstream analysis and decision-making in a malaria pre-elimination area in southern Mozambique
Abstract Background Different anopheline species (even within a species group/complex) can differ in their feeding and resting behaviours, which impact both malaria transmission patterns as well as the efficacy of vector control interventions. While morphological identification of sampled specimens...
| Published in: | Malaria Journal |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2024
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-024-04842-0 https://doaj.org/article/12495982eda14a74826c3754e860ff94 |
| Summary: | Abstract Background Different anopheline species (even within a species group/complex) can differ in their feeding and resting behaviours, which impact both malaria transmission patterns as well as the efficacy of vector control interventions. While morphological identification of sampled specimens is an important first step towards understanding species diversity and abundance, misidentification can result in the implementation of less effective vector control measures, and consequently smaller reductions in the number of local malaria cases. Focusing on southern Mozambique, a malaria pre-elimination area where malaria remains persistent, the aims of this preliminary study were to use molecular identification (CO1 and ITS2 barcoding) to (1) validate the results from the morphological identification (with a particular focus on Anopheles pharoensis and Anopheles squamosus), and (2) have a closer look at the Anopheles coustani group (which includes Anopheles tenebrosus and Anopheles ziemanni). Methods Female anopheline mosquitoes (n = 81) were identified morphologically and subsequently sequenced at the ribosomal DNA internal transcribed spacer region 2 (ITS2) and/or cytochrome oxidase subunit 1 (CO1) loci towards species determination. Results Out of the 62 specimens that were identified morphologically to species, 4 (6.5%) were misidentified. Regarding the An. coustani group, morphological identification showed that several members are present in southern Mozambique, including An. coustani sensu lato (s.l.), An. ziemanni and An. tenebrosus. However, based on both ITS2 and CO1 sequences, the exact species remains unknown for the latter two members until voucher sequences are available for comparison. Conclusion The reason(s) for morphological misidentification of anopheline mosquitoes need to be mitigated. This is usually related to both the capacity (i.e. training) of the microscopist to identify anopheline species, and the information provided in the dichotomous identification key. As the An. coustani complex ... |
|---|