Knockdown Resistance (kdr) Mutations in Indian Anopheles stephensi(Diptera: Culicidae) Populations
Open accessAbstract
Knockdown resistance (kdr) in insects resulting from mutation(s) in the voltage-gated sodium channel (VGSC) gene is one of the mechanisms of resistance against DDT and the pyrethroid group of insecticides. Earlier, we reported the presence of two classic kdr mutations, i.e., L1014F and L1014S in Anopheles stephensi Liston, a major Indian malaria vector affecting mainly urban areas. This report presents the distribution of these alleles in different An. stephensi populations. Seven populations of An. stephensi from six states of India were screened for the presence of two alternative kdr mutations L1014F and L1014S using allele-specific polymerase chain reaction assays. We recorded the presence of both kdr mutations in northern Indian populations (Alwar and Gurgaon), with the preponderance of L1014S, whereas only L1014F was present in Raipur (central India) and Chennai (southern India). None of the kdr mutations were found in Ranchi in eastern India and in Mangaluru and Mysuru in southern India. This study provides evidence for a focal pattern of distribution of kdr alleles in India.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Several mechanisms including metabolic and insecticide target site insensitivity are involved in insecticide resistance in An. stephensi from different countries.
“Several mechanisms including metabolic and insecticide target site insensitivity are involved in insecticide resistance in An. stephensi from different countries, each of which has its own operational significance in vector control [26–28, 31, 33–36, 38, 39, 42, 47, 48].”
From Evolution of insecticide resistance and its mechanisms in Anopheles stephensi in the WHO Eastern Mediterranean Region (2020) · cites this paper as [33]
The Abstract (p. 1) identifies sodium-channel kdr mutations as a target-site resistance mechanism and documents them in Indian An. stephensi populations. The Discussion (p. 3) says kdr alone did not produce pyrethroid resistance in two tested populations. Our copy does not establish metabolic resistance mechanisms in this species or resistance mechanisms across different countries. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredResistance to DDT, dieldrin, malathion, and recently pyrethroid insecticides was reported from different states of India.
“Resistance to DDT, dieldrin, malathion, and recently pyrethroid insecticides, was reported from different states of India [31–41].”
From Evolution of insecticide resistance and its mechanisms in Anopheles stephensi in the WHO Eastern Mediterranean Region (2020) · cites this paper as [33]
The Discussion (p. 3) reports resistance in Indian Anopheles stephensi to DDT, dieldrin, and malathion. But it says the species remains susceptible to pyrethroids, and the Results (p. 3) classify the tested populations as susceptible to synthetic pyrethroids. This source therefore does not support the claim of recently reported pyrethroid resistance. (LLM, conf=0.90)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn India, An. stephensi is resistant to DDT in Delhi, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Kerala and Madhya Pradesh whereas it is susceptible to DDT in Karnataka.
“In India, An. stephensi is resistant to DDT in Delhi, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Kerala and Madhya Pradesh whereas it is susceptible to DDT in Karnataka.”
From Evolution of insecticide resistance and its mechanisms in Anopheles stephensi in the WHO Eastern Mediterranean Region (2020) · cites this paper as [33]
The Results (p. 3) report DDT resistance in the tested Alwar population, supporting the Rajasthan portion of the claim. They do not report DDT susceptibility tests for Karnataka or establish resistance in Delhi, Gujarat, Kerala, or Madhya Pradesh. The absence of kdr mutations in Mangaluru and Mysuru (Abstract, p. 1) does not establish DDT susceptibility there. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe species is resistant to malathion in Delhi, West Bengal, Goa, Gujarat, Rajasthan, and Karnataka, susceptible in Kerala and Maharashtra, and resistant to be confirmed in Madhya Pradesh.
“The species is resistant to malathion in Delhi, West Bengal, Goa, Gujarat, Rajasthan, and Karnataka, susceptible in Kerala and Maharashtra, and resistant to be confirmed in Madhya Pradesh.”
From Evolution of insecticide resistance and its mechanisms in Anopheles stephensi in the WHO Eastern Mediterranean Region (2020) · cites this paper as [33]
The Discussion (p. 3) reports that Anopheles stephensi has been resistant to malathion, but it does not give malathion susceptibility status for the listed states. The paper’s susceptibility tests cover DDT and pyrethroids, not malathion (Insecticide Susceptibility Tests, p. 2; Table 2, p. 3), so the state-by-state distinctions are unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredTo deltamethrin, the species is resistant in Karnataka, resistant to be confirmed in Gujarat but susceptible in Kerala, Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal and Rajasthan.
“To deltamethrin, the species is resistant in Karnataka, resistant to be confirmed in Gujarat but susceptible in Kerala, Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal and Rajasthan [31–33, 36, 39–41, 79, 82, 83].”
From Evolution of insecticide resistance and its mechanisms in Anopheles stephensi in the WHO Eastern Mediterranean Region (2020) · cites this paper as [33]
Table 2 (Discussion, p. 3) reports 100% corrected mortality after deltamethrin exposure in Alwar, supporting susceptibility for the tested Rajasthan population. The Results (p. 3) report susceptibility tests only for Alwar, Ranchi, and Chennai; they do not establish the claimed deltamethrin status in Karnataka, Gujarat, Kerala, Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, or West Bengal. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
In India, involvement of different enzyme groups including esterases, GSTs and cytochrome p450s as well as site insensitivity mechanism of kdr west and east alleles was revealed.
“In India, the involvement of different enzyme groups including esterases, GSTs and cytochrome p450s as well as site insensitivity mechanism of kdr west and east alleles was revealed [31, 33–36, 38, 39, 47, 48].”
From Evolution of insecticide resistance and its mechanisms in Anopheles stephensi in the WHO Eastern Mediterranean Region (2020) · cites this paper as [33]
The Abstract (p. 1) describes kdr mutations as a voltage-gated sodium-channel resistance mechanism, and the Results (p. 3) report L1014F and L1014S alleles in Indian Anopheles stephensi populations. Our copy does not establish the involvement of esterases, GSTs or cytochrome P450s, and it does not call the mutations “west” and “east” alleles. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThere are two types of kdr alleles in Anopheles mosquitoes, kdr west and kdr east.
“There are two types of kdr alleles in Anopheles mosquitoes, i.e., kdr west [33, 39, 103] and kdr east [26, 104].”
From Evolution of insecticide resistance and its mechanisms in Anopheles stephensi in the WHO Eastern Mediterranean Region (2020) · cites this paper as [33]
The Abstract (p. 1) identifies two classic kdr mutations, L1014F and L1014S, in Anopheles stephensi. The paper does not call them “kdr west” and “kdr east” or establish that these are the two types across Anopheles mosquitoes. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Faulde, M. K., Rueda, L. M., & Khaireh, B. A. (2014) · Acta Tropica · doi:10.1016/j.actatropica.2014.06.016 · Cited by 245 · see citing works
Modifications of pyrethroid effects associated with <i>kdr</i> mutation in <i>Anopheles gambiae</i>
Chandre, F., Darriet, F., Duchon, S., Finot, L., Manguin, S., Carnevale, P., & Guillet, P. (2000) · Medical and Veterinary Entomology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2915.2000.00212.x · Cited by 209 · see citing works
Silva, A. P. B., Santos, J. M. M., & Martins, A. J. (2014) · Parasites & Vectors · doi:10.1186/1756-3305-7-450 · Cited by 160 · see citing works
Mathias, D. K., Ochomo, E., Atieli, F., Ombok, M., Nabie Bayoh, M., Olang, G., Muhia, D., Kamau, L., Vulule, J. M., Hamel, M. J., et al. (2011) · Malaria Journal · doi:10.1186/1475-2875-10-10 · Cited by 158 · see citing works
Singh, O. P., Dykes, C. L., Lather, M., Agrawal, O. P., & Adak, T. (2011) · Malaria Journal · doi:10.1186/1475-2875-10-59 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
Self-citationPCR-based methods for the detection of L1014 kdr mutation in Anopheles culicifacies sensu lato
Singh, O. P., Bali, P., Hemingway, J., Subbarao, S. K., Dash, A. P., & Adak, T. (2009) · Malaria Journal · doi:10.1186/1475-2875-8-154 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Covell, G. 1928. Malaria in Bombay. Government Central Press, Bombay, India.
- Ramphul, U., T. Boase, C. Bass, L. M. Okedi, M. J. Donnelly, and P. Muller. 2009. Insecticide resistance and its association with target-site mutations in natural populations of Anopheles gambiae from eastern Uganda. Trans. R. Soc. Trop. Med. Hyg. 103: 1121-1126.
- Singh, R. K., G. Kumar, P. Kumar, and P. K. Mittal. 2014. Insecticide susceptibility status of malaria vectors in India: A review. Int. J. Mosq. Res. 1: 5-9.
- (WHO) World Health Organization. 2009. Policies, strategies and targets for malaria control. In 'World Malaria Report 2009'. World Health Organization, Geneva, pp. 3-8.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Enayati, A., Hanafi-Bojd, A. A., Sedaghat, M. M., Zaim, M., & Hemingway, J. (2020) · Malaria Journal · doi:10.1186/s12936-020-03335-0 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Safi, N. H. Z., Ahmadi, A. A., Nahzat, S., Warusavithana, S., Safi, N., Valadan, R., Shemshadian, A., Sharifi, M., Enayati, A., & Hemingway, J. (2019) · Malaria Journal · doi:10.1186/s12936-019-2884-x · Cited by 29 · see citing works
- Authors
- Dykes, C. L., Das, M. K., Eapen, A., Batra, C. P., Ghosh, S. K., Vijayan, V. A., Mishra, S., & Singh, O. P.
- Affiliations
- National Institute of Malaria Research (IN)
- National Institute of Epidemiology (IN)
- University of Mysore (IN)
- Venue
- Journal of Medical Entomology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2016-01-07
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 315-320
- ISSN
- 0022-2585 (ISSN-L)
- 1938-2928
- PMC
- PMC5853671
- OpenAlex
- W2234431271
- Cited by
- 18
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 1.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Medical Entomology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- World Health Organization
- National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (U19AI089676)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Malaria Research and Control
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Insect Resistance and Genetics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Dengue and Mosquito Control Research
- Keywords
- knockdown resistance, kdr mutation, Anopheles stephensi, voltage-gated sodium channels, L1014F, pyrethroid resistance, DDT resistance, insecticide resistance, malaria vectors, allele distribution, geographic distribution of resistance
- MeSH terms
- Alleles, Animals, Anopheles, Female, India, Insecticide Resistance, Mutation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
