CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 146Malaria Research and ControlInsect Resistance and GeneticsVector-borne infectious diseases

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

An online tool for mapping insecticide resistance in major Anopheles vectors of human malaria parasites and review of resistance status for the Afrotropical region

Open access
Knox, Tessa B, Juma, Elijah O, Ochomo, Eric O, Pates Jamet, Helen, Ndungo, Laban, Chege, Patrick, Bayoh, Nabie M, N’Guessan, Raphael, Christian, Riann N, Hunt, Richard H, Coetzee, Maureen·2014·Parasites & Vectors
DOI 10.1186/1756-3305-7-76PMC PMC3942210
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Background: Malaria control programmes across Africa and beyond are facing increasing insecticide resistance in the major anopheline vectors. In order to preserve or prolong the effectiveness of the main malaria vector interventions, up-to-date and easily accessible insecticide resistance data that are interpretable at operationally-relevant scales are critical. Herein we introduce and demonstrate the usefulness of an online mapping tool, IR Mapper. Methods: A systematic search of published, peer-reviewed literature was performed and Anopheles insecticide susceptibility and resistance mechanisms data were extracted and added to a database after a two-level verification process. IR Mapper ( http://www.irmapper.com ) was developed using the ArcGIS for JavaScript Application Programming Interface and ArcGIS Online platform for exploration and projection of these data. Results: Literature searches yielded a total of 4,084 susceptibility data points for 1,505 populations, and 2,097 resistance mechanisms data points for 1,000 populations of Anopheles spp. tested via recommended WHO methods from 54 countries between 1954 and 2012. For the Afrotropical region, data were most abundant for populations of An. gambiae , and pyrethroids and DDT were more often used in susceptibility assays (51.1 and 26.8% of all reports, respectively) than carbamates and organophosphates. Between 2001 and 2012, there was a clear increase in prevalence and distribution of confirmed resistance of An. gambiae s.l. to pyrethroids (from 41 to 87% of the mosquito populations tested) and DDT (from 64 to 91%) throughout the Afrotropical region. Metabolic resistance mechanisms were detected in western and eastern African populations and the two kdr mutations (L1014S and L1014F) were widespread. For An. funestus s.l., relatively few populations were tested, although in 2010–2012 resistance was reported in 50% of 10 populations tested. Maps are provided to illustrate the use of IR Mapper and the distribution of insecticide resistance in malaria vectors in Africa. Conclusions: The increasing pyrethroid and DDT resistance in Anopheles in the Afrotropical region is alarming. Urgent attention should be afforded to testing An. funestus populations especially for metabolic resistance mechanisms. IR Mapper is a useful tool for investigating temporal and spatial trends in Anopheles resistance to support the pragmatic use of insecticidal interventions.

Overview

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1756-3305-7-76

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Number of publications from which data were extracted on insecticide susceptibility and resistance mechanisms, up to 30th April 2013.
Figure 1 Number of publications from which data were extracted on insecticide susceptibility and resistance mechanisms, up to 30th April 2013.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 IR Mapper online user interface showing Anopheles spp. pyrethroid resistance (red dots) and detected elevated mono-oxygenase and esterase activity plus kdr mutations (black dots) from 2001 – 2013 (as at 06/12/2013) along with Plasmodium falciparum endemicity estimates for 2010.
Figure 2 IR Mapper online user interface showing Anopheles spp. pyrethroid resistance (red dots) and detected elevated mono-oxygenase and esterase activity plus kdr mutations (black dots) from 2001 – 2013 (as at 06/12/2013) along with Plasmodium falciparum endemicity estimates for 2010.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 Publication dates of key protocols and procedures used in insecticide resistance evaluations for Anopheles. Ace-1R: insensitive acetylcholinesterase G119S mutation; CDC: Centres for Disease Control and Prevention; GSTs: elevated glutathione s-transferase; kdr: L1014S and L1014F target site mutations; MR4: Malaria Research and Reference Reagent Resource Centre; PCR: polymerase chain reaction; PCR-RFLP: PCR restriction fragment length polymorphism; rdl: dieldrin resistance-conferring chloride ion channel mutation; RT-PCR: reverse transcriptase PCR; SNP-PCR: single nucleotide polymorphism PCR; WHO: World Health Organization.
Figure 3 Publication dates of key protocols and procedures used in insecticide resistance evaluations for Anopheles. Ace-1R: insensitive acetylcholinesterase G119S mutation; CDC: Centres for Disease Control and Prevention; GSTs: elevated glutathione s-transferase; kdr: L1014S and L1014F target site mutations; MR4: Malaria Research and Reference Reagent Resource Centre; PCR: polymerase chain reaction; PCR-RFLP: PCR restriction fragment length polymorphism; rdl: dieldrin resistance-conferring chloride ion channel mutation; RT-PCR: reverse transcriptase PCR; SNP-PCR: single nucleotide polymorphism PCR; WHO: World Health Organization.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 Proportion of populations of An. gambiae s.l. and An. funestus s.l. with confirmed resistance using standard WHO susceptibility tests for pyrethroids and organochlorines. Note that populations are accounted for more than once when tested with both insecticide classes. Italics indicate the number of populations tested.
Figure 4 Proportion of populations of An. gambiae s.l. and An. funestus s.l. with confirmed resistance using standard WHO susceptibility tests for pyrethroids and organochlorines. Note that populations are accounted for more than once when tested with both insecticide classes. Italics indicate the number of populations tested.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5 Proportion of populations of An. gambiae s.l. with resistance mechanisms detected via standard biochemical or molecular methods. Note that populations are accounted for more than once when tested for multiple resistance mechanisms. Italics indicate the number of populations tested.
Figure 5 Proportion of populations of An. gambiae s.l. with resistance mechanisms detected via standard biochemical or molecular methods. Note that populations are accounted for more than once when tested for multiple resistance mechanisms. Italics indicate the number of populations tested.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 6 Distribution of insecticide resistance in An. gambiae s.l. collected between 2001 and 2012. Where there were multiple collections, species or insecticides tested, the lowest susceptibility category is displayed. Shading indicates the predicted distribution of the species complex [42].
Figure 6 Distribution of insecticide resistance in An. gambiae s.l. collected between 2001 and 2012. Where there were multiple collections, species or insecticides tested, the lowest susceptibility category is displayed. Shading indicates the predicted distribution of the species complex [42].CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 7 Distribution of insecticide resistance in An. funestus s.l. collected between 2001 and 2012. Where there were multiple collections, species or insecticides tested, the lowest susceptibility category is displayed. Shading indicates the predicted distribution of the species group [42].
Figure 7 Distribution of insecticide resistance in An. funestus s.l. collected between 2001 and 2012. Where there were multiple collections, species or insecticides tested, the lowest susceptibility category is displayed. Shading indicates the predicted distribution of the species group [42].CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 8 Distribution of molecular / biochemical resistance mechanisms in An. gambiae s.l. collected between 2001 and 2012. For sites for which multiple collections were tested, ‘detected’ is shown in preference to ‘not detected’. Shading indicates the predicted distribution of the species complex [42].
Figure 8 Distribution of molecular / biochemical resistance mechanisms in An. gambiae s.l. collected between 2001 and 2012. For sites for which multiple collections were tested, ‘detected’ is shown in preference to ‘not detected’. Shading indicates the predicted distribution of the species complex [42].CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 9 Distribution of molecular / biochemical resistance mechanisms in An. funestus s.l. collected between 2001 and 2012. For sites for which multiple collections were tested, ‘detected’ is shown in preference to ‘not detected’. Shading indicates the predicted distribution of the species group [42].
Figure 9 Distribution of molecular / biochemical resistance mechanisms in An. funestus s.l. collected between 2001 and 2012. For sites for which multiple collections were tested, ‘detected’ is shown in preference to ‘not detected’. Shading indicates the predicted distribution of the species group [42].CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 34 references

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Coetzee M, Horne DWK, Brooke BD, Hunt RH: DDT, dieldrin and pyrethroid insecticide resistance in African malaria vector mosquitoes: an historical review and implications for future malaria control in southern Africa. Sth Afr J Sci. 1999, 95: 215-218.
  2. WHO: Global Plan for Insecticide Resistance Management in malaria vectors. 2012, Geneva: World Health Organization
  3. WHO: Test procedures for insecticide resistance monitoring in malaria vector mosquitoes. 2013, Geneva: World Health Organization
  4. National library of medicine. (US) [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/],
  5. Google scholar. [http://scholar.google.com/],
  6. WHO: Instructions for Determining the Susceptibility or Resistance of Adult Mosquitos to Organochlorine, Organophosphate and Carbamate Insecticides – Diagnostic Test. WHO/VBC/81.806. 1981, Geneva: World Health Organization
  7. WHO: Report of WHO informal consultations. Test Procedures for Insecticide Resistance Monitoring in Malaria Vectors, bio-Efficacy and Persistence of Insecticides on Treated Surfaces. 1998, Geneva: World Health Organization
  8. WHO/AFRO: Malaria Vector Control (Grant ID# 45785) – “Filling the gap Between Product Development and Effective Delivery”: Atlas of Insecticide Resistance in Malaria Vectors of the WHO African Region. 2012, Brazzaville: WHO Regional Office for Africa
  9. CDC: Guideline for Evaluation Insecticide Resistance in Vectors Using the CDC Bottle Bioassay. 2012, Atlanta: Centres for Disease Control and Prevention

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 146

Related

Metadata

Authors
Knox, T. B., Juma, E. O., Ochomo, E. O., Pates Jamet, H., Ndungo, L., Chege, P., Bayoh, N. M., N’Guessan, R., Christian, R. N., Hunt, R. H., & Coetzee, M.
Affiliations
  • Vestergaard (Switzerland) (CH)
  • Maseno University (KE)
  • Kenya Medical Research Institute (KE)
  • National Health Laboratory Service (ZA)
  • University of the Witwatersrand (ZA)
Corresponding author
Coetzee, Maureen
ORCID
Venue
Parasites & Vectors
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2014-02-21
Volume
7
Issue
1
Pages
76-76
ISSN
1756-3305 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/1756-3305-7-76
PMC
PMC3942210
OpenAlex
W2099799315
Cited by
146
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 5
FWCI
17.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Parasites & Vectors (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ResearchOnline at James Cook University (James Cook University) (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (acceptedVersion)
  • Greater South Information System
Funders
  • Department of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India
  • President's Malaria Initiative
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
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Parasitology › Vector-borne infectious diseases
Keywords
malaria vectors, Anopheles gambiae, Anopheles funestus, pyrethroid resistance, DDT resistance, metabolic resistance, kdr mutation, online mapping tools, Afrotropical region, spatial distribution of resistance, malaria vector control, carbamates, organophosphates
MeSH terms
Africa, Animals, Anopheles, DDT, Humans, Insect Vectors, Insecticide Resistance, Insecticides, Malaria, Mutation, Pyrethrins, Insect Proteins, Permethrin, Spatio-Temporal Analysis

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