21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Laboratory evaluation of molecular xenomonitoring using mosquito and tsetse fly excreta/feces to amplify Plasmodium, Brugia, and Trypanosoma DNA

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background:  Results from an increasing number of studies suggest that mosquito excreta/feces (E/F) testing has considerable potential to serve as a supplement for traditional molecular xenomonitoring techniques. However, as the catalogue of possible use-cases for this methodology expands, and the list of amenable pathogens grows, a number of fundamental methods-based questions remain. Answering these questions is critical to maximizing the utility of this approach and to facilitating its successful implementation as an effective tool for molecular xenomonitoring.

          Methods:  Utilizing E/F produced by mosquitoes or tsetse flies experimentally exposed to Brugia malayi, Plasmodium falciparum, or Trypanosoma brucei brucei, factors such as limits of detection, throughput of testing, adaptability to use with competent and incompetent vector species, and effects of additional blood feedings post parasite-exposure were evaluated.  Two platforms for the detection of pathogen signal (quantitative real-time PCR and digital PCR (dPCR)) were also compared, with strengths and weaknesses examined for each.      

          Results:  Experimental results indicated that high throughput testing is possible when evaluating mosquito E/F for the presence of either B. malayi or P. falciparum from both competent and incompetent vector mosquito species.  Furthermore, following exposure to pathogen, providing mosquitoes with a second, uninfected bloodmeal did not expand the temporal window for E/F collection during which pathogen detection was possible.  However, this collection window did appear longer in E/F collected from tsetse flies following exposure to T. b. brucei.  Testing also suggested that dPCR may facilitate detection through its increased sensitivity.  Unfortunately, logistical obstacles will likely make the large-scale use of dPCR impractical for this purpose.

          Conclusions:  By examining many E/F testing variables, expansion of this technology to a field-ready platform has become increasingly feasible.  However, translation of this methodology from the lab to the field will first require field-based pilot studies aimed at assessing the efficacy of E/F screening.

          Related collections

          Most cited references63

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Two-sided confidence intervals for the single proportion: comparison of seven methods.

          Simple interval estimate methods for proportions exhibit poor coverage and can produce evidently inappropriate intervals. Criteria appropriate to the evaluation of various proposed methods include: closeness of the achieved coverage probability to its nominal value; whether intervals are located too close to or too distant from the middle of the scale; expected interval width; avoidance of aberrations such as limits outside [0,1] or zero width intervals; and ease of use, whether by tables, software or formulae. Seven methods for the single proportion are evaluated on 96,000 parameter space points. Intervals based on tail areas and the simpler score methods are recommended for use. In each case, methods are available that aim to align either the minimum or the mean coverage with the nominal 1 -alpha.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Probable Inference, the Law of Succession, and Statistical Inference

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Efficacy, Safety, and Pharmacokinetics of Coadministered Diethylcarbamazine, Albendazole, and Ivermectin for Treatment of Bancroftian Filariasis.

              Available treatments for lymphatic filariasis (LF) are limited in their longterm clearance of microfilaria from the blood. The safety and efficacy of a single-dose triple-drug therapy of the antifilarial drugs diethylcarbamazine (DEC), ivermectin (IVM), and albendazole (ALB) for LF are unknown.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data CurationRole: Formal AnalysisRole: Funding AcquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project AdministrationRole: ResourcesRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: Writing – Original Draft PreparationRole: Writing – Review & Editing
                Role: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: ValidationRole: Writing – Review & Editing
                Role: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: ValidationRole: Writing – Review & Editing
                Role: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: ValidationRole: Writing – Review & Editing
                Role: MethodologyRole: Writing – Review & Editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data CurationRole: Formal AnalysisRole: Funding AcquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project AdministrationRole: ResourcesRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: Writing – Review & Editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Project AdministrationRole: ResourcesRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – Review & Editing
                Journal
                Gates Open Res
                Gates Open Res
                Gates Open Res
                Gates Open Research
                F1000 Research Limited (London, UK )
                2572-4754
                3 June 2020
                2019
                : 3
                : 1734
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Biological Sciences, Smith College, Northampton, Massachusetts, 01063, USA
                [2 ]Molecular and Cellular Biology Program, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts, 01003, USA
                [3 ]Department of Vector Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, L3 5QA, UK
                [1 ]College of Public Health, Medical and Veterinary Sciences, James Cook University, Cairns, Australia
                [1 ]Institute of Parasitology, Department of Pathobiology, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Vienna, Austria
                [1 ]College of Public Health, Medical and Veterinary Sciences, James Cook University, Cairns, Australia
                Author notes

                No competing interests were disclosed.

                Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

                Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

                Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8447-7425
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3941-0854
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5703-5675
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9711-4981
                Article
                10.12688/gatesopenres.13093.2
                7308644
                32596646
                bfd761ea-0fab-4565-a2d2-65546047697f
                Copyright: © 2020 Pilotte N et al.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 20 May 2020
                Funding
                Funded by: Medical Research Council
                Award ID: MR/P025285/1
                Funded by: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
                Award ID: OPP1154992
                This work was supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1154992]. This work was also supported by the Medical Research Council [MR/P025285/1].
                The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Articles

                molecular xenomonitoring,excreta/feces,lymphatic filariasis,malaria,human african trypanosomiasis,mosquito,surveillance

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content107

                Cited by1

                Most referenced authors704