4.5 Article

Identification of TCT, a novel knockdown resistance allele mutation and analysis of resistance detection methods in the voltage-gated Na+ channel of Culex pipiens pallens from Shandong Province, China

期刊

MOLECULAR MEDICINE REPORTS
卷 7, 期 2, 页码 525-530

出版社

SPANDIDOS PUBL LTD
DOI: 10.3892/mmr.2012.1184

关键词

Culex pipiens pallens; resistance mechanism; knockdown resistance alleles; allele-specific-polymerase chain reaction technique

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81271877]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present study aimed to investigate deltamethrin resistance in Culex pipiens pallens (C. pipiens pallens) mosquitoes and its correlation with knockdown resistance (kdr) mutations. In addition, mosquito-resistance testing methods were analyzed. Using specific primers in polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and allele-specific (AS)-PCR, kdr gene sequences isolated from wild C. pipiens pallens mosquitoes were sequenced. Linear regression analysis was used to determine the correlation between the mutations and deltamethrin resistance. A kdr allelic gene was cloned and sequenced. Analysis of the DNA sequences revealed the presence of two point mutations at the L1014 residue in the IIS6 transmembrane segment of the voltage-gated sodium channel (VGSC): L1014F, TTA -> TTT, replacing a leucine (L) with a phenylalanine (F); L1014S, TTA -> TCA, replacing leucine (L) with serine (S). Two alternative kdr-like mutations, L1014F and L1014S, were identified to be positively correlated with the deltamethrin-resistant phenotype. In addition a novel mutation, TCT, was identified in the VGSC of C. pipiens pallens. PCR and AS-PCR yielded consistent results with respect to mosquito resistance. However, the detection rate of PCR was higher than that of AS-PCR. Further studies are required to determine the specific resistance mechanism. PCR and AS-PCR demonstrated suitability for mosquito resistance field tests, however, the former method may be superior to the latter.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据