4.3 Article

Human skin microbiota and their volatiles as odour baits for the malaria mosquito Anopheles gambiae s.s

期刊

ENTOMOLOGIA EXPERIMENTALIS ET APPLICATA
卷 139, 期 2, 页码 170-179

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1570-7458.2011.01119.x

关键词

skin bacteria; mosquito behaviour; odour-baited traps; carbon dioxide; host odour; Diptera; Culicidae

资金

  1. Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH) through the Grand Challenges in Global Health Initiative (GCGH) [121]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Host seeking by the malaria mosquito Anopheles gambiae Giles sensu stricto (Diptera: Culicidae) is mainly guided by volatile chemicals present in human odours. The skin microbiota plays an important role in the production of these volatiles, and skin bacteria grown on agar plates attract An. gambiae s.s. in the laboratory. In this study, the attractiveness of volatiles produced by human skin bacteria to An. gambiae s.s. was tested in laboratory, semi-field, and field experiments to assess these effects in increasing environmental complexity. A synthetic blend of 10 compounds identified in the headspace of skin bacteria was also tested for its attractiveness. Carbon dioxide significantly increased mosquito catches of traps baited with microbial volatiles in the semi-field experiments and was therefore added to the field traps. Traps baited with skin bacteria caught significantly more An. gambiae s.s. than control traps, both in the laboratory and semi-field experiments. Traps baited with the synthetic blend caught more mosquitoes than control traps in the laboratory experiments, but not in the semi-field experiments. Although bacterial volatiles increased mosquito catches in the field study, trapping several mosquito vector species, these effects were not significant for An. gambiae s.l. It is concluded that volatiles from skin bacteria affect mosquito behaviour under laboratory and semi-field conditions and, after fine tuning, have the potential to be developed as odour baits for mosquitoes.

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

4.3
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