Optimization of Plasmodium vivax sporozoite production from Anopheles stephensi in South West India.
Anopheles stephensi
Insectary
Membrane-feeding assays
Plasmodium vivax
Sporozoite
Journal
Malaria journal
ISSN: 1475-2875
Titre abrégé: Malar J
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101139802
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
18 May 2021
18 May 2021
Historique:
received:
17
02
2021
accepted:
12
05
2021
entrez:
19
5
2021
pubmed:
20
5
2021
medline:
18
9
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Efforts to study the biology of Plasmodium vivax liver stages, particularly the latent hypnozoites, have been hampered by the limited availability of P. vivax sporozoites. Anopheles stephensi is a major urban malaria vector in Goa and elsewhere in South Asia. Using P. vivax patient blood samples, a series of standard membrane-feeding experiments were performed with An. stephensi under the US NIH International Center of Excellence for Malaria Research (ICEMR) for Malaria Evolution in South Asia (MESA). The goal was to understand the dynamics of parasite development in mosquitoes as well as the production of P. vivax sporozoites. To obtain a robust supply of P. vivax sporozoites, mosquito-rearing and mosquito membrane-feeding techniques were optimized, which are described here. Membrane-feeding experiments were conducted using both wild and laboratory-colonized An. stephensi mosquitoes and patient-derived P. vivax collected at the Goa Medical College and Hospital. Parasite development to midgut oocysts and salivary gland sporozoites was assessed on days 7 and 14 post-feeding, respectively. The optimal conditions for mosquito rearing and feeding were evaluated to produce high-quality mosquitoes and to yield a high sporozoite rate, respectively. Laboratory-colonized mosquitoes could be starved for a shorter time before successful blood feeding compared with wild-caught mosquitoes. Optimizing the mosquito-rearing methods significantly increased mosquito survival. For mosquito feeding, replacing patient plasma with naïve serum increased sporozoite production > two-fold. With these changes, the sporozoite infection rate was high (> 85%) and resulted in an average of ~ 22,000 sporozoites per mosquito. Some mosquitoes reached up to 73,000 sporozoites. Sporozoite production could not be predicted from gametocyte density but could be predicted by measuring oocyst infection and oocyst load. Optimized conditions for the production of high-quality P. vivax sporozoite-infected An. stephensi were established at a field site in South West India. This report describes techniques for producing a ready resource of P. vivax sporozoites. The improved protocols can help in future research on the biology of P. vivax liver stages, including hypnozoites, in India, as well as the development of anti-relapse interventions for vivax malaria.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Efforts to study the biology of Plasmodium vivax liver stages, particularly the latent hypnozoites, have been hampered by the limited availability of P. vivax sporozoites. Anopheles stephensi is a major urban malaria vector in Goa and elsewhere in South Asia. Using P. vivax patient blood samples, a series of standard membrane-feeding experiments were performed with An. stephensi under the US NIH International Center of Excellence for Malaria Research (ICEMR) for Malaria Evolution in South Asia (MESA). The goal was to understand the dynamics of parasite development in mosquitoes as well as the production of P. vivax sporozoites. To obtain a robust supply of P. vivax sporozoites, mosquito-rearing and mosquito membrane-feeding techniques were optimized, which are described here.
METHODS
METHODS
Membrane-feeding experiments were conducted using both wild and laboratory-colonized An. stephensi mosquitoes and patient-derived P. vivax collected at the Goa Medical College and Hospital. Parasite development to midgut oocysts and salivary gland sporozoites was assessed on days 7 and 14 post-feeding, respectively. The optimal conditions for mosquito rearing and feeding were evaluated to produce high-quality mosquitoes and to yield a high sporozoite rate, respectively.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Laboratory-colonized mosquitoes could be starved for a shorter time before successful blood feeding compared with wild-caught mosquitoes. Optimizing the mosquito-rearing methods significantly increased mosquito survival. For mosquito feeding, replacing patient plasma with naïve serum increased sporozoite production > two-fold. With these changes, the sporozoite infection rate was high (> 85%) and resulted in an average of ~ 22,000 sporozoites per mosquito. Some mosquitoes reached up to 73,000 sporozoites. Sporozoite production could not be predicted from gametocyte density but could be predicted by measuring oocyst infection and oocyst load.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Optimized conditions for the production of high-quality P. vivax sporozoite-infected An. stephensi were established at a field site in South West India. This report describes techniques for producing a ready resource of P. vivax sporozoites. The improved protocols can help in future research on the biology of P. vivax liver stages, including hypnozoites, in India, as well as the development of anti-relapse interventions for vivax malaria.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34006297
doi: 10.1186/s12936-021-03767-2
pii: 10.1186/s12936-021-03767-2
pmc: PMC8129701
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
221Subventions
Organisme : NIAID NIH HHS
ID : U19 AI089688
Pays : United States
Références
Lancet. 2019 Jul 27;394(10195):332-343
pubmed: 31229233
Annu Rev Entomol. 1973;18:381-420
pubmed: 4218469
Malar J. 2016 Nov 25;15(1):569
pubmed: 27884146
ACS Infect Dis. 2018 Apr 13;4(4):541-548
pubmed: 29465219
PLoS One. 2014 Oct 23;9(10):e110671
pubmed: 25340408
Nat Commun. 2018 May 9;9(1):1837
pubmed: 29743474
J Med Entomol. 2002 Jan;39(1):162-72
pubmed: 11931252
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2014 Apr;90(4):612-616
pubmed: 24534811
Parasit Vectors. 2020 Mar 6;13(1):120
pubmed: 32143713
Ohio J Sci. 1946 Mar;46:65-70
pubmed: 20985146
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2007 Aug;77(2):242-5
pubmed: 17690393
Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health. 2016 Mar;47(2):171-81
pubmed: 27244953
Pak J Biol Sci. 2007 Jan 15;10(2):280-6
pubmed: 19070029
Malar J. 2019 Apr 17;18(1):138
pubmed: 30995911
Malar J. 2015 Aug 12;14:312
pubmed: 26259952
Malar J. 2018 Jan 25;17(1):50
pubmed: 29370800
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2003 Nov;69(5):529-35
pubmed: 14695091
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2007 Mar;76(3):470-4
pubmed: 17360869
Malar J. 2016 Nov 9;15(1):549
pubmed: 27829419
Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health. 2005;36 Suppl 4:158-66
pubmed: 16438203
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016 Jun 29;10(6):e0004807
pubmed: 27355210
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2006 May;74(5):708-15
pubmed: 16687667
Parasit Vectors. 2013 Dec 10;6(1):345
pubmed: 24326030
J Vector Borne Dis. 2018 Jan-Mar;55(1):9-13
pubmed: 29916442
Int J Parasitol. 2011 Mar;41(3-4):293-300
pubmed: 20974145
J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 2017 Sep;33(3):175-183
pubmed: 28854115
J Insect Physiol. 2010 Nov;56(11):1659-64
pubmed: 20609367
Malar J. 2016 Feb 27;15:124
pubmed: 26919828
Malar J. 2020 Jun 22;19(1):214
pubmed: 32571333
Ann Trop Med Parasitol. 1997 Jan;91(1):49-60
pubmed: 9093429
Trop Biomed. 2012 Mar;29(1):169-74
pubmed: 22543617
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2016 Dec 28;95(6 Suppl):108-120
pubmed: 27708188
Malar J. 2018 Jun 5;17(1):225
pubmed: 29871629
Pathog Glob Health. 2015 May;109(3):107-22
pubmed: 25891812
Malar J. 2017 Jul 11;16(1):284
pubmed: 28693607
Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1987 Jan;184(1):113-7
pubmed: 3797424
J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 2002 Dec;18(4):359-63
pubmed: 12542195
Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1986 Oct;183(1):81-5
pubmed: 3749035
Trends Parasitol. 2008 May;24(5):228-35
pubmed: 18403267