Cargando…

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

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 l...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pilotte, Nils, Cook, Darren A.N., Pryce, Joseph, Zulch, Michael F., Minetti, Corrado, Reimer, Lisa J., Williams, Steven A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: F1000 Research Limited 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7308644/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32596646
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/gatesopenres.13093.2
_version_ 1783549036382388224
author Pilotte, Nils
Cook, Darren A.N.
Pryce, Joseph
Zulch, Michael F.
Minetti, Corrado
Reimer, Lisa J.
Williams, Steven A.
author_facet Pilotte, Nils
Cook, Darren A.N.
Pryce, Joseph
Zulch, Michael F.
Minetti, Corrado
Reimer, Lisa J.
Williams, Steven A.
author_sort Pilotte, Nils
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7308644
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher F1000 Research Limited
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73086442020-06-25 Laboratory evaluation of molecular xenomonitoring using mosquito and tsetse fly excreta/feces to amplify Plasmodium, Brugia, and Trypanosoma DNA Pilotte, Nils Cook, Darren A.N. Pryce, Joseph Zulch, Michael F. Minetti, Corrado Reimer, Lisa J. Williams, Steven A. Gates Open Res Research Article 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. F1000 Research Limited 2020-06-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7308644/ /pubmed/32596646 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/gatesopenres.13093.2 Text en Copyright: © 2020 Pilotte N et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 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.
spellingShingle Research Article
Pilotte, Nils
Cook, Darren A.N.
Pryce, Joseph
Zulch, Michael F.
Minetti, Corrado
Reimer, Lisa J.
Williams, Steven A.
Laboratory evaluation of molecular xenomonitoring using mosquito and tsetse fly excreta/feces to amplify Plasmodium, Brugia, and Trypanosoma DNA
title Laboratory evaluation of molecular xenomonitoring using mosquito and tsetse fly excreta/feces to amplify Plasmodium, Brugia, and Trypanosoma DNA
title_full Laboratory evaluation of molecular xenomonitoring using mosquito and tsetse fly excreta/feces to amplify Plasmodium, Brugia, and Trypanosoma DNA
title_fullStr Laboratory evaluation of molecular xenomonitoring using mosquito and tsetse fly excreta/feces to amplify Plasmodium, Brugia, and Trypanosoma DNA
title_full_unstemmed Laboratory evaluation of molecular xenomonitoring using mosquito and tsetse fly excreta/feces to amplify Plasmodium, Brugia, and Trypanosoma DNA
title_short Laboratory evaluation of molecular xenomonitoring using mosquito and tsetse fly excreta/feces to amplify Plasmodium, Brugia, and Trypanosoma DNA
title_sort laboratory evaluation of molecular xenomonitoring using mosquito and tsetse fly excreta/feces to amplify plasmodium, brugia, and trypanosoma dna
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7308644/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32596646
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/gatesopenres.13093.2
work_keys_str_mv AT pilottenils laboratoryevaluationofmolecularxenomonitoringusingmosquitoandtsetseflyexcretafecestoamplifyplasmodiumbrugiaandtrypanosomadna
AT cookdarrenan laboratoryevaluationofmolecularxenomonitoringusingmosquitoandtsetseflyexcretafecestoamplifyplasmodiumbrugiaandtrypanosomadna
AT prycejoseph laboratoryevaluationofmolecularxenomonitoringusingmosquitoandtsetseflyexcretafecestoamplifyplasmodiumbrugiaandtrypanosomadna
AT zulchmichaelf laboratoryevaluationofmolecularxenomonitoringusingmosquitoandtsetseflyexcretafecestoamplifyplasmodiumbrugiaandtrypanosomadna
AT minetticorrado laboratoryevaluationofmolecularxenomonitoringusingmosquitoandtsetseflyexcretafecestoamplifyplasmodiumbrugiaandtrypanosomadna
AT reimerlisaj laboratoryevaluationofmolecularxenomonitoringusingmosquitoandtsetseflyexcretafecestoamplifyplasmodiumbrugiaandtrypanosomadna
AT williamsstevena laboratoryevaluationofmolecularxenomonitoringusingmosquitoandtsetseflyexcretafecestoamplifyplasmodiumbrugiaandtrypanosomadna