Anopheles infection responses; laboratory models versus field malaria transmission systems

Ruth Aguilar, Yuemei Dong, Emma Warr, George Dimopoulos

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

The molecular biology of disease vectors, particularly mosquitoes, has experienced a remarkable progress in the past two decades. This is mainly attributed to methodological advances and the emerging genome sequences of vector species, which have brought experimental biology to an unprecedented level. It is now possible to determine the entire transcriptome of Anopheles gambiae at a variety of conditions, with a low per-gene effort and cost. Proteomic profiles can be generated for as small samples as the hemolymph, and transient reverse genetic and stable germ line based transgenic analyses can be performed to analyze gene function. High throughput screening for receptors and ligands can be used to characterize interactions between vectors and pathogens. At the current breathtaking rates of data production it is essential to question and evaluate the relevance of laboratory infection models to the real disease transmission systems. The majority of scientific discoveries in mosquito molecular biology have been based on highly inbred laboratory strains and rodent malaria parasite infection models, which may differ substantially to their counterparts that transmit human malaria in the field. This review addresses the recent advances in high throughput transcription analyses of Anopheles responses to infection, and discusses considerations for the use of laboratory malaria infection models.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)285-291
Number of pages7
JournalActa Tropica
Volume95
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2005

Keywords

  • Anopheles
  • Field mosquitoes
  • Laboratory models
  • Plasmodium
  • Vector

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Parasitology
  • veterinary (miscalleneous)
  • Insect Science
  • Infectious Diseases

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Anopheles infection responses; laboratory models versus field malaria transmission systems'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this