Dataset Information

Comparative analysis of subsampling methods for large mosquito samples.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The analysis of large mosquito samples is expensive and time-consuming, delaying the efficient timing of vector control measurements. Processing a fraction of a sample using a subsampling method can significantly reduce the processing effort. However, a comprehensive evaluation of the reliability of different subsampling methods is missing. METHODS:A total of 23 large mosquito samples (397-4713 specimens per sample) were compared in order to evaluate five subsampling methods for the estimation of the number of specimens and species: area, volume, weight, selection of 200 random specimens and analyses with an image processing software. Each sample was distributed over a grid paper (21.0?×?29.7 cm; 25 grid cells of 4.2?×?5.9 cm) with 200 randomly distributed points. After taking pictures, mosquito specimens closest to each of the 200 points on the paper were selected. All mosquitoes per grid cell were identified by morphology and transferred to scaled tubes to estimate the volume. Finally, the fresh and dry weights were determined. RESULTS:The estimated number of specimens and species did not differ between the area-, volume- and weight-based method. Subsampling 20% of the sample gave an error rate of approximately 12% for the number of specimens, 6% for the proportion of the most abundant species and between 6-40% for the number of species per sample. The error for the estimated number of specimens using the picture processing software ImageJ gave a similar error rate when analyzing 15-20% of the total sample. By using 200 randomly selected specimens it was possible to give a precise estimation of the proportion of the most abundant species (r?=?0.97, P?

SUBMITTER: Jaworski L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6636137 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparative analysis of subsampling methods for large mosquito samples.

Jaworski Linda L Jansen Stephanie S Pfitzner Wolf Peter WP Beck Matthias M Becker Norbert N Schmidt-Chanasit Jonas J Kiel Ellen E Lühken Renke R

Parasites & vectors 20190716 1

<h4>Background</h4>The analysis of large mosquito samples is expensive and time-consuming, delaying the efficient timing of vector control measurements. Processing a fraction of a sample using a subsampling method can significantly reduce the processing effort. However, a comprehensive evaluation of the reliability of different subsampling methods is missing.<h4>Methods</h4>A total of 23 large mosquito samples (397-4713 specimens per sample) were compared in order to evaluate five subsampling me ...[more]

PMID: 31311590

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Mosquito-borne diseases (MBDs) cause a significant proportion of the global infectious disease burden. Vector control remains the primary strategy available to reduce the transmission of MBDs. However, long-term, wide-scale and large-scale traditional chemical pesticide application has caused significant and increased negative effects on ecosystems and broader emerging insecticide resistance in vectors; therefore, the development of a novel alternative approach is urgently needed. Mosquito densoviruses (MDVs) are entomopathogenic viruses that exhibit a narrow host range and multiple transmission patterns, making MDVs a great potential bioinsecticide. However, the application process has been relatively stagnant over the past three decades. The major obstacle has been that viruses must be produced in mosquito cell lines; therefore, the production process is both expensive and time-consuming. METHODS:In our study, two wild-type (wt) MDVs, AaeDV and AalDV-3, and a recombinant rAaeDV-210 were used to infect the Aag2 and C6/36 mosquito cell lines and the 1st-2nd-instar and 3rd-4th-instar larvae of Ae. albopictus, Ae. aegypti and Cx. quinquefasciatus. Viral titers and yields in cells, media, larvae and rearing water and total viral yield were evaluated. Three kinds of virus displayed higher maximum virus titers in vivo than in vitro, and they displayed higher maximum viral yields in rearing water. RESULTS:The three viruses displayed higher total maximum viral yields in C6/36 cells than in Aag2 cells. The three viruses displayed higher total maximum viral yields in Aedes mosquitoes than in Culex mosquitoes. Higher viral yields were produced by 1st-2nd-instar larvae compared to 3rd-4th-instar larvae. The recombinant viruses did not display significantly lower yields than wt viruses in nearly all samples. In summary, by using 100 1st-2nd-instar Aedes mosquito larvae in 200 ml of rearing water, more than 1013 genome equivalents (geq) MDV yield can be obtained. CONCLUSIONS:Considering the lower production cost, this in vivo method has great potential for the large-scale production of MDVs. MDVs exhibit promising prospects and great potential for mosquito control in the future.

Project description:Diverse invertebrate taxa including all 200,000 species of Hymenoptera (ants, bees, wasps and sawflies) have a haplodiploid sex determination system, where females are diploid and males are haploid. Thus, hymenopteran genome projects can make use of DNA from a single haploid male sample, which is assumed advantageous for genome assembly. For the purpose of gene annotation, transcriptome sequencing is usually conducted using RNA from a pool of individuals. We conducted a comparative analysis of genome and transcriptome assembly and annotation methods, using genetic sources of different ploidy: (1) DNA from a haploid male or a diploid female (2) RNA from the same haploid male or a pool of individuals. We predicted that the use of a haploid male as opposed to a diploid female will simplify the genome assembly and gene annotation thanks to the lack of heterozygosity. Using DNA and RNA from the same haploid individual is expected to provide better confidence in transcript-to-genome alignment, and improve the annotation of gene structure in terms of the exon/intron boundaries. The haploid genome assemblies proved to be more contiguous, with both contig and scaffold N50 size at least threefold greater than their diploid counterparts. Completeness evaluation showed mixed results. The SOAPdenovo2 diploid assembly was missing more genes than the haploid assembly. The SPAdes diploid assembly had more complete genes, but a higher level of duplicates, and a greatly overestimated genome size. When aligning the two transcriptomes against the male genome, the male transcriptome gave 2-3% more complete transcripts than the pool transcriptome for genes with comparable expression levels in both transcriptomes. However, this advantage disappears in the final results of the gene annotation pipeline that incorporates evidence from homologous proteins. The RNA pool is still required to obtain the full transcriptome with genes that are expressed in other life stages and castes. In conclusion, the use of a haploid source material for a de novo genome project provides a substantial advantage to the quality of the genome draft and the use of RNA from the same haploid individual for transcriptome to genome alignment provides a minor advantage for genes that are expressed in the adult male.

Dataset Information

Comparative analysis of subsampling methods for large mosquito samples.

Publications

Comparative analysis of subsampling methods for large mosquito samples.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets