Abstract
BackgroundThe scale-up of malaria interventions in sub-Saharan Africa has been accompanied by a dramatic increase in insecticide resistance in Anopheles spp. In Zimbabwe resistance to pyrethroid insecticides was reported in Gokwe District in 2008. This study reports results of the first nation-wide assessment of insecticide susceptibility in wild populations of Anopheles gambiae sensu lato (s.l.) in Zimbabwe, and provides a comprehensive review of the insecticide resistance status of An. gambiae s.l. in southern African countries.MethodsWorld Health Organization (WHO) insecticide susceptibility tests were performed on 2,568 field collected mosquitoes originating from 13 sentinel sites covering all endemic regions in Zimbabwe in 2011–2012. At each site, 24-hour mortality and knock-down values for 50% and 90% of exposed mosquitoes (KD50 and KD90, respectively) were calculated for pools of 20–84 (mean, 54) mosquitoes exposed to 4% DDT, 0.1% bendiocarb, 0.05% λ-cyhalothrin or 5% malathion. Susceptibility results from Zimbabwe were compiled with results published during 2002–2012 for all southern African countries to investigate the resistance status of An. gambiae s.l. in the region.ResultsUsing WHO criteria, insecticide resistance was not detected at any site sampled and for any of the insecticide formulations tested during the malaria transmission season in 2012. Knock-down within 1 hr post-insecticide exposure ranged from 95% to 100%; mortality 24 hours post-insecticide exposure ranged from 98% to 100%. Despite the lack of insecticide resistance, high variability was found across sites in KD50 and KD90 values. A total of 24 out of 64 (37.5%) sites in southern Africa with reported data had evidence of phenotypic insecticide resistance in An. gambiae s.l. to at least one insecticide.ConclusionDespite a long history of indoor residual spraying of households with insecticide, up to 2012 there was no evidence of phenotypic resistance to any of the four insecticide classes in An. gambiae s.l. collected across different eco-epidemiological areas in Zimbabwe. Results reinforce the need for careful monitoring over time in sentinel sites in order to detect the potential emergence and propagation of insecticide resistance as insecticidal vector control interventions in Zimbabwe continue to be implemented.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1475-2875-13-408) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Highlights
The scale-up of malaria interventions in sub-Saharan Africa has been accompanied by a dramatic increase in insecticide resistance in Anopheles spp
Over the past 10 years malaria interventions have been scaled-up throughout sub-Saharan Africa, including longlasting insecticidal nets (LLINs), indoor residual spraying (IRS) of households with insecticide, as well as diagnosis
Four classes of chemicals are recommended for use in IRS or on LLINs: carbamates, organochlorines, organophosphates and pyrethroids; notably, pyrethroids are the only insecticides currently used in LLINs recommended by World Health Organization (WHO) [12]
Summary
The scale-up of malaria interventions in sub-Saharan Africa has been accompanied by a dramatic increase in insecticide resistance in Anopheles spp. Over the past 10 years malaria interventions have been scaled-up throughout sub-Saharan Africa, including longlasting insecticidal nets (LLINs), indoor residual spraying (IRS) of households with insecticide, as well as diagnosis increased geographic coverage, and the efficacy and residual power of the various insecticide formulations employed [1,2]. The emergence of insecticide resistance in Anopheles spp. is likely to be mainly a result of strong selective pressure imparted by the scale-up of interventions and the massive use of agrochemicals (e.g., [3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11]), and is one of the major challenges affecting the future impact and sustainability of current vector control interventions in sub-Saharan Africa. A key premise of the GPIRM is that insecticide resistance management must be done pre-emptively on a country-by country basis, continuously and across representative geographic areas with different histories of insecticide use in both the public health as well as agricultural sector
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
