Next Article in Journal
Phylogenetic Position of the Genus Alulacris (Orthoptera: Acrididae: Melanoplinae: Podismini) Revealed by Complete Mitogenome Evidence
Next Article in Special Issue
A Yeast RNA-Interference Pesticide Targeting the Irx Gene Functions as a Broad-Based Mosquito Larvicide and Adulticide
Previous Article in Journal
A Fine-Scale Hotspot at the Edge: Epigean Arthropods from the Atacama Coast (Paposo-Taltal, Antofagasta Region, Chile)
Previous Article in Special Issue
Review and Meta-Analysis of the Evidence for Choosing between Specific Pyrethroids for Programmatic Purposes
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Implications of Sublethal Insecticide Exposure and the Development of Resistance on Mosquito Physiology, Behavior, and Pathogen Transmission

by
Felipe Andreazza
1,†,
Eugênio E. Oliveira
1 and
Gustavo Ferreira Martins
2,*
1
Departamento de Entomologia, Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Viçosa 36570-900, MG, Brazil
2
Departamento de Biologia Geral, Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Viçosa 36570-900, MG, Brazil
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Current: Department of Biology, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USA.
Insects 2021, 12(10), 917; https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12100917
Submission received: 31 August 2021 / Revised: 3 October 2021 / Accepted: 4 October 2021 / Published: 8 October 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Insecticides for Mosquito Control: Strengthening the Evidence Base)

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

Mosquitoes are one of the greatest threats to human lives; they transmit a wide range of pathogens, including viruses that cause lethal diseases. Mosquitoes are found in both aquatic (as larvae or pupae) and terrestrial (as adults) environments during their complex life cycle. For decades, insecticides have been systematically used on mosquitoes with the aim to reduce their population. Little is known about how the stress resulting from the exposure of mosquitoes to insecticides impacts the tri-partite relationship between the mosquitoes, their vertebrate hosts, and the pathogens they transmit. In this work, we review existing experimental evidence to obtain a broad picture on the potential effects of the (sub)lethal exposure of hematophagous mosquitoes to different insecticides. We have focused on studies that have advanced our understanding of their physiological and behavioral responses (including the mechanisms behind insecticide resistance) and the spread of pathogens by these vectors—understudied but critically important issues for epidemiology. Studying these exposure-related effects is of paramount importance for predicting how they respond to insecticide exposure and whether this exposure makes them more or less likely to transmit pathogens.

Abstract

For many decades, insecticides have been used to control mosquito populations in their larval and adult stages. Although changes in the population genetics, physiology, and behavior of mosquitoes exposed to lethal and sublethal doses of insecticides are expected, the relationships between these changes and their abilities to transmit pathogens remain unclear. Thus, we conducted a comprehensive review on the sublethal effects of insecticides and their contributions to insecticide resistance in mosquitoes, with the main focus on pyrethroids. We discuss the direct and acute effects of sublethal concentrations on individuals and populations, the changes in population genetics caused by the selection for resistance after insecticide exposure, and the major mechanisms underlying such resistance. Sublethal exposures negatively impact the individual’s performance by affecting their physiology and behavior and leaving them at a disadvantage when compared to unexposed organisms. How these sublethal effects could change mosquito population sizes and diversity so that pathogen transmission risks can be affected is less clear. Furthermore, despite the beneficial and acute aspects of lethality, exposure to higher insecticide concentrations clearly impacts the population genetics by selecting resistant individuals, which may bring further and complex interactions for mosquitoes, vertebrate hosts, and pathogens. Finally, we raise several hypotheses concerning how the here revised impacts of insecticides on mosquitoes could interplay with vector-mediated pathogens’ transmission.

1. Background

Vector-borne diseases can cause severe harm to human health, including morbidity and mortality depending on the pathogen infection, diagnosis, and treatment quality available for infected individuals [1,2]. For years, the scientific community has worked to develop ways to mitigate the effects of these diseases, and one of the main approaches used is the reduction of vector populations [2,3]. The principal vectors of many human pathogens are mosquitoes. For example, the mosquito Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) is capable of transmitting multiple pathogens, including the Dengue, Zika, and Chikungunya viruses [4,5]. Furthermore, several mosquito species of the genus Anopheles are responsible for transmitting the protozoan Plasmodium, which causes malaria, as well as the worms that cause lymphatic filariasis. These worms are also transmitted by other mosquito species, including Culex quinquefasciatus (Diptera: Culicidae). The abilities of these pathogens to be transmitted by widely distributed vectors explain their worldwide distributions. For instance, the Dengue virus is now present in at least 129 countries and was estimated to infect around 390 million people every year [1]. Furthermore, the Plasmodium-caused disease malaria was considered endemic in at least 87 countries, with 229 million cases reported for 2019 in the latest 2021 report [2].
Several approaches have been used to reduce vector populations, which spans from the reductions of breeding sites up to the use of insecticides to control the abundances of both the vector’s immature and adult stages [6,7,8]. Pyrethroids, synthetic analogs derived from pyrethrins (naturally occurring compounds present in the flower buds of certain Tanacetum species), are the most widely used group of insecticides, [9,10]. Pyrethroids and pyrethrins act by disrupting the functioning of voltage-gated sodium channels in insects. Pyrethroids are stabler and more toxic to insects than pyrethrins are and cost less to produce [8,11,12]. Organophosphates and carbamates are two other nerve-active insecticide groups that target acetylcholinesterase enzymes, and consequently are as quick-acting as pyrethroids [13]. Finally, two other relatively slow-acting groups of insecticides commonly used against mosquitoes are insect growth regulators (e.g., pyriproxyfen, which attacks the hormonal balance to disrupt growth and development) and biorational insecticides (e.g., Bacillus thuringiensis var. israelensis (Bti), which targets the midgut) [14,15].
To control adult mosquitoes, several insecticide application techiniques can be used, such as indoor residual sprays (IRS), long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLIN), aerosol sprays, and fumigations [7,8,16]. The IRS and LLIN are the most commonly used methods for the control of Anopheles spp., and were responsible for significant decreases in the number of malaria cases in Africa from 2000 to 2019 [2,6,8,17]. However, successive reports of insecticide resistance, especially to pyrethroids, have caused uncertainty regarding the current progress in vector control and put the sustainability of the continuous use of IRS and LLIN in doubt [6,8,16]. Despite the promising launch of a large-scale pilot vaccination program with a first vaccine candidate for malaria in 2019 [17], the report of an increase of 12 million malaria cases per year from 2014–2019, is an indication of delayed progress in malaria control [2]. Pyrethroids are also used to control Ae. aegypti and other culicid mosquitoes, and this has unsurprisingly imposed strong pressure for the selection of resistant populations [18,19,20,21,22]. Resistance has also been reported against other insecticide groups, including organophosphates, insect growth regulators, and Bti [23,24]. However, since research on the effects of these compounds has been scarce, they have been discussed to a lesser extent than pyrethroids in this review. Interestingly, despite growing reports of pyrethroid resistance globally and the intensive use of insecticides against mosquitoes, the ways in which sublethal exposure to these compounds and resistance-associated population genetic changes affect the transmission of pathogens have remained elusive [25,26].
In the current review, the multiple facets of insecticide exposure effects on mosquitoes (Culicidae) that can interplay with their vector competence (i.e., the ability of a vector to transmit a pathogen [27], correlated with overall pathogen transmission risks) were highlighted (Figure 1). The main text is divided into Section 2 and Section 3. Section 2 contains information on the direct and acute effects of sublethal concentrations on individuals and populations; it is further divided into two parts, each dedicated to effects of exposure on adult and larval mosquitoes. Section 3 reviews the effects of changes in population genetics caused by selection for resistance after exposure to high doses of insecticides. Section 3 is organized into three subsections, each discussing one of the three major resistance mechanisms: target site mutations, metabolic resistance, and behavioral resistance. Understanding both the sublethal and lethal effects of insecticide exposure on the biological and behavioral responses of mosquitoes, especially those impacting their blood meal-related activities—a key point in pathogen transmission—can lead to the development of novel approaches that provide comprehensive conclusions linking control strategies to epidemic risks.

2. Changes in Pathogen Dissemination by Mosquitoes That Survived an Insecticide Exposure

Insecticides, like any other xenobiotics, can directly impact both the biology and behavior of mosquitoes, after non-lethal exposures. Upon contact with the insects, insecticide molecules can induce behaviors, or cause energy-consuming biochemical reactions before causing lethality [28]. These behaviors or energetic costs can reduce insect fitness by disturbing feeding or reproductive behaviors, and thus interfere with the vector competence [29,30]. For example, only sufficiently “aged” female mosquitoes can transmit the malaria-causing protozoan Plasmodium falciparum, which takes about 10 to 15 days to complete its life cycle within the vector and be ready for transmission to humans [26]; therefore, decreases in vector survival time resulting from sublethal insecticide exposure or lower blood meal volumes would reduce pathogen transmission [29,31].
Herein, we structured separate sections for different responses of the immature and adult life stages. In the case of adults, two different situations resulting in sublethal exposures have been considered: (a) reduced exposure on treated surfaces because of irritability (i.e., stimulus-dependent repellency) [32,33,34]; and (b) exposure to low insecticide concentrations due to the expected reduction of insecticide residuals in IRS and LLIN [35]. Regarding the sublethal exposure of larvae, sublethal exposures are results from the direct application of insecticides that dilute in water bodies [36,37] or through indirect contamination of aquatic systems by insecticides in runoff [38]. Nevertheless, for both cases (i.e., larvae and adults), most of the impacts of exposures to sublethal concentrations occurred through the toxicity of the insecticide itself and its cascading effects on subsequent generations [39,40]. These sublethal responses contrast with the impacts of lethal exposures, which selected for resistant populations (discussed in Section 3) and thus had presented long-term and stable population genetic effects, even if insecticide use is suspended [32,41].

2.1. Sublethal Exposure of Adults to Insecticides

As mentioned above, pyrethroids in IRS and LLIN have been the most commonly used methods for controlling adult mosquitoes. Pyrethroids target voltage-gated sodium channels in insects. They act by prolonging their opening state and causing repetitive firing (type I pyrethroids) or long membrane depolarization (type II pyrethroids); both lead to convulsions, subsequent paralysis, and eventually death [11,12]. Structurally, type II pyrethroids harbor an α-cyano moiety at the phenyl benzyl alcohol position that is absent in type I pyrethroids. The presence of this α-cyano moiety confers type II pyrethroids higher toxicity than type I pyrethroids [9].
In addition to the pyrethroid lethal effects, several mosquito species (e.g., Anopheles spp. and Ae. aegypti) are irritated by contact with pyrethroid molecules [34,42,43,44]. Studies showed that certain populations of Anopheles species also respond to the presence of pyrethroids (especially type I, which are often more volatile than type II) before making physical contact with a treated surface, suggesting their ability to recognize volatile particles by olfaction [33,45]. These excito-repellent behaviors allow sublethally exposed mosquitoes to escape from insecticide residues [43]. This escape behavior could lead to the reduction of human bites inside homes, which would reduce pathogen transmission rates. However, the outcome of this irritability on mosquito physiology and the potential risk of mosquitoes being present in greater numbers outside of homes, where people cannot be protected by bed nets or IRS, should also be considered as potential factors increasing the transmission risks [44].
Mosquitoes’ foraging and learning abilities depend on the normal functioning of their neural system, which can be modulated by both their physiological status and environmental cues [46,47,48,49,50]. Therefore, the direct impacts of sublethal exposures to pyrethroids on most of the insect’s abilities is expected to be dependent on their sensory and neural systems, especially considering that not only pyrethroids but also several other insecticides target the mosquito nervous system [8]. Cohnstaedt and Allan [51] demonstrated that female mosquitoes of Ae. aegypti, Cx. quinquefasciatus, and Anopheles albimanus needed more time to initiate a flight response to host cues, flew slower, and had higher flight turning rates after being exposed to two pyrethroids (i.e., deltamethrin and permethrin, type II and I, respectively). This impaired flight ability is expected to interfere with insect mobility and reproduction, but it is not known to what extent this impairment may affect the transmission of pathogens.
When considering the reproductive and olfactory abilities of insects, the impacts of sublethal concentrations of insecticides were usually reported to be negative for their fitness [52,53,54,55]. However, studies had also reported the absence of these negative impacts, and in less common circumstances, the occurrence of beneficial effects for the insect’s fitness [56,57,58,59,60], the latter which is termed ‘hormetic effect’, and are usually but not exclusively related to pyrethroids [61,62]. Interestingly, the majority of the records of sublethal effects in mosquitoes have demonstrated only negative results after insecticide exposures, with no hormesis identified [35,63]. The fact that there are few studies reporting impacts of pyrethroid sublethal exposure in mosquitoes, and that even in these studies the doses used are high enough to cause mortality of at least part of the exposed individuals (e.g., LD10 or higher [63]) might explain the lack of evidence for pyrethroid mediated hormetic effects, which is usually reached at much lower and narrow concentration ranges.
Several species have been found to constitutively overexpress detoxifying enzymes as a tolerance or resistance mechanism [64,65,66,67]. However, the overexpression of such enzymes can also occur only after contact with sublethal concentrations of insecticides in susceptible individuals. This phenomenon of increased expression of detoxifying enzymes was observed in a susceptible population of Anopheles coluzzii after sublethal exposure to pyrethroids [68], and this is probably a common response among insects [69,70,71]. This overexpression of enzymes leads to energetic costs that may negatively impact several life-history traits related to fitness. However, the fitness costs of induced metabolic responses in mosquitoes have only been assessed for constitutive metabolic resistance, as mentioned in the next section (i.e., Section 3.2) [72,73]. Additionally, an impaired mosquito would probably have its flight abilities reduced, as it had been shown for other insect species [51,74,75,76], and have most of their biological and physiological parameters impacted.
Pathogens, such as the Dengue and Zika viruses, need to overcome the midgut barrier to disseminate throughout the insect hemolymph and eventually reach the salivary gland before they can be transmitted. Sublethal exposure to a pyrethroid insecticide (i.e., bifenthrin) increased the amount of Zika virus that passed through the midgut of Aedes albopictus females [77]. The higher dissemination ability in exposed females may be related to differential energy resource allocation caused by insecticide exposure that reduces the insect imme response, facilitating the dissemination of the virus. Another study showed that this increased dissemination of pathogen happens in the early days after the ingestion of infected blood, but in later days after an infected blood meal, the viral dissemination in the control infected mosquitoes also increases, and both mosquito groups end up presenting 100% viral dissemination [78]. Further studies are needed to confirm the underlying mechanisms that drive the observed differential pathogen dissemination rate found by these studies and to assess how would insecticide exposure impacts pathogen dissemination within mosquito and transmission risks.
Finally, Bti, which is normally used in larval control, appears to influence adult Ae. albopictus to detect cues in the water body to which Bti is added, since its presence induced an increase in the oviposition behavior of this mosquito [79]. However, in the same study, it was demonstrated that the toxicity of Bti to emerging larvae could be maintained for several days without any change in efficacy [79].

2.2. Sublethal Exposure of Larvae to Insecticides

Many studies that investigated the effects of sublethal concentrations of pesticides on larval mosquitoes have reported that the physiology of an individual is not reset during metamorphosis to enable it to negate these effects in adults [80,81]. The effects of physiological stressors during the immature developmental stage on the adult can also be difficult to interpret, as they may have multiple outcomes, such as longer development times, male-biased sex ratios, and higher emergence rates and body sizes [82,83,84,85] or they offer null impacts, depending on the xenobiotics [86,87].
Sublethal exposures to both pyrethroids or organophosphates in the fourth larval instar caused reductions in adult longevity, fecundity, and wing length in Cx. quinquefasciatus [82]. Furthermore, in this case, the fewer eggs laid by treated females were also smaller than the eggs of control females [82], which would impact the next generation’s fitness as well. These impacts may be mediated by changes in larval swimming behavior induced by sublethal exposure to these pesticides, as was demonstrated in Ae. aegypti [37]. In addition to energy loss due to faster wriggling movements, the impact on the feeding ability of these insects would also explain the longer developmental period necessary to reach the pupal stage [37]. On the other hand, sublethal exposure to malathion in first-instar larvae of Ae. aegypti resulted in larger adult females at 20 ºC, but not at 30 ºC, demonstrating that other environmental factors during exposure can also shape the nature of the effects of sublethal insecticide exposures [88]. In this case, the reduced competition resulting from the elimination of small or more susceptible larvae was proposed as an explanation for the larger-sized females that developed from larvae grown at the lower temperature [88]. Nonetheless, the vector competence of the larger adult females originating from larvae grown at the lower temperature was not modified compared to that of the control, while the females originating from exposed larvae grown at the higher temperature presented a significantly higher vector competence for the tested Sindbis virus (MRE16-strain) infection and dissemination rates than the control females [88]. The mechanism underlying the higher adult vector competence of these sublethally exposed larvae could not be assessed in that study, but it was speculated that impairment of the immune system was involved in the increased vector competence in smaller adults [88].
Lingering damage to tissues—such as those of the midgut, as a result of larval or adult sublethal exposures to insecticides—is common in insects, including mosquitoes [81,89,90,91]. Because the insect midgut is a port of entry for most pathogens and is thus a barrier to be overcome before the pathogen can infect new hosts [92], any damage to the midgut or the peritrophic matrix (an extracellular matrix that surrounds the food bolus and is synthetized by the posterior midgut after a blood meal) could change a pathogen’s ability to disseminate throughout the insect’s body. Bti-based insecticides are normally used for larval control; upon ingestion, these insecticides damage midgut cells. Sublethal exposure to Bti-based products increases the susceptibility to dengue virus infections, but not to chikungunya in Bti-resistant Ae. aegypti [93]. It remains to be elucidated as to whether this is a common effect and related to the sublethal damage by Bti on the midgut, or is linked to genetic factors (since it was observed in a Bti-resistant mosquito population). On the other hand, the damaged midgut impairs the mosquito’s digestion ability, inducing it to take smaller blood meals [81,89], which conversely reduces the likelihood of mosquitoes initially acquiring the pathogens.
Studies have been carried out considering the interaction between adult mosquitoes derived from exposed larvae and malaria-causing parasites [86,87,94]. For instance, the exposure of Culex pipiens to the neonicotinoid imidacloprid did not affect the life history traits of individuals nor the susceptibility of adults to infection by avian malaria parasite (Plasmodium gallinaceum) [86]. The exposure of larvae of Cx. pipiens to field-realistic doses of glyphosate, the most used herbicide worldwide, did not affect the individual survival, adult size, and female fecundity. Conversely, females derived from exposed larvae with the herbicide increased the probability of female infection by Plasmodium relictum [87]. The sublethal exposure to permethrin at larvae or adults of An. gambiae reduced the infection prevalence by Plasmodium berghei [94]. These studies with laboratory-consolidated models pointed that the level of interference of the exposure of the larvae to insecticides in the process of infection of mosquitoes depends on the species of both vector and pathogen and the mode of action of the compounds. Nevertheless, more realistic field studies are needed to better understand how larval exposure can interfere with the life cycle of pathogens in adult mosquitoes.

3. Changes in Pathogen Dissemination in Insecticide-Resistant Mosquitoes

Insecticides often do not reach 100% efficacy at controlling any given target species. Even when applied at recommended field rates, some compounds fail to reach the targeted insects because of biotic and abiotic factors associated with a surface covering failures, compound degradation, or runoff after heavy rainfalls [95,96]. Furthermore, it is not uncommon in any species that there are individuals capable of behaviorally avoiding such compounds or equipped with physiological tools capable of mitigating these compounds’ actions. The result of these factors is that the applied insecticides will almost always leave some survivors. The individuals that survive such insecticide exposures by behavioral means or physiological mechanisms will then reproduce and transfer the traits that permitted their survival to their offspring, increasing the percentage of resistant individuals in the population across generations [32].
The two main classes of insecticide resistance mechanisms are alterations of target sites (e.g., the mutation in the voltage-gated sodium channel gene, for pyrethroids, or in the acetylcholinesterase gene, for organophosphates and carbamates), which generally reduces the binding rate of the insecticide and its target [19,97], and modifications of the insect’s metabolism, which can occur via a variety of detoxification and excretion processes [98]. Both of these insecticide resistance mechanisms (i.e., target site modification and changes in metabolism) occur in mosquitoes. Furthermore, as already described for other insect groups [99,100,101,102,103], attention has recently been paid to behavioral resistance mechanisms to insecticides in mosquitoes [6,104,105]. The selection of resistance through any of these mechanisms will shape the genetics of mosquito populations and could impact insect physiology and behavior, and therefore transmission abilities.

3.1. Target Site Insecticide Resistance

Most known cases of insecticide resistance related to target site alterations in mosquitoes involves knockdown resistance (kdr) mutations in the insect sodium channels, which are the major targets for the actions of pyrethroids [8,97,105,106]. The occurrence of kdr mutation, which reduces the action of insecticide molecules targeting voltage-gated sodium channels, was shown to also cause changes in the gating properties of such ionic channels [97,107,108,109]. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect modified firing activities (i.e., low action potential frequency) in some neural circuits of individuals carrying kdr mutations, potentially resulting in differential sensitivity to environmental cues.
Considering that a large part of a mosquito’s host-seeking behaviors depends on olfactory sensory neurons [48,49], and that blood meal intake behavior has also been suggested to be modulated by specific sensory neurons in the tip of the mosquito stylet [110], modified neural activities in kdr-mutant mosquitoes could have important impacts on insect fitness. Diop et al. [111], for example, demonstrated that L1014F kdr homozygous An. gambiae had an impaired ability to locate holes in bed nets, suggesting a decrease in their overall sensory abilities due to this mutation. Another study also showed that an L1014F kdr insecticide-resistant strain of An. gambiae preferred hosts under insecticide-treated nets more than those under untreated nets, while isoline-susceptible mosquitoes did not discern between both netting options [112]. This preference for insecticide-protected hosts suggests that the L1014F kdr mutation in the voltage-gated sodium channels modulates the mosquitoes’ host preference towards insecticide presence.
Differential susceptibility to pathogen infection has been reported in mosquitoes harboring kdr mutations, independently of insecticide exposure [113,114,115]. These studies indicated greater susceptibility of L1014F and L1014S kdr mutants of An. gambiae to infection by P. falciparum, which in turn represents a worsening scenario for malaria control in regions where pyrethroid insecticides are used heavily and mosquitoes have already evolved pyrethroid resistance [113,114,115]. Nonetheless, another study showed that even though L1014S kdr increased the susceptibility of mosquitoes to P. falciparum when pyrethroids were present, the insecticide had toxic effects directly on the pathogen, thus reducing the overall infection risk [116]. This suggests that the higher mosquito susceptibility to parasite infection is compensated for by the toxicity of the insecticide to the parasite itself.
When a mosquito harboring a given kdr mutation is selected, several other polymorphisms located in the vicinity of the voltage-gated sodium channel locus might also be selected for, even under weak selective pressure, and thus exponentially increase in the population [117]. These new frequencies of a certain haplotype might cause slight to strong changes in the mosquito’s physiology (including its vector competence) or behavior. Previous investigations reported a positive correlation between high frequencies of a specific haplotype for the immune gene ClipC9 and high frequencies of the L1014F kdr mutation, indicating that linked selection could be playing a role in shaping genetic traits other than the one under direct selective pressure [115]. When this immune gene was inhibited in the L1014F kdr-mutant An. gambiae, their susceptibility to P. falciparum increased, demonstrating the immune gene’s direct role in controlling the mosquito’s susceptibility to this pathogen. This immune gene was also shown to be located in a locus very close to the voltage-gated sodium channel gene [115]. This would, therefore, explain the multiple different outcomes of kdr mutations observed in several different populations, as these might be linked to different haplotypes of other genes that have indirect positive or negative impacts on the transmission rates, thus making the nature of these impacts hard to predict.
Another set of studies have also investigated a target-site mutation in the acetylcholinesterase gene (i.e., Ace-1 G119S) that confers resistance to organophosphates and carbamates [22,118]. Given the involvement of this enzyme in the neural signaling, the same broad scenario of impacts of altered activity as results of mutations that were discussed for kdr resistance could be expected. However, at least one study provided evidence that the biochemical activity levels of this enzyme do not change with the mutation [119]. This is the only mutation found in this gene in both Anopheles and Culex and the selection process seemingly selected a single haplotype (Ace-1R) with signals of linkage selections across at least two megabases in the genome of An. gambiae [120]. The reduced diversity across the genome of the resistant individuals therefore suggests a source for the several fitness costs and adult behavioral disadvantages reported by literature [120,121]. Although the specific pathways in which the selection for Ace-1R allele can impact vector competence is not well known yet, its negative impact on fitness does not necessarily imply a lower transmission risk since higher P. falciparum infection prevalence was also described to occur in the resistant individuals compared with susceptible ones of same genetic background [122].
Insecticide resistance could also indirectly interfere with overall vectorial capacity, which is influenced by variables such as vector density and longevity as well as transmission of pathogens ([123] and references therein), by causing changes in insect fecundity, mainly through modulations to reproductive abilities by modifying mating or blood meal feeding abilities in resistant individuals. The previously mentioned changes in neural excitability may also directly impact the female-male communications and mating success of kdr or Ace-1R-expressing individuals, or even impact the blood volumes that these females take to produce mature, viable eggs. Platt et al. [124] showed that a L1014F kdr mutation in Anopheles spp. benefitted mating competitiveness when in heterozygosis, but in homozygosis this mutation reduced mating competitiveness. Another study also showed the mating disadvantage for An. gambiae males carrying the Ace-1R allele [121]. This observed effect on mating success could be caused by changes in neural olfactory perception of sexual aggregation pheromones, as previously demonstrated in Ae. aegypti [125], but further investigations are needed to confirm this hypothesis.

3.2. Metabolic Insecticide Resistance

Metabolic resistance in mosquito species usually involves increased expression of enzymes (e.g., esterase or monooxygenases dependent on cytochrome P450) associated with detoxification processes [64,65,66,67,126]. Unlike target-site mutations, the genetic mechanisms underlying metabolic resistance are more easily and logically linked to direct energy losses, since in most cases resistant insects possess higher expression levels of resistance enzymes, which surely consumes energy [73,127]. These energetic costs could indirectly or directly affect components of insect fitness (e.g., fecundity and longevity), pathogen transmission rates, and overall population densities [128,129]. Additionally, the regulatory mechanisms involved in the overexpression of detoxification genes could also select for other linked gene variants, as was discussed in the previous section [115].
The studies on the fitness costs of metabolic resistance in insect pests showed multiple different outcomes, which could be explained by differences in experimental designs or laboratory versus field conditions [41]. Nevertheless, the overexpression of both esterase and cytochrome P450 conferring resistance to two different insecticide groups (i.e., organophosphates, and pyrethroids) in Cx. pipiens reduced its energy reserves (e.g., glycogen, glucose, and lipids) by up to 30% [72,73]. In P450-overexpressing insects, smaller-bodied females and lower female emergence rates [72] were observed, which is suggestive of lower fecundity and potential population decreases, similarly to those demonstrated in organophosphate-resistant beetles overexpressing esterase enzymes [130]. These lower energy resources could also cause shorter adult lifespans, which could reduce the pathogen transmission risks, as was demonstrated for Cx. pipiens overexpressing esterase enzymes [131].
The effects of the overexpression of detoxification enzymes on the transmission rates of pathogens are still controversial. It has been suggested that esterase overproduction can interfere with P. relictum development in Cx. pipiens [132]. However, more recent studies have suggested that this resistance mechanism decreased the susceptibility of Cx. pipiens to infection by this pathogen [133]. This reduction in infection rates more likely resulted from the increased expression of multiple immunity-related genes than from changes in energy costs [133]. This linked overexpression of multiple immune-related and detoxifying genes indicates that the same regulatory mechanisms and gene expression profiles are shared between these gene groups [117,133], suggesting that metabolic resistance can indirectly cause other physiological changes, including changes in vector competence.
The mechanisms involved in regulating the expression of detoxifying enzymes by the downregulation of microRNAs (i.e., short RNA sequences that bind to specific regions of their target mRNA to prevent protein synthesis) have recently been elucidated [134]. The downregulation of four of these post-transcriptional specific inhibitors of enzyme synthesis leads to higher levels of the cytochrome P450 enzymes that confer resistance to pyrethroids in Cx. pipiens [135,136]. These microRNAs are present in the genome in clusters, and their downregulation could impact several other physiological systems in the mosquitoes and interfere with their pathogen transmission abilities.
The overexpression of detoxifying enzymes might also interfere with mosquito host-seeking behaviors by disrupting their olfactory abilities. It is well-known in insects that for correct flight navigation towards an odorant source, every odorant molecule must be degraded after targeting its odorant receptor to allow the signal to be interrupted and new molecules recognized [137]. These processes are largely performed by enzymes, which are mainly esterase and cytochrome P450 enzymes [137,138]. Interestingly, members of a large class of cytochrome P450 genes (e.g., CYP3 and CYP4) that are strongly related to insecticide and other plant xenobiotic detoxification processes were also shown to be expressed at high levels in the antennae of herbivorous pests [138], suggesting a link between these two physiological functions (i.e., metabolism of insecticides and odorant compounds). Therefore, it is not known if high expression levels of esterase or cytochrome P450 enzymes could also metabolize odorant molecules faster in insecticide-resistant mosquitoes. The potential interference with host-seeking behavior in metabolically resistant mosquitoes would reduce their blood feeding frequency, fitness, and thus, pathogen transmission rates.

3.3. Behavioral Insecticide Resistance

The behavioral resistance discussed in this section relates to the failure of the insecticide to control the mosquito population because the mosquitoes are repelled by the insecticide and avoid exposure to it. This concept of behavioral resistance in mosquitoes has become a topic of concern due to the long-term, intensive use of IRS and LLIN over the last decades. Mosquitoes have recently been reported to show stronger repellent behaviors to pyrethroids than previously observed [6,33,139].
Since repellent behaviors to an insecticide directly change the exposure rate/time, their potential impacts on vectorial capacity through interactions with insecticides are very complex. Repellent behaviors can easily modulate the amount of insecticide to which an insect is exposed, therefore changing the dose it experiences from lethal to sublethal, and can also modulate the selection dynamics of physiological resistance to insecticides in different ways. We propose the following three main scenarios, considering the target site for the repellency is different than the one for lethality: (1) If a genotypic variant conferring insecticide repellence is already present in a population at a high frequency, this will decrease the likelihood of a physiological resistance mechanism being selected, since many susceptible individuals will survive exposure by being repelled. (2) If physiological resistance was selected before a repellent genotype arose in the population, then repellence is less likely to be selected since many resistant but non-repelled insects also survive. (3) Finally, when both variants are present in the population but not yet at high frequencies, they would reduce the selection pressure for each other, slowing down the selection for both genotypes, keeping their frequencies more stable until other factors disrupt such an equilibrium [32,140,141].
Transfluthrin, a pyrethroid, can cause behavioral repellency in susceptible Ae. aegypti adults by acting solely on the voltage-gated sodium channels. Transfluthrin-mediated repellency is a likely result of insecticide actions in selected neuronal circuits [142]. Similar repellency mediated by the activation of sodium channels has also been demonstrated for natural pyrethrins [143]. The presence of the two kdr mutations (S989P and V1016G) in the sodium channel gene reduced pyrethroid-mediated repellency without impairing olfaction [143,144]. Other studies that used unrelated field-resistant populations have observed indirect effects of apparent linked or fitness-related alterations in repellency behavior to pyrethroids or other repellents in both Ae. aegypti and An. gambiae [144,145]. Nonetheless, further research is required on whether the observed increase in Anopheles repellency behavior to pyrethroids in the field is a direct or linked effect of kdr or metabolic pyrethroid resistance (with respect to lethality).
In addition to direct repellence behavior, the foraging period patterns of mosquitoes after the introduction of IRS and LLIN have also received special attention. Higher rates of mosquito bites in humans reported after the use of residual sprays and treated nets occurred through a temporal shift in mosquito foraging from late night to early evening (Figure 2) when people are still out of their beds or homes [139,146,147,148,149]. This shift could be a result of selections acting on trait variants and/or changes in ecological interaction among closely related species, especially in the case of the An. gambiae sensu lato species complex.
The existence of selective trait variants in a species leading to differences in endo/exophagy preferences was suggested in a study that detected changes in this foraging preference before and after the use of IRS and LLIN within a single species (i.e., An. gambiae sensu stricto) [150]. The behavioral trait that these selected phenotypes variants harbor (endophagy or exophagy) could be a result of single or multiple mutations in specific genes related to the circadian rhythms that influence time-specific behaviors, as has been observed in butterflies and drosophilids [151,152]. Additionally, changes in ecological interactions as a result of decreases in the density of one sibling species in the community that was lethally exposed to an insecticide, which benefitted and increased the prevalence and success of other species, were suggested by several studies. For instance, changes in species composition of An. gambiae s.l. occurred with a reduction in the density of more endophilic species (e.g., An. gambiae s.s.) and an increase in the density of more exophilic ones (e.g., Anopheles arabiensis) [147,153,154,155]. Similar shifts toward exophilic behavior at both the inter- and intraspecies levels have also been reported for the Anopheles funestus s.l. complex [147,156,157].
The above-mentioned ecological selectivity of insecticides for species with higher relative numbers of exophilic mosquitoes would benefit the adults of the exophilic species by reducing the overall larval density, and therefore, the competition stress experienced by its larvae. In turn, this could also cause an increase in the absolute number, size, and fitness of the adults of the remaining exophilic species [159]. The larger size of adults is related to there being longer-lived females in the population, which increases the pathogen transmission risks [31,160]. Therefore, the ecological selectivity of an insecticide, in addition to shaping the species assemblage towards individuals that are more exophilic or exophagic, may also induce higher mosquito fitness and pathogen transmission risks.
A higher prevalence of host-seeking in the early morning hours represents a greater risk of exposure of humans to biting mosquitoes [6,139,150]. Independently of the specific mechanism involved (e.g., inherited behavioral resistance, species assemblage changes, etc.), these behavioral changes could increase the pathogen transmission rates to similar or higher levels than target-site or metabolic insecticide resistance would, as has been demonstrated by two different mathematical models (i.e., Imperial and OpenMalaria models [161,162]) of malaria transmission. These two models predicted the effects of the increasing frequency of exophagy after the use of IRS and LLIN on mean entomological inoculation rates (infectious bites per person) (Figure 3) [6]. Therefore, more studies are needed to understand the very complex scenario resulting from the multiple species and multiple effects of the lethality of insecticides in these vectors in the real world.

4. Conclusions

A broader understanding of the effects of insecticides on vectors of human pathogens is needed to support continuous efforts aimed at epidemic reductions. Every year, new disease outbreaks occur, such as the Zika epidemic outbreak in 2015 in South America and the increasing number of cases of Dengue infection worldwide. These outbreaks point out the fact that, despite causing high mosquito mortality, the sublethal effects mediated by insecticides on the behaviors and physiology of mosquitoes can also influence their transmission of pathogens. A large number of studies have suggested that insecticide resistance has modified the physiology, blood-feeding behavior, and reproduction of mosquitoes, and to some extent the dynamics of many diseases that vector mosquitoes can spread. The present comprehensive review and discussion on how unintentional selection for insecticide resistance can drive the overall transmission risks of pathogens by different heritable traits and mechanisms in mosquitoes could help us to better predict, understand, and mitigate common and unexpected epidemics like those that have occurred recently.
The effects of sublethal exposures, on the other hand, involve even more dynamic environmental and ecological interactions that are much less tractable and reproducible by studies when compared with the effects of insecticide resistance in terms of population genetic changes. Thus, even though numerous studies have been done on these sublethal effects, establishing comprehensive and predictable links between the effects of sublethal exposures and changes in vector competence is still a challenge. Therefore, the sublethal effects of insecticides on mosquito vector competence might still be considered a large research gap, with there being a long way to go before we can obtain a more comprehensive understanding of their effects and mechanisms.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, F.A., E.E.O. and G.F.M.; First Draft Preparation, F.A.; Review and Editing, F.A., E.E.O. and G.F.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior—Brasil (CAPES—001), Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico—Brasil (CNPq—142205/2017-6 for FA; 404844/2018-9 and 301725/2019-5 for GFM; 308576/2018-7 and 427304/2018-0 for EEO), and Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais (Fapemig).

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the editorial board of Insects and the four anonymous reviewers for comments and suggestions that helped to improve this review.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. WHO. Fact-Sheets: Dengue and Severe Dengue 19 May 2021; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  2. WHO. World Malaria Report 2020: 20 Years of Global Progress and Challenges; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  3. WHO. Global Strategy for Dengue Prevention and Control 2012–2020; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  4. Turell, M.J.; Beaman, J.R.; Tammariello, R.F. Susceptibility of selected strains of Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus (Diptera: Culicidae) to chikungunya virus. J. Med. Entomol. 1992, 29, 49–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Chouin-Carneiro, T.; Vega-Rua, A.; Vazeille, M.; Yebakima, A.; Girod, R.; Goindin, D.; Dupont-Rouzeyrol, M.; Lourenço-de-Oliveira, R.; Failloux, A.-B. Differential susceptibilities of Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus from the Americas to Zika virus. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2016, 10, e0004543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Gatton, M.L.; Chitnis, N.; Churcher, T.; Donnelly, M.J.; Ghani, A.C.; Godfray, H.C.J.; Gould, F.; Hastings, I.; Marshall, J.; Ranson, H. The importance of mosquito behavioural adaptations to malaria control in Africa. Evol. Int. J. Org. Evol. 2013, 67, 1218–1230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  7. Chareonviriyaphap, T.; Bangs, M.J.; Suwonkerd, W.; Kongmee, M.; Corbel, V.; Ngoen-Klan, R. Review of insecticide resistance and behavioral avoidance of vectors of human diseases in Thailand. Parasit. Vectors 2013, 6, 280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Liu, N. Insecticide resistance in mosquitoes: Impact, mechanisms, and research directions. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2015, 60, 537–559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Elliott, M. Synthetic Pyrethroids; Elliott, M., Ed.; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, USA, 1977; pp. 1–28. ISBN 1947-5918. [Google Scholar]
  10. Casida, J.E.; Quistad, G.B. Pyrethrum Flowers: Production, Chemistry, Toxicology, and Uses; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1995; ISBN 9780195082104. [Google Scholar]
  11. Narahashi, T. Neuroreceptors and ion channels as the basis for drug action: Past, present, and future. J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 2000, 294, 1–26. [Google Scholar]
  12. Soderlund, D.M.; Clark, J.M.; Sheets, L.P.; Mullin, L.S.; Piccirillo, V.J.; Sargent, D.; Stevens, J.T.; Weiner, M.L. Mechanisms of pyrethroid neurotoxicity: Implications for cumulative risk assessment. Toxicology 2002, 171, 3–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Mengle, D.C.; Casida, J.E. Inhibition and recovery of brain cholinesterase activity in house flies poisoned with organophosphate and carbamate compounds. J. Econ. Entomol. 1958, 51, 750–757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Estrada, J.G.; Mulla, M.S. Evaluation of two new insect growth regulators against mosquitoes in the laboratory. J. Am. Mosq. Control Assoc. 1986, 2, 57–60. [Google Scholar]
  15. Silva-Filha, M.H.N.L.; Romão, T.P.; Rezende, T.M.T.; da Silva Carvalho, K.; de Menezes, H.S.G.; do Nascimento, N.A.; Soberón, M.; Bravo, A. Bacterial toxins active against mosquitoes: Mode of action and resistance. Toxins 2021, 13, 523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Ranson, H.; Lissenden, N. Insecticide resistance in African Anopheles mosquitoes: A worsening situation that needs urgent action to maintain malaria control. Trends Parasitol. 2016, 32, 187–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. WHO. Fact-Sheets: Malaria 1 April 2021; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  18. Xu, Q.; Zhang, L.; Li, T.; Zhang, L.; He, L.; Dong, K.; Liu, N. Evolutionary adaptation of the amino acid and codon usage of the mosquito sodium channel following insecticide selection in the field mosquitoes. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e47609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Haddi, K.; Tomé, H.V.V.; Du, Y.; Valbon, W.R.; Nomura, Y.; Martins, G.F.; Dong, K.; Oliveira, E.E. Detection of a new pyrethroid resistance mutation (V410L) in the sodium channel of Aedes aegypti: A potential challenge for mosquito control. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 46549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Lien, N.T.K.; Ngoc, N.T.H.; Hien, N.T.; Hoang, N.H.; Binh, N.T.H. Two novel mutations in the voltage-gated sodium channel associated with knockdown resistance (kdr) in the dengue vector Aedes aegypti in Vietnam. J. Vector Ecol. 2018, 43, 184–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Singh, O.P.; Dykes, C.L.; Das, M.K.; Pradhan, S.; Bhatt, R.M.; Agrawal, O.P.; Adak, T. Presence of two alternative kdr-like mutations, L1014F and L1014S, and a novel mutation, V1010L, in the voltage gated Na+ channel of Anopheles culicifacies from Orissa, India. Malar. J. 2010, 9, 146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  22. Tmimi, F.Z.; Faraj, C.; Bkhache, M.; Mounaji, K.; Failloux, A.B.; Sarih, M. Insecticide resistance and target site mutations (G119S ace-1 and L1014F kdr) of Culex pipiens in Morocco. Parasit Vectors 2018, 11, 51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Marcombe, S.; Farajollahi, A.; Healy, S.P.; Clark, G.G.; Fonseca, D.M. Insecticide resistance status of United States populations of Aedes albopictus and mechanisms involved. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e101992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Paris, M.; Tetreau, G.; Laurent, F.; Lelu, M.; Despres, L.; David, J. Persistence of Bacillus thuringiensis israelensis (Bti) in the environment induces resistance to multiple Bti toxins in mosquitoes. Pest Manag. Sci. 2011, 67, 122–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Tokponnon, F.T.; Ogouyémi, A.H.; Sissinto, Y.; Sovi, A.; Gnanguenon, V.; Cornélie, S.; Adéothy, A.A.; Ossè, R.; Wakpo, A.; Gbénou, D.; et al. Impact of long-lasting, insecticidal nets on anaemia and prevalence of Plasmodium falciparum among children under five years in areas with highly resistant malaria vectors. Malar. J. 2014, 13, 76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  26. Thomas, M.B.; Read, A.F. The threat (or not) of insecticide resistance for malaria control. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2016, 113, 8900–8902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Hardy, J.L.; Houk, E.J.; Kramer, L.D.; Reeves, W.C. Intrinsic factors affecting vector competence of mosquitoes for arboviruses. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1983, 28, 229–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Welling, W. Dynamic aspects of insect-insecticide interactions. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1977, 22, 53–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Viana, M.; Hughes, A.; Matthiopoulos, J.; Ranson, H.; Ferguson, H.M. Delayed mortality effects cut the malaria transmission potential of insecticide-resistant mosquitoes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2016, 113, 8975–8980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Valbon, W.R.; Cruz, F.M.; Ramos, G.S.; Tome, H.V.V.; Oliveira, E.E. Sublethal exposure to deltamethrin reduces the abilities of giant water bugs to prey upon Aedes aegypti larvae. Chemosphere 2018, 191, 350–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Jones, C.M.; Sanou, A.; Guelbeogo, W.M.; Sagnon, N.; Johnson, P.C.D.; Ranson, H. Aging partially restores the efficacy of malaria vector control in insecticide-resistant populations of Anopheles gambiae sl. from Burkina Faso. Malar. J. 2012, 11, 24. [Google Scholar]
  32. Georghiou, G.P. The evolution of resistance to pesticides. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 1972, 3, 133–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ritthison, W.; Titgratog, R.; Tainchum, K.; Bangs, M.J.; Manguin, S.; Chareonviriyaphap, T. Pyrethroid susceptibility and behavioral avoidance in Anopheles epiroticus, a malaria vector in Thailand. J. Vector Ecol. 2014, 39, 32–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Tainchum, K.; Nararak, J.; Boonyuan, W.; Bangs, M.J.; Chareonviriyaphap, T. Behavioral responses of Anopheles species (Culicidae: Diptera) with varying surface exposure to pyrethroid-treated netting in an excito-repellency test system. J. Vector Ecol. 2016, 41, 254–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Glunt, K.D. Understanding the Consequences of Sub-Lethal Insecticide Concentrations for Insecticide Resistance Management and Malaria Control; The Pennsylvania State University: State College, PA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  36. Benelli, G. Research in mosquito control: Current challenges for a brighter future. Parasitol. Res. 2015, 114, 2801–2805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Tomé, H.V.V.; Pascini, T.V.; Dângelo, R.A.C.; Guedes, R.N.C.; Martins, G.F. Survival and swimming behavior of insecticide-exposed larvae and pupae of the yellow fever mosquito Aedes aegypti. Parasit. Vectors 2014, 7, 195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  38. Stehle, S.; Schulz, R. Agricultural insecticides threaten surface waters at the global scale. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2015, 112, 5750–5755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  39. Müller, C. Impacts of sublethal insecticide exposure on insects—Facts and knowledge gaps. Basic Appl. Ecol. 2018, 30, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Silva, S.M.; Haddi, K.; Viteri Jumbo, L.O.; Oliveira, E.E. Progeny of the maize weevil, Sitophilus zeamais, is affected by parental exposure to clove and cinnamon essential oils. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2017, 163, 220–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Ffrench-Constant, R.H.; Bass, C. Does resistance really carry a fitness cost? Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 2017, 21, 39–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Siegert, P.Y.; Walker, E.; Miller, J.R. Differential behavioral responses of Anopheles gambiae (Diptera: Culicidae) modulate mortality caused by pyrethroid-treated bednets. J. Econ. Entomol. 2009, 102, 2061–2071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Manda, H.; Arce, L.M.; Foggie, T.; Shah, P.; Grieco, J.P.; Achee, N.L. Effects of irritant chemicals on Aedes aegypti resting behavior: Is there a simple shift to untreated “safe sites”? PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2011, 5, e1243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Manda, H.; Shah, P.; Polsomboon, S.; Chareonviriyaphap, T.; Castro-Llanos, F.; Morrison, A.; Burrus, R.G.; Grieco, J.P.; Achee, N.L. Contact irritant responses of Aedes aegypti using sublethal concentration and focal application of pyrethroid chemicals. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2013, 7, e2074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Potikasikorn, J.; Chareonviriyaphap, T.; Bangs, M.J.; Prabaripai, A. Behavioral responses to DDT and pyrethroids between Anopheles minimus species A and C, malaria vectors in Thailand. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2005, 73, 343–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  46. Bui, M.; Shyong, J.; Lutz, E.K.; Yang, T.; Li, M.; Truong, K.; Arvidson, R.; Buchman, A.; Riffell, J.A.; Akbari, O.S. Live calcium imaging of Aedes aegypti neuronal tissues reveals differential importance of chemosensory systems for life-history-specific foraging strategies. BMC Neurosci. 2019, 20, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Sanford, M.R.; Olson, J.K.; Lewis, W.J.; Tomberlin, J.K. The effect of sucrose concentration on olfactory-based associative learning in Culex quinquefasciatus Say (Diptera: Culicidae). J. Insect Behav. 2013, 26, 494–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Seenivasagan, T.; Guha, L.; Parashar, B.D.; Agrawal, O.P.; Sukumaran, D. Olfaction in Asian tiger mosquito Aedes albopictus: Flight orientation response to certain saturated carboxylic acids in human skin emanations. Parasitol. Res. 2014, 113, 1927–1932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. van Breugel, F.; Riffell, J.; Fairhall, A.; Dickinson, M.H. Mosquitoes use vision to associate odor plumes with thermal targets. Curr. Biol. 2015, 25, 2123–2129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Vinauger, C.; Lahondere, C.; Cohuet, A.; Lazzari, C.R.; Riffell, J.A. Learning and memory in disease vector insects. Trends Parasitol. 2016, 32, 761–771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Cohnstaedt, L.W.; Allan, S.A. Effects of sublethal pyrethroid exposure on the host-seeking behavior of female mosquitoes. J. Vector Ecol. 2011, 36, 395–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Desneux, N.; Decourtye, A.; Delpuech, J.-M. The sublethal effects of pesticides on beneficial arthropods. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2007, 52, 81–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Wei, H.; Du, J. Sublethal effects of larval treatment with deltamethrin on moth sex pheromone communication system of the Asian corn borer, Ostrinia furnacalis. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2004, 80, 12–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Kadala, A.; Charreton, M.; Jakob, I.; Le Conte, Y.; Collet, C. A use-dependent sodium current modification induced by type I pyrethroid insecticides in honeybee antennal olfactory receptor neurons. Neurotoxicology 2011, 32, 320–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Wang, G.; Huang, X.; Wei, H.; Fadamiro, H.Y. Sublethal effects of larval exposure to indoxacarb on reproductive activities of the diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (L.) (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae). Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2011, 101, 227–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Guedes, N.M.P.; Tolledo, J.; Corrêa, A.S.; Guedes, R.N.C. Insecticide-induced hormesis in an insecticide-resistant strain of the maize weevil, Sitophilus zeamais. J. Appl. Entomol. 2010, 134, 142–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Cordeiro, E.M.G.; De Moura, I.L.T.; Fadini, M.A.M.; Guedes, R.N.C. Beyond selectivity: Are behavioral avoidance and hormesis likely causes of pyrethroid-induced outbreaks of the southern red mite Oligonychus ilicis? Chemosphere 2013, 93, 1111–1116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Zanuncio, J.C.; Jusselino-Filho, P.; Ribeiro, R.C.; Zanuncio, T.V.; Ramalho Fde, S.; Serrão, J.E. Hormetic responses of a stinkbug predator to sublethal doses of pyrethroid. Bull Env. Contam. Toxicol. 2011, 87, 608–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Santos, M.F.; Santos, R.L.; Tomé, H.V.V.; Barbosa, W.F.; Martins, G.F.; Guedes, R.N.C.; Oliveira, E.E. Imidacloprid-mediated effects on survival and fertility of the Neotropical brown stink bug Euschistus heros. J. Pest Sci. 2016, 89, 231–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Tuelher, E.S.; da Silva, É.H.; Freitas, H.L.; Namorato, F.A.; Serrão, J.E.; Guedes, R.N.C.; Oliveira, E.E. Chlorantraniliprole-mediated toxicity and changes in sexual fitness of the Neotropical brown stink bug Euschistus heros. J. Pest Sci. 2017, 90, 397–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Calabrese, E.J.; Baldwin, L.A. Toxicology rethinks its central belief. Nature 2003, 421, 691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Guedes, R.N.C.; Cutler, G.C. Insecticide-induced hormesis and arthropod pest management. Pest Manag. Sci. 2014, 70, 690–697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  63. Sunday, O.O.; Kayode, A.; Ashamo, M.O. Laboratory review of sublethal effects of cypermethrin on oviposition, life span and egg development in Culex quinquefasciatus, Say (Diptera: Culicidae). Int. J. Mosq. Res. 2016, 3, 20–26. [Google Scholar]
  64. Brogdon, W.G.; McAllister, J.C.; Corwin, A.M.; Cordon-Rosales, C. Independent selection of multiple mechanisms for pyrethroid resistance in Guatemalan Anopheles albimanus (Diptera: Culicidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 1999, 92, 298–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Vulule, J.M.; Beach, R.F.; Atieli, F.K.; McAllister, J.C.; Brogdon, W.G.; Roberts, J.M.; Mwangi, R.W.; Hawley, W.A. Elevated oxidase and esterase levels associated with permethrin tolerance in Anopheles gambiae from Kenyan villages using permethrin-impregnated nets. Med. Vet. Entomol. 1999, 13, 239–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Casimiro, S.; Coleman, M.; Mohloai, P.; Hemingway, J.; Sharp, B. Insecticide resistance in Anopheles funestus (Diptera: Culicidae) from Mozambique. J. Med. Entomol. 2006, 43, 267–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Marcombe, S.; Mathieu, R.B.; Pocquet, N.; Riaz, M.-A.; Poupardin, R.; Sélior, S.; Darriet, F.; Reynaud, S.; Yébakima, A.; Corbel, V. Insecticide resistance in the dengue vector Aedes aegypti from Martinique: Distribution, mechanisms and relations with environmental factors. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e30989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Main, B.J.; Everitt, A.; Cornel, A.J.; Hormozdiari, F.; Lanzaro, G.C. Genetic variation associated with increased insecticide resistance in the malaria mosquito, Anopheles coluzzii. Parasit. Vectors 2018, 11, 225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. Meunier, L.; Prefontaine, G.; Van Munster, M.; Brousseau, R.; Masson, L. Transcriptional response of Choristoneura fumiferana to sublethal exposure of Cry1Ab protoxin from Bacillus thuringiensis. Insect Mol. Biol. 2006, 15, 475–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Xiao, C.; Luan, S.; Xu, Z.; Lang, J.; Rao, W.; Huang, Q. Tolerance potential of Chilo suppressalis larvae to fipronil exposure via the modulation of detoxification and GABA responses. J. Asia Pac. Entomol. 2017, 20, 1287–1293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Zhou, C.; Yang, H.; Wang, Z.; Long, G.; Jin, D. Comparative transcriptome analysis of Sogatella furcifera (Horváth) exposed to different insecticides. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 8773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Hardstone, M.C.; Huang, X.; Harrington, L.C.; Scott, J.G. Differences in development, glycogen, and lipid content associated with cytochrome P450-mediated permethrin resistance in Culex pipiens quinquefasciatus (Diptera: Culicidae). J. Med. Entomol. 2010, 47, 188–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Rivero, A.; Magaud, A.; Nicot, A.; Vézilier, J. Energetic cost of insecticide resistance in Culex pipiens mosquitoes. J. Med. Entomol. 2011, 48, 694–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Tosi, S.; Burgio, G.; Nieh, J.C. A common neonicotinoid pesticide, thiamethoxam, impairs honey bee flight ability. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 1201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  75. Alkassab, A.T.; Kirchner, W.H. Assessment of acute sublethal effects of clothianidin on motor function of honeybee workers using video-tracking analysis. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2018, 147, 200–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Guedes, R.N.C.; Corbett, S.; Rodriguez, M.; Goto, J.J.; Walse, S.S. Pesticide-mediated disruption of spotted wing Drosophila flight response to raspberries. J. Appl. Entomol. 2018, 142, 457–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Knecht, H.; Richards, S.L.; Balanay, J.A.G.; White, A.V. Impact of mosquito age and insecticide exposure on vector competence of Aedes albopictus (Diptera: Culicidae) for Zika virus. Pathogens 2018, 7, 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  78. Richards, S.L.; White, A.V.; Balanay, J.A.G. Potential for sublethal insecticide exposure to impact vector competence of Aedes albopictus (Diptera: Culicidae) for dengue and Zika viruses. Res. Rep. Trop. Med. 2017, 8, 53–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  79. Carrieri, M.; Masetti, A.; Albieri, A.; Maccagnani, B.; Bellini, R. Larvicidal activity and influence of Bacillus thuringiensis var. israelensis on Aedes albopictus oviposition in ovitraps during a two-week check interval protocol. J. Am. Mosq. Control Assoc. 2009, 25, 149–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Pechenik, J.A. Larval experience and latent effects—Metamorphosis is not a new beginning. Integr. Comp. Biol. 2006, 46, 323–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Fernandes, K.M.; Tomé, H.V.V.; Miranda, F.R.; Gonçalves, W.G.; Pascini, T.V.; Serrão, J.E.; Martins, G.F. Aedes aegypti larvae treated with spinosad produce adults with damaged midgut and reduced fecundity. Chemosphere 2019, 221, 464–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Robert, L.L.; Olson, J.K. Effects of sublethal dosages of insecticides on Culex quinquefasciatus. J. Am. Mosq. Control Assoc. 1989, 5, 239–246. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  83. Antonio, G.E.; Sanchez, D.; Williams, T.; Marina, C.F. Paradoxical effects of sublethal exposure to the naturally derived insecticide spinosad in the dengue vector mosquito, Aedes aegypti. Pest Manag. Sci. 2009, 65, 323–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Bara, J.J.; Montgomery, A.; Muturi, E.J. Sublethal effects of atrazine and glyphosate on life history traits of Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus (Diptera: Culicidae). Parasitol. Res. 2014, 113, 2879–2886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Vantaux, A.; Ouattarra, I.; Lefèvre, T.; Dabiré, K.R. Effects of larvicidal and larval nutritional stresses on Anopheles gambiae development, survival and competence for Plasmodium falciparum. Parasit. Vectors 2016, 9, 226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  86. Pigeault, R.; Bataillard, D.; Glaizot, O.; Christe, P. Effect of neonicotinoid exposure on the life history traits and susceptibility to Plasmodium infection on the major avian malaria vector Culex pipiens (Diptera: Culicidae). Parasitologia 2021, 1, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Bataillard, D.; Christe, P.; Pigeault, R. Impact of field-realistic doses of glyphosate and nutritional stress on mosquito life history traits and susceptibility to malaria parasite infection. Ecol. Evol. 2020, 10, 5079–5088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Muturi, E.J.; Alto, B.W. Larval environmental temperature and insecticide exposure alter Aedes aegypti competence for arboviruses. Vector-Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2011, 11, 1157–1163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Fernandes, K.M.; Gonzaga, W.G.; Pascini, T.V.; Miranda, F.R.; Tomé, H.V.V.; Serrão, J.E.; Martins, G.F. Imidacloprid impairs the post-embryonic development of the midgut in the yellow fever mosquito Stegomyia aegypti (= Aedes aegypti). Med. Vet. Entomol. 2015, 29, 245–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  90. Lopes, M.P.; Fernandes, K.M.; Tomé, H.V.V.; Gonçalves, W.G.; Miranda, F.R.; Serrão, J.E.; Martins, G.F. Spinosad-mediated effects on the walking ability, midgut, and Malpighian tubules of Africanized honey bee workers. Pest Manag. Sci. 2018, 74, 1311–1318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  91. Santos, H.P.; Gutierrez, Y.; Oliveira, E.E.; Serrão, J.E. Sublethal dose of deltamethrin damage the midgut cells of the mayfly Callibaetis radiatus. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2018, 25, 1418–1427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Michalski, M.L.; Erickson, S.M.; Bartholomay, L.C.; Christensen, B.M. Midgut barrier imparts selective resistance to filarial worm infection in Culex pipiens pipiens. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2010, 4, e875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Moltini-Conclois, I.; Stalinski, R.; Tetreau, G.; Després, L.; Lambrechts, L. Larval exposure to the bacterial insecticide Bti enhances dengue virus susceptibility of adult Aedes aegypti mosquitoes. Insects 2018, 9, 193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  94. Hauser, G.; Thiévent, K.; Koella, J.C. Consequences of larval competition and exposure to permethrin for the development of the rodent malaria Plasmodium berghei in the mosquito Anopheles gambiae. Parasit. Vectors 2020, 13, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Allan, S.A.; Kline, D.L.; Walker, T. Environmental factors affecting efficacy of bifenthrin-treated vegetation for mosquito control. J. Am. Mosq. Control Assoc. 2009, 25, 338–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Liu, P.; Liu, Y.; Liu, Q.; Liu, J. Photodegradation mechanism of deltamethrin and fenvalerate. J. Environ. Sci. 2010, 22, 1123–1128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Dong, K.; Du, Y.; Rinkevich, F.; Nomura, Y.; Xu, P.; Wang, L.; Silver, K.; Zhorov, B.S. Molecular biology of insect sodium channels and pyrethroid resistance. Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2014, 50, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  98. Gong, Y.; Li, T.; Feng, Y.; Liu, N. The function of two P450s, CYP9M10 and CYP6AA7, in the permethrin resistance of Culex quinquefasciatus. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Romero, A.; Potter, M.F.; Haynes, K.F. Behavioral responses of the bed bug to insecticide residues. J. Med. Entomol. 2009, 46, 51–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  100. Haddi, K.; Mendonça, L.P.; Dos Santos, M.F.; Guedes, R.N.C.; Oliveira, E.E. Metabolic and behavioral mechanisms of indoxacarb resistance in Sitophilus zeamais (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 2015, 108, 362–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Silverman, J.; Ross, M.H. Behavioral resistance of field-collected German cockroaches (Blattodea: Blattellidae) to baits containing glucose. Environ. Entomol. 1994, 23, 425–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Freitas, R.C.P.; Faroni, L.R.D.; Haddi, K.; Jumbo, L.O.V.; Oliveira, E.E. Allyl isothiocyanate actions on populations of Sitophilus zeamais resistant to phosphine: Toxicity, emergence inhibition and repellency. J. Stored Prod. Res. 2016, 69, 257–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Zhou, Y.H.; Zhang, Z.W.; Fu, Y.F.; Zhang, G.C.; Yuan, S. Carbon dioxide, odorants, heat and visible cues affect wild mosquito landing in open spaces. Front Behav. Neurosci. 2018, 12, 86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Valbon, W.R.; Haddi, K.; Carvalho, G.A.; Souza, R.A.; Guedes, R.N.C.; Martins, G.F.; Oliveira, E.E. “Armed to the teeth”: The multiple ways to survive insecticidal and predatory challenges in Aedes aegypti larvae. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2019, 156, 87–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Silver, K.; Dong, K.S.; Zhorov, B. Molecular mechanism of action and selectivity of sodium channel blocker insecticides. Curr. Med. Chem. 2017, 24, 2912–2924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  106. Silver, K.S.; Du, Y.; Nomura, Y.; Oliveira, E.E.; Salgado, V.L.; Zhorov, B.S.; Dong, K. Voltage-gated sodium channels as insecticide targets. Adv. Insect Phys. 2014, 46, 389–433. [Google Scholar]
  107. Du, Y.; Song, W.; Groome, J.R.; Nomura, Y.; Luo, N.; Dong, K. A negative charge in transmembrane segment 1 of domain II of the cockroach sodium channel is critical for channel gating and action of pyrethroid insecticides. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 2010, 247, 53–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  108. Oliveira, E.E.; Du, Y.; Nomura, Y.; Dong, K. A residue in the transmembrane segment 6 of domain I in insect and mammalian sodium channels regulate differential sensitivities to pyrethroid insecticides. Neurotoxicology 2013, 38, 42–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  109. Vais, H.; Williamson, M.S.; Goodson, S.J.; Devonshire, A.L.; Warmke, J.W.; Usherwood, P.N.; Cohen, C.J. Activation of Drosophila sodium channels promotes modification by deltamethrin. Reductions in affinity caused by knock-down resistance mutations. J. Gen. Physiol. 2000, 115, 305–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  110. Jung, J.W.; Baeck, S.-J.; Perumalsamy, H.; Hansson, B.S.; Ahn, Y.-J.; Kwon, H.W. A novel olfactory pathway is essential for fast and efficient blood-feeding in mosquitoes. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 13444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. Diop, M.M.; Moiroux, N.; Chandre, F.; Martin-Herrou, H.; Milesi, P.; Boussari, O.; Porciani, A.; Duchon, S.; Labbé, P.; Pennetier, C. Behavioral cost & overdominance in Anopheles gambiae. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0121755. [Google Scholar]
  112. Porciani, A.; Diop, M.; Moiroux, N.; Kadoke-Lambi, T.; Cohuet, A.; Chandre, F.; Dormont, L.; Pennetier, C. Influence of pyrethroid-treated bed net on host seeking behavior of Anopheles gambiae s. s. carrying the kdr allele. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0164518. [Google Scholar]
  113. Alout, H.; Djègbè, I.; Chandre, F.; Djogbénou, L.S.; Dabiré, R.K.; Corbel, V.; Cohuet, A. Insecticide exposure impacts vector–parasite interactions in insecticide-resistant malaria vectors. Proc. R. Soc. 2014, 281, 20140389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  114. Ndiath, M.O.; Cailleau, A.; Diedhiou, S.M.; Gaye, A.; Boudin, C.; Richard, V.; Trape, J.-F. Effects of the kdr resistance mutation on the susceptibility of wild Anopheles gambiae populations to Plasmodium falciparum: A hindrance for vector control. Malar. J. 2014, 13, 340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  115. Mitri, C.; Markianos, K.; Guelbeogo, W.M.; Bischoff, E.; Gneme, A.; Eiglmeier, K.; Holm, I.; Sagnon, N.; Vernick, K.D.; Riehle, M.M. The kdr-bearing haplotype and susceptibility to Plasmodium falciparum in Anopheles gambiae: Genetic correlation and functional testing. Malar. J. 2015, 14, 391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  116. Kristan, M.; Lines, J.; Nuwa, A.; Ntege, C.; Meek, S.R.; Abeku, T.A. Exposure to deltamethrin affects development of Plasmodium falciparum inside wild pyrethroid resistant Anopheles gambiae ss mosquitoes in Uganda. Parasit. Vectors 2016, 9, 100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  117. Ellegren, H.; Galtier, N. Determinants of genetic diversity. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2016, 17, 422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  118. Essandoh, J.; Yawson, A.E.; Weetman, D. Acetylcholinesterase (Ace-1) target site mutation 119S is strongly diagnostic of carbamate and organophosphate resistance in Anopheles gambiae s.s. and Anopheles coluzzii across southern Ghana. Malar. J. 2013, 12, 404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  119. Alout, H.; Djogbénou, L.; Berticat, C.; Chandre, F.; Weill, M. Comparison of Anopheles gambiae and Culex pipiens acetycholinesterase 1 biochemical properties. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. Part B Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2008, 150, 271–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  120. Weetman, D.; Mitchell, S.N.; Wilding, C.S.; Birks, D.P.; Yawson, A.E.; Essandoh, J.; Mawejje, H.D.; Djogbenou, L.S.; Steen, K.; Rippon, E.J. Contemporary evolution of resistance at the major insecticide target site gene Ace-1 by mutation and copy number variation in the malaria mosquito Anopheles gambiae. Mol. Ecol. 2015, 24, 2656–2672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Berticat, C.; Boquien, G.; Raymond, M.; Chevillon, C. Insecticide resistance genes induce a mating competition cost in Culex pipiens mosquitoes. Genet. Res. 2002, 79, 41–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  122. Alout, H.; Ndam, N.T.; Sandeu, M.M.; Djégbe, I.; Chandre, F.; Dabiré, R.K.; Djogbénou, L.S.; Corbel, V.; Cohuet, A. Insecticide resistance alleles affect vector competence of Anopheles gambiae s.s. for Plasmodium falciparum field isolates. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e63849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  123. Beerntsen, B.T.; James, A.A.; Christensen, B.M. Genetics of mosquito vector competence. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 2000, 64, 115–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  124. Platt, N.; Kwiatkowska, R.M.; Irving, H.; Diabaté, A.; Dabire, R.; Wondji, C.S. Target-site resistance mutations (kdr and RDL), but not metabolic resistance, negatively impact male mating competiveness in the malaria vector Anopheles gambiae. Heredity 2015, 115, 243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  125. Fawaz, E.Y.; Allan, S.A.; Bernier, U.R.; Obenauer, P.J.; Diclaro, J.W. Swarming mechanisms in the yellow fever mosquito: Aggregation pheromones are involved in the mating behavior of Aedes aegypti. J. Vector Ecol. 2014, 39, 347–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  126. Kasai, S.; Weerashinghe, I.S.; Shono, T. P450 monooxygenases are an important mechanism of permethrin resistance in Culex quinquefasciatus Say larvae. Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. Publ. Collab. Entomol. Soc. Am. 1998, 37, 47–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Kliot, A.; Ghanim, M. Fitness costs associated with insecticide resistance. Pest Manag. Sci. 2012, 68, 1431–1437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  128. Rascalou, G.; Pontier, D.; Menu, F.; Gourbière, S. Emergence and prevalence of human vector-borne diseases in sink vector populations. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e36858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  129. Keeling, M.J.; Rohani, P. Modeling Infectious Diseases in Humans and Animals; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  130. Arnaud, L.; Brostaux, Y.; Assie, L.K.; Gaspar, C.; Haubruge, E. Increased fecundity of malathion-specific resistant beetles in absence of insecticide pressure. Heredity 2002, 89, 425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  131. Gazave, É.; Chevillon, C.; Lenormand, T.; Marquine, M.; Raymond, M. Dissecting the cost of insecticide resistance genes during the overwintering period of the mosquito Culex pipiens. Heredity 2001, 87, 441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  132. Vézilier, J.; Nicot, A.; Gandon, S.; Rivero, A. Insecticide resistance and malaria transmission: Infection rate and oocyst burden in Culex pipiens mosquitoes infected with Plasmodium relictum. Malar. J. 2010, 9, 379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  133. Vézilier, J.; Nicot, A.; Lorgeril, J.; Gandon, S.; Rivero, A. The impact of insecticide resistance on Culex pipiens immunity. Evol. Appl. 2013, 6, 497–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Lucas, K.J.; Zhao, B.; Liu, S.; Raikhel, A.S. Regulation of physiological processes by microRNAs in insects. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 2015, 11, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  135. Guo, Q.; Huang, Y.; Zou, F.; Liu, B.; Tian, M.; Ye, W.; Guo, J.; Sun, X.; Zhou, D.; Sun, Y. The role of miR-2~ 13~ 71 cluster in resistance to deltamethrin in Culex pipiens pallens. Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2017, 84, 15–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Sun, X.H.; Xu, N. A novel miRNA, miR-13664, targets CpCYP314A1 to regulate deltamethrin resistance in Culex pipiens pallens. Parasitology 2019, 146, 197–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Leal, W.S. Odorant reception in insects: Roles of receptors, binding proteins, and degrading enzymes. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2013, 58, 373–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Pottier, M.A.; Bozzolan, F.; Chertemps, T.; Jacquin-Joly, E.; Lalouette, L.; Siaussat, D.; Maibeche-Coisne, M. Cytochrome P450s and cytochrome P450 reductase in the olfactory organ of the cotton leafworm Spodoptera littoralis. Insect Mol. Biol. 2012, 21, 568–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Cooke, M.K.; Kahindi, S.C.; Oriango, R.M.; Owaga, C.; Ayoma, E.; Mabuka, D.; Nyangau, D.; Abel, L.; Atieno, E.; Awuor, S. ’A bite before bed’: Exposure to malaria vectors outside the times of net use in the highlands of western Kenya. Malar. J. 2015, 14, 259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  140. Gould, F. Role of behavior in the evolution of insect adaptation to insecticides and resistant host plants. Bull. ESA 1984, 30, 34–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Lynch, P.A.; Boots, M. Using evolution to generate sustainable malaria control with spatial repellents. eLife 2016, 5, e15416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  142. Andreazza, F.; Valbon, W.R.; Wang, Q.; Liu, F.; Xu, P.; Bandason, E.; Chen, M.; Wu, S.; Smith, L.B.; Scott, J.G. Sodium channel activation underlies transfluthrin repellency in Aedes aegypti. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2021, 15, e0009546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Liu, F.; Wang, Q.; Xu, P.; Andreazza, F.; Valbon, W.R.; Bandason, E.; Chen, M.; Yan, R.; Feng, B.; Smith, L.; et al. A dual-target molecular mechanism of pyrethrum repellency against mosquitoes. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12, 2553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Yang, L.; Norris, E.J.; Jiang, S.; Bernier, U.R.; Linthicum, K.J.; Bloomquist, J.R. Reduced effectiveness of repellents in a pyrethroid-resistant strain of Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) and its correlation with olfactory sensitivity. Pest Manag. Sci. 2020, 76, 118–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Deletre, E.; Martin, T.; Duménil, C.; Chandre, F. Insecticide resistance modifies mosquito response to DEET and natural repellents. Parasit. Vectors 2019, 12, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  146. Tirados, I.; Costantini, C.; Gibson, G.; Torr, S.J. Blood-feeding behaviour of the malarial mosquito Anopheles arabiensis: Implications for vector control. Med. Vet. Entomol. 2006, 20, 425–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Russell, T.L.; Govella, N.J.; Azizi, S.; Drakeley, C.J.; Kachur, S.P.; Killeen, G.F. Increased proportions of outdoor feeding among residual malaria vector populations following increased use of insecticide-treated nets in rural Tanzania. Malar. J. 2011, 10, 80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  148. Yohannes, M.; Boelee, E. Early biting rhythm in the Afro-tropical vector of malaria, Anopheles arabiensis, and challenges for its control in Ethiopia. Med. Vet. Entomol. 2012, 26, 103–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  149. Yohannes, M.; Haile, M.; Ghebreyesus, T.A.; Witten, K.H.; Getachew, A.; Byass, P.; Lindsay, S.W. Can source reduction of mosquito larval habitat reduce malaria transmission in Tigray, Ethiopia? Trop. Med. Int. Heal. 2005, 10, 1274–1285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Reddy, M.R.; Overgaard, H.J.; Abaga, S.; Reddy, V.P.; Caccone, A.; Kiszewski, A.E.; Slotman, M.A. Outdoor host seeking behaviour of Anopheles gambiae mosquitoes following initiation of malaria vector control on Bioko Island, Equatorial Guinea. Malar. J. 2011, 10, 184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  151. Niitepõld, K.; Smith, A.D.; Osborne, J.L.; Reynolds, D.R.; Carreck, N.L.; Martin, A.P.; Marden, J.H.; Ovaskainen, O.; Hanski, I. Flight metabolic rate and Pgi genotype influence butterfly dispersal rate in the field. Ecology 2009, 90, 2223–2232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  152. Chen, W.; Liu, Z.; Li, T.; Zhang, R.; Xue, Y.; Zhong, Y.; Bai, W.; Zhou, D.; Zhao, Z. Regulation of Drosophila circadian rhythms by miRNA let-7 is mediated by a regulatory cycle. Nat. Commun. 2014, 5, 5549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  153. Bayoh, M.N.; Mathias, D.K.; Odiere, M.R.; Mutuku, F.M.; Kamau, L.; Gimnig, J.E.; Vulule, J.M.; Hawley, W.A.; Hamel, M.J.; Walker, E.D. Anopheles gambiae: Historical population decline associated with regional distribution of insecticide-treated bed nets in western Nyanza Province, Kenya. Malar. J. 2010, 9, 62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  154. Mutuku, F.M.; King, C.H.; Mungai, P.; Mbogo, C.; Mwangangi, J.; Muchiri, E.M.; Walker, E.D.; Kitron, U. Impact of insecticide-treated bed nets on malaria transmission indices on the south coast of Kenya. Malar. J. 2011, 10, 356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  155. Zhou, G.; Afrane, Y.A.; Vardo-Zalik, A.M.; Atieli, H.; Zhong, D.; Wamae, P.; Himeidan, Y.E.; Minakawa, N.; Githeko, A.K.; Yan, G. Changing patterns of malaria epidemiology between 2002 and 2010 in Western Kenya: The fall and rise of malaria. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e20318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  156. Moiroux, N.; Gomez, M.B.; Pennetier, C.; Elanga, E.; Djènontin, A.; Chandre, F.; Djègbé, I.; Guis, H.; Corbel, V. Changes in Anopheles funestus biting behavior following universal coverage of long-lasting insecticidal nets in Benin. J. Infect. Dis. 2012, 206, 1622–1629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  157. Sougoufara, S.; Diédhiou, S.M.; Doucouré, S.; Diagne, N.; Sembène, P.M.; Harry, M.; Trape, J.-F.; Sokhna, C.; Ndiath, M.O. Biting by Anopheles funestus in broad daylight after use of long-lasting insecticidal nets: A new challenge to malaria elimination. Malar. J. 2014, 13, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  158. Dukeen, M.Y.H. Ecology of the malaria vector Anopheles arabiensis Patton (Diptera: Culicidae) by the Nile in northern Sudan. Bull. Entomol. Res. 1986, 76, 451–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. White, M.T.; Griffin, J.T.; Churcher, T.S.; Ferguson, N.M.; Basanez, M.G.; Ghani, A.C. Modelling the impact of vector control interventions on Anopheles gambiae population dynamics. Parasit Vectors 2011, 4, 153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  160. Lyimo, E.O.; Koella, J.C. Relationship between body size of adult Anopheles gambiae sl and infection with the malaria parasite Plasmodium falciparum. Parasitology 1992, 104, 233–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  161. Griffin, J.T.; Hollingsworth, T.D.; Okell, L.C.; Churcher, T.S.; White, M.; Hinsley, W.; Bousema, T.; Drakeley, C.J.; Ferguson, N.M.; Basáñez, M.-G. Reducing Plasmodium falciparum malaria transmission in Africa: A model-based evaluation of intervention strategies. PLoS Med. 2010, 7, e1000324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  162. Smith, T.; Maire, N.; Ross, A.; Penny, M.; Chitnis, N.; Schapira, A.; Studer, A.; Genton, B.; Lengeler, C.; Tediosi, F. Towards a comprehensive simulation model of malaria epidemiology and control. Parasitology 2008, 135, 1507–1516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Figure 1. Summary of potential impacts of different insecticide concentrations on mosquito physiology and behavior.
Figure 1. Summary of potential impacts of different insecticide concentrations on mosquito physiology and behavior.
Insects 12 00917 g001
Figure 2. Time-related foraging behavioral changes potentially reducing the efficacy of Anopheles control. The colored lines within the clock represent the distribution of An. arabiensis biting times in places with short- (blue) or long-term (red) use of indoor residual sprays (IRS). The biting number decreases toward the center of the clock and increases toward the distal region of the clock. The clock indicates only the late afternoon and nighttime evaluation period from 6:30 p.m. (18:30) to 5:30 a.m. (5:30), as no data for other periods of the day were available. Adapted from Dukeen [158] and Yohannes [149].
Figure 2. Time-related foraging behavioral changes potentially reducing the efficacy of Anopheles control. The colored lines within the clock represent the distribution of An. arabiensis biting times in places with short- (blue) or long-term (red) use of indoor residual sprays (IRS). The biting number decreases toward the center of the clock and increases toward the distal region of the clock. The clock indicates only the late afternoon and nighttime evaluation period from 6:30 p.m. (18:30) to 5:30 a.m. (5:30), as no data for other periods of the day were available. Adapted from Dukeen [158] and Yohannes [149].
Insects 12 00917 g002
Figure 3. Malaria transmission model predictions as impacted by insecticide resistance after the use of LLIN and IRS. LLIN: long-lasting insecticidal nets. IRS: indoors residual spray. EIR: entomological inoculation rate (infectious bites per person). Adapted from Gatton et al. [6].
Figure 3. Malaria transmission model predictions as impacted by insecticide resistance after the use of LLIN and IRS. LLIN: long-lasting insecticidal nets. IRS: indoors residual spray. EIR: entomological inoculation rate (infectious bites per person). Adapted from Gatton et al. [6].
Insects 12 00917 g003
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Andreazza, F.; Oliveira, E.E.; Martins, G.F. Implications of Sublethal Insecticide Exposure and the Development of Resistance on Mosquito Physiology, Behavior, and Pathogen Transmission. Insects 2021, 12, 917. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12100917

AMA Style

Andreazza F, Oliveira EE, Martins GF. Implications of Sublethal Insecticide Exposure and the Development of Resistance on Mosquito Physiology, Behavior, and Pathogen Transmission. Insects. 2021; 12(10):917. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12100917

Chicago/Turabian Style

Andreazza, Felipe, Eugênio E. Oliveira, and Gustavo Ferreira Martins. 2021. "Implications of Sublethal Insecticide Exposure and the Development of Resistance on Mosquito Physiology, Behavior, and Pathogen Transmission" Insects 12, no. 10: 917. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12100917

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop