CiteULike is a free online bibliography manager. Register and you can start organising your references online.

COMPARISON OF ARTIFICIAL MEMBRANE FEEDING WITH DIRECT SKIN FEEDING TO ESTIMATE THE INFECTIOUSNESS OF PLASMODIUM VIVAX GAMETOCYTE CARRIERS TO MOSQUITOES

Am J Trop Med Hyg, Vol. 69, No. 5. (1 November 2003), pp. 529-535.

X Abstract

The efficacy of a membrane-feeding apparatus as a means of infecting Anopheles dirus mosquitoes with Plasmodium vivax was compared with direct feeding of mosquitoes on gametocyte carriers. Volunteers participating in the study were symptomatic patients reporting to malaria clinics in western Thailand. Direct mosquito feeds were conducted on 285 P. vivax-infected individuals. Four methods of preparing blood for the membrane-feeding apparatus were evaluated. They included 1) replacement of patient plasma with sera from a P. vivax-naive donor (n = 276), 2) replacement of patient plasma with plasma from a P. vivax-naive donor (n = 83), 3) replacement of patient plasma with that individual's own plasma (n = 80), and 4) whole blood added directly to the feeder (n = 221). Criteria used to compare the different methods included 1) number of feeds infecting mosquitoes, 2) percent of mosquitoes with oocysts, and 3) mean number of oocysts per positive mosquito. For most parameters, the direct- feeding method was not significantly different from methods that replaced patient plasma with sera/plasma from a P. vivax-naive donor. However, direct feeding was more effective than use of whole blood or blood that was reconstituted with the patient's own plasma. These data suggest a possible role of transmission-blocking antibody. The implications towards development of a membrane-feeding assay for the evaluation of candidate transmission-blocking malaria vaccines is discussed.

View the full article here:

HighWire, Pubmed, Hubmed

This article has been bookmarked once, on 2008-11-08.

2008-11-08 User becarmson
Privacy Statement | Terms & Conditions
CiteULike organises scholarly (or academic) papers or literature and provides bibliographic (which means it makes bibliographies) for universities and higher education establishments. It helps undergraduates and postgraduates. People studying for PhDs or in postdoctoral (postdoc) positions. The service is similar in scope to EndNote or RefWorks or any other reference manager like BibTeX, but it is a social bookmarking service for scientists and humanities researchers.