title: Detection of knockdown resistance (kdr) mutations in Anopheles gambiae: a comparison of two new high-throughput assays with existing methods.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Knockdown resistance (kdr) is a well-characterized mechanism of resistance to pyrethroid insecticides in many insect species and is caused by point mutations of the pyrethroid target site the para-type sodium channel. The presence of kdr mutations in Anopheles gambiae, the most important malaria vector in Africa, has been monitored using a variety of molecular techniques. However, there are few reports comparing the performance of these different assays. In this study, two new high-throughput assays were developed and compared with four established techniques.
  
  
  METHODS
  Fluorescence-based assays based on 1) TaqMan probes and 2) high resolution melt (HRM) analysis were developed to detect kdr alleles in An. gambiae. Four previously reported techniques for kdr detection, Allele Specific Polymerase Chain Reaction (AS-PCR), Heated Oligonucleotide Ligation Assay (HOLA), Sequence Specific Oligonucleotide Probe - Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay (SSOP-ELISA) and PCR-Dot Blot were also optimized. The sensitivity and specificity of all six assays was then compared in a blind genotyping trial of 96 single insect samples that included a variety of kdr genotypes and African Anopheline species. The relative merits of each assay was assessed based on the performance in the genotyping trial, the length/difficulty of each protocol, cost (both capital outlay and consumable cost), and safety (requirement for hazardous chemicals).
  
  
  RESULTS
  The real-time TaqMan assay was both the most sensitive (with the lowest number of failed reactions) and the most specific (with the lowest number of incorrect scores). Adapting the TaqMan assay to use a PCR machine and endpoint measurement with a fluorimeter showed a slight reduction in sensitivity and specificity. HRM initially gave promising results but was more sensitive to both DNA quality and quantity and consequently showed a higher rate of failure and incorrect scores. The sensitivity and specificity of AS-PCR, SSOP-ELISA, PCR Dot Blot and HOLA was fairly similar with a small number of failures and incorrect scores.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The results of blind genotyping trials of each assay indicate that where maximum sensitivity and specificity are required the TaqMan real-time assay is the preferred method. However, the cost of this assay, particularly in terms of initial capital outlay, is higher than that of some of the other methods. TaqMan assays using a PCR machine and fluorimeter are nearly as sensitive as real-time assays and provide a cost saving in capital expenditure. If price is a primary factor in assay choice then the AS-PCR, SSOP-ELISA, and HOLA are all reasonable alternatives with the SSOP-ELISA approach having the highest throughput.
authors: Department of Biological Chemistry, Rothamsted Research, Harpenden, UK. chris.bass@bbsrc.ac.uk
authors: Chris
authors: C
authors: Bass
authors: Dimitra
authors: D
authors: Nikou
authors: Martin J
authors: MJ
authors: Donnelly
authors: Martin S
authors: MS
authors: Williamson
authors: Hilary
authors: H
authors: Ranson
authors: Amanda
authors: A
authors: Ball
authors: John
authors: J
authors: Vontas
authors: Linda M
authors: LM
authors: Field
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D000852:Anopheles / Q000187:drug effects / Q000235:genetics*; D005453:Fluorescence; D019476:Insect Proteins / Q000235:genetics; D007303:Insect Vectors / Q000187:drug effects / Q000235:genetics*; D007305:Insecticide Resistance; D017354:Point Mutation; D016133:Polymerase Chain Reaction / Q000191:economics / Q000379:methods; D011722:Pyrethrins / Q000494:pharmacology; D015222:Sodium Channels / Q000235:genetics; D044366:Transition Temperature
chemical_list: D019476:Insect Proteins; D011722:Pyrethrins; D015222:Sodium Channels
references: Nature. 1951 Aug 4;168(4266):193-5
references: 14875041
references: Emerg Infect Dis. 2007 Feb;13(2):199-206
references: 17479880
references: Med Vet Entomol. 2004 Dec;18(4):372-7
references: 15642004
references: Bull Entomol Res. 2000 Apr;90(2):125-32
references: 10948372
references: Insect Mol Biol. 2000 Oct;9(5):491-7
references: 11029667
references: Insect Mol Biol. 2001 Feb;10(1):9-18
references: 11240632
references: Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2002 Jul;67(1):24-7
references: 12363059
references: Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2003 Apr;68(4 Suppl):23-9
references: 12749482
references: Insect Mol Biol. 2003 Jun;12(3):241-5
references: 12752657
references: Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2004 Jun;70(6):591-6
references: 15210997
references: Clin Chem. 2004 Jul;50(7):1156-64
references: 15229148
references: J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 2004 Jun;20(2):195-6
references: 15264630
references: Genetics. 1984 Aug;107(4):611-34
references: 6430749
references: Annu Rev Entomol. 1989;34:77-96
references: 2539040
references: Trends Pharmacol Sci. 1992 Jun;13(6):236-41
references: 1321523
references: Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1992 Dec;47(6):893-901
references: 1471745
references: Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1993 Oct;49(4):520-9
references: 8214283
references: Med Vet Entomol. 1994 Jan;8(1):71-5
references: 8161849
references: Lancet. 1995 Feb 25;345(8948):479-83
references: 7861874
references: Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1995 May;52(5):377-82
references: 7771600
references: Trop Med Int Health. 1996 Apr;1(2):147-54
references: 8665378
references: Mol Gen Genet. 1996 Aug 27;252(1-2):51-60
references: 8804403
references: Genome Res. 1997 Apr;7(4):389-98
references: 9110178
references: Nucleic Acids Res. 1997 Jul 1;25(13):2657-60
references: 9185578
references: Insect Mol Biol. 1998 May;7(2):179-84
references: 9535162
references: Genet Anal. 1999 Feb;14(5-6):143-9
references: 10084106
references: Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2005 Feb;72(2):155-62
references: 15741552
references: Malar J. 2005;4:16
references: 15766386
references: Acta Trop. 2005 Sep;95(3):204-9
references: 16023989
references: Malar J. 2006;5:16
references: 16504072
references: Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2006 Apr;74(4):658-62
references: 16607001
references: Med Vet Entomol. 2006 Mar;20(1):27-32
references: 16608487
references: J Med Entomol. 2006 Mar;43(2):238-47
references: 16619605
references: Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2006 May;74(5):795-7
references: 16687682
references: Malar J. 2006;5:56
references: 16820067
references: BMC Cancer. 2006;6:295
references: 17184525
references: Trop Med Int Health. 2004 Dec;9(12):1267-73
references: 15598258