Skip to main content

Table 2 Results of identification of Anopheles gambiae s.s. indoor-resting female samples by different genotyping approaches

From: Comparative analyses reveal discrepancies among results of commonly used methods for Anopheles gambiae molecular form identification

Samples

PCR-RFLPs

  

Sequencing

 

IGS581

IGS690

AS-PCR

N (n)

IGS581

IGS690

 

1

MM

MM

MM

5 (4)

T

A

 

2

MM

MM

MS

6 (3)

T

A

 

3

MM

MS

MS

1

T

A

 

4

MM

MS

MS

6

T/C

A/T

 

5

MS

MS

MS

29 (28)

T/C

A/T

GUINEA BISSAU

6

MS

SS

MS

6

T/C

A/T

 

7

SS

SS

MS

2

T/C

A/T

 

8

MS

SS

MS

1

C

T

 

9

MS

SS

SS

4

C

T

 

10

SS

SS

SS

7

C

T

 

11

MM

MM

MM

9 (4)

T

A

 

12

MM

MM

MS

7 (4)

T

A

 

13

MM

MS

MM

1

T

A

 

14

MM

MS

MS

1

T

A

THE GAMBIA

15

MM

MS

MS

2

T/C

A/T

 

16

MS

MS

MS

16 (8)

T/C

A/T

 

17

MS

SS

MS

1

T/C

A/T

 

18

MS

SS

MS

2

C

T

 

19

SS

SS

MS

1

C

T

 

20

SS

SS

SS

9 (5)

C

T

  1. PCR-RFLP581[16], PCR-RFLP690 [17] and AS-PCR [13] genotyping and sequencing of IGS amplicon. IGS581: M-form = T, S-form = C; IGS690: M-form = A, S-form = T. N = numbers of specimens identified by PCR-RFLPs and AS-PCR. (n) = number of specimens sequenced, when these do not correspond to N.
Back to article page

Malaria Journal

ISSN: 1475-2875

Contact us