Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29448925›Full record

ArticleMalaria journal2018

Insecticide resistance evolution with mixtures and sequences: a model-based explanation.

Andy South, Ian M Hastings

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Malaria journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 77 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Evolutionary and epidemiological considerations for anthelmintic treatments in ruminant livestock.International journal for parasitology. Drugs and drug resistance · 2026
    Article
  4. The "dark magic mushroom" co-produces amatoxins and psilocybin.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Detection of insecticide resistance and knockdown resistance (Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Andy SouthDepartment of Parasitology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, L3 5QA, UK. southandy@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4051-6135
Ian M HastingsDepartment of Parasitology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, L3 5QA, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1332-742X
Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine · GB

Funding

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation 37999.01Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 105620/Z/14/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInsecticide resistance threatens effective vector control, especially for mosquitoes and malaria. To manage resistance, recommended insecticide use strategies include mixtures, sequences and rotations. New insecticides are being developed and there is an opportunity to develop use strategies that limit the evolution of further resistance in the short term. A 2013 review of modelling and empirical studies of resistance points to the advantages of mixtures. However, there is limited recent, accessible modelling work addressing the evolution of resistance under different operational strategies. There is an opportunity to improve the level of mechanistic understanding within the operational community of how insecticide resistance can be expected to evolve in response to different strategies. This paper provides a concise, accessible description of a flexible model of the evolution of insecticide resistance. The model is used to develop a mechanistic picture of the evolution of insecticide resistance and how it is likely to respond to potential insecticide use strategies. The aim is to reach an audience unlikely to read a more detailed modelling paper. The model itself, as described here, represents two independent genes coding for resistance to two insecticides. This allows the representation of the use of insecticides in isolation, sequence and mixtures.

resultsThe model is used to demonstrate the evolution of resistance under different scenarios and how this fits with intuitive reasoning about selection pressure. Using an insecticide in a mixture, relative to alone, always prompts slower evolution of resistance to that insecticide. However, when resistance to both insecticides is considered, resistance thresholds may be reached later for a sequence relative to a mixture. Increasing the ability of insecticides to kill susceptible mosquitoes (effectiveness), has the most influence on favouring a mixture over a sequence because one highly effective insecticide provides more protection to another in a mixture.

conclusionsThe model offers an accessible description of the process of insecticide resistance evolution and how it is likely to respond to insecticide use. A simple online user-interface allowing further exploration is also provided. These tools can contribute to an improved discussion about operational decisions in insecticide resistance management.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnophelesEvolution, MolecularInsecticide ResistanceInsecticidesMalariaModels, GeneticMosquito ControlMosquito VectorsInsecticidesInfectious diseasesInsecticide resistanceMalariaMosquitoesPopulation geneticsPublic healthVector-borne diseases

Identifiers

PMID29448925
PMCPMC5815191
OpenAlexW2796555987

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.