Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34022891›Full record

ArticleMalaria journal2021

Microbiota identified from preserved Anopheles.

Bianca E Silva, Zvifadzo Matsena Zingoni, Lizette L Koekemoer, Yael L Dahan-Moss

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Malaria journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. mBio · 2026
    Article
  2. Frontiers in microbiology · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Environmental persistence and transmission dynamics ofApplied and environmental microbiology · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Identification of anFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. 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

4 authors.

Bianca E SilvaWits Research Institute for Malaria, School of Pathology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Zvifadzo Matsena ZingoniDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of the Witwatersrand, Parktown, South Africa.
Lizette L KoekemoerWits Research Institute for Malaria, School of Pathology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Yael L Dahan-MossWits Research Institute for Malaria, School of Pathology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa. yaeld@nicd.ac.za.

Funding

DST/NRF South African Research Chairs Initiative Grant 171215294399
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMosquito species from the Anopheles gambiae complex and the Anopheles funestus group are dominant African malaria vectors. Mosquito microbiota play vital roles in physiology and vector competence. Recent research has focused on investigating the mosquito microbiota, especially in wild populations. Wild mosquitoes are preserved and transported to a laboratory for analyses. Thus far, microbial characterization post-preservation has been investigated in only Aedes vexans and Culex pipiens. Investigating the efficacy of cost-effective preservatives has also been limited to AllProtect reagent, ethanol and nucleic acid preservation buffer. This study characterized the microbiota of African Anopheles vectors: Anopheles arabiensis (member of the An. gambiae complex) and An. funestus (member of the An. funestus group), preserved on silica desiccant and RNAlater

methodsMicrobial composition and diversity were characterized using culture-dependent (midgut dissections, culturomics, MALDI-TOF MS) and culture-independent techniques (abdominal dissections, DNA extraction, next-generation sequencing) from laboratory (colonized) and field-collected mosquitoes. Colonized mosquitoes were either fresh (non-preserved) or preserved for 4 and 12 weeks on silica or in RNAlater

resultsElizabethkingia anophelis and Serratia oryzae were common between both vector species, while Enterobacter cloacae and Staphylococcus epidermidis were specific to females and males, respectively. Microbial diversity was not influenced by sex, condition (fresh or preserved), preservative, or preservation time-period; however, the type of bacterial identification technique affected all microbial diversity indices.

conclusionsThis study broadly characterized the microbiota of An. arabiensis and An. funestus. Silica- and RNAlater

Indexed as

AnimalsAnophelesBacteriaMicrobiotaMosquito VectorsPreservation, BiologicalSouth AfricaSpecimen HandlingAnopheles arabiensisAnopheles funestusCulturomicsNext-generation sequencingRNAlater ®Silica

Identifiers

PMID34022891
PMCPMC8141131

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.