Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T00:42:56.947Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Susceptibility baselines for DDT metabolism and related enzyme systems in the sandfly Phlebotomus papatasi (Scopoli) (Diptera: Psychodidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

S. El-Sayed ,
J. Hemingway  and
R. P. Lane
S. El-Sayed
Affiliation:
School of Hygiene & Environmental StudiesP.O. Box 205, Khartoum, Sudan
J. Hemingway
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Parasitology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical MedicineLondon, WCIE 7HT, UK
R. P. Lane*
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Parasitology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical MedicineLondon, WCIE 7HT, UK
*
*For correspondence
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

DDT metabolism in Phlebotomus papatasi (Scopoli) was investigated and compared to that in DDT-resistant and susceptible strains of Culex quinquefasciatus Say and Anopheles gambiae Giles with the objective of establishing baselines for sandfly studies. P. papatasi produced eight metabolites of DDT, with DDE predominating, as in the two mosquito species. Both oxidases and glutathione transferases were found to be involved in DDT metabolism in insecticide-susceptible adults of P. papatasi. The activity level of glutathione transferases and the reduced and oxidized difference spectra of cytochrome P-450 were measured spectrophotometrically. The level of glutathione transferase activity in P. papatasi was lower than that in susceptible C. quinquefasciatus adults when expressed in terms of the activity per milligram of soluble protein but, in contrast, the cytochrome P-450 was slightly higher in both the reduced and oxidized states.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 79 , Issue 4 , November 1989 , pp. 679 - 684
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Amin, A. M.. & Hemingway, J. (1989). Preliminary investigation of the mechanisms of DDT and pyrethroid resistance in Culex quinquefasciatus Say (Diptera: Culicidae) from Saudi Arabia.—Bull. ent. Res. 79, 361–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amin, A. M.. & Peiris, H. T. (in press). Detection and selection of organophosphate and carbamate resistance in Culex quinquefasciatus from Saudi Arabia.—Med. Vet. Entomol.Google Scholar
Arias, J. R. (1988). Feasible control activities against the sand fly vectors of Leishmania in the New World.—pp. 314–316in Walton, B. C., Wijeyaratne, P. M.. & Moddaber, F. (Eds). Research on control strategies for the leishmaniases.—373 pp. Ottawa, Int. Dev. Res. Cent. (Rep. 184e).Google Scholar
Clarke, A. G.. & Shamaan, N. A. (1984). Evidence that DDT-dehydrochlorinase from the house fly is a glutathione S-transferase.—Pestic. Biochem. & Physiol. 22, 249–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dhanda, V., Shetty, P. S.. & Dhiman, R. C. (1983). Studies on phlebotomine sandflies as vectors of kala-azar in Bihar.—pp. 128–137in Mahajan, R. C. (Ed.). Indo-UK workshop on leishmaniasis. Proceedings of the workshop held at the Rajendra Memorial Research Institute for Medical Sciences (ICMR), Patna, during 12 6–10, 1982.—190 pp. New Delhi, Indian Coun. Med. Res.Google Scholar
Esterre, P., Chippaux, J. P., Lefait, J. F.. & Dedet, J. P. (1986). Evaluation d'un programme de lutte contre la leishmaniose cutanée dans un village forestier de Guyane française.—Bull. Wld Hlth Org. 64, 559–565.Google Scholar
Hemingway, J., Malcolm, C. A., Kissoon, K. E., Boddington, R. G., Curtis, C. F.. & Hill, N. (1985). The biochemistry of insecticide resistance in Anopheles sacharovi: comparative studies with a range of insecticide susceptible and resistant Anopheles and Culex species.—Pestic. Biochem. & Physiol. 24, 68–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herath, P. R. J., Jayawardena, K. G. I., Hemingway, J.. & Harris, J. (1988). DDT resistance in Anopheles culicifacies Giles and A. subpictus Grassi (Diptera: Culicidae) from Sri Lanka: a field study on the mechanisms and changes in gene frequency after cessation of DDT spraying.—Bull. ent. Res. 78, 717–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaul, S. M., Wattal, B. L., Bhatnagar, V. N.. & Mathur, K. K. (1978). Preliminary observations on the susceptibility status of Phlebotomus argentipes and P. papatasi to DDT in two districts of North Bihar (India).—J. communic. Dis. 10, 208–211.Google Scholar
Kimura, T., Duffy, J. R.. & Brown, A. W. A. (1965). Dehydrochlorination and DDT-resistance in Culex mosquitos.—Bull. Wld Hlth Org. 32, 557–561.Google ScholarPubMed
Kulkarni, A. P.. & Hodgson, E. (1976). Spectral interactions of insecticide synergists with microsomal cytochrome P-450 from insecticide-resistant and susceptible house flies.—Pestic. Biochem. & Physiol. 6, 183–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipke, H.. & Chalkley, J. (1964). The conversion of DDT to DDE by some anophelines.—Bull. Wld Hlth Org. 30, 57–64.Google ScholarPubMed
Perry, A. S.. & Hoskins, W. M. (1950). The detoxification of DDT by resistant houseflies and inhibition of this process by piperonyl cyclonene.—Science, N.Y. 111, 600–601.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thakur, C. P. (1984). Epidemiological, clinical and therapeutic features of Bihar kala-azar (including post kala-azar dermal leishmaniasis).—Trans. R. Soc. trop. Med. Hyg. 78, 391–398.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
WHO (WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION) (1988). Guidelines for leishmaniasis control at regional and subregional levels.—30 pp. Geneva, Wld Hlth Org. (Unpublished document WHO/LEISH/88.25).Google Scholar