Insecticide resistance and malaria transmission indicators in Anopheles gambiae s.l. in Bobo-Dioulasso: Implications for vector control strategies
MiriamFélicitéAmara1
MoussaNamountougou1
HamadouKonaté1
WilfredUlrichKouamé1
Kouadio1
KoudraogoBienvenueYaméogo3
SadapawindéThérèseKagoné2
AbdoulayeDiabate1
OlivierGnankine4✉Email
1Unité de Formation et de Recherche en Sciences de la Vie et de la TerreUniversité Nazi BONIBobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso
2
A
A
A
A
Centre MURAZ Bobo-Dioulasso (Burkina Faso)
3Institut de Recherche en Sciences de la Santé-Direction Régionale Ouest (IRSS-DRO) Bobo-Dioulasso (Burkina Faso)
4
A
Unité de Formation et de Recherche en Sciences de la Vie et de la TerreUniversité Joseph KI-ZERBOOuagadougouBurkina Faso
Miriam Félicité Amaraabc, Moussa Namountougouabc, Hamadou Konatéabc, Kouamé Wilfred Ulrich Kouadioabc, Koudraogo Bienvenue Yaméogoc, Sadapawindé Thérèse Kagoné b, Abdoulaye Diabateabc, Olivier Gnankined*
aUnité de Formation et de Recherche en Sciences de la Vie et de la Terre, Université Nazi BONI, Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso.
bCentre MURAZ Bobo-Dioulasso (Burkina Faso)
cInstitut de Recherche en Sciences de la Santé-Direction Régionale Ouest (IRSS-DRO) Bobo-Dioulasso (Burkina Faso)
dUnité de Formation et de Recherche en Sciences de la Vie et de la Terre, Université Joseph KI-ZERBO, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
*Corresponding author:
Olivier GNANKINE (olignankine@gmail.com);
Abstract
Background
In the context of intensified malaria control efforts in Burkina Faso, this study assessed i) the insecticide resistance status of Anopheles gambiae sensu lato and ii) key entomological indicators of malaria transmission in Bobo-Dioulasso.
Methods
World Health Organization-standard susceptibility bioassays were conducted on Anopheles populations collected from six neighborhoods (Kua, Sarfalao, Sabaribougou, Dogona, Farakan and Kodeni) testing six insecticides organochlorines (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane 4%), organophosphates (pirimiphos-methyl 1.25%), pyrethroids (permethrin 0.75%, deltamethrin 0.05%, alpha-cypermethrin 0.05%), and carbamates (bendiocarb 0.1%). Synergist bioassays using piperonyl butoxide were also performed to investigate metabolic resistance mechanisms, and Plasmodium infection rates were determined via Polymerase Chain Reaction.
Results
A
A
Overall, data revealed high resistance levels to dichlorodiphényltrichloroéthane and pyrethroids, associated with either moderate or higher knockdown resistance mutations (L995F and L995S) allelic frequencies. Fortunately, a susceptibility to bendiocarb and pirimiphos-methyl was found in majority of localities. Restoration of pyrethroid susceptibility following piperonyl butoxide pre-exposure suggests the likely involvement of metabolic resistance mechanisms. Analysis of 622 specimens from the Anopheles gambiae complex revealed a predominance of An. arabiensis (90.8%), followed by An. gambiae s.s. and An. coluzzii. Sporozoite infection rates varied by species, reaching 45.0% in An. coluzzii, 27.4% in An. arabiensis, and 16.2% in An. gambiae s.s.. The overall entomological inoculation rate (EIR) was estimated at 10.624 infectious bites per person, with An. arabiensis contributing the majority (91.2%), underscoring its central role in malaria transmission in Bobo-Dioulasso.
Conclusions
Despite insecticide resistance, Anopheles populations exhibited high Plasmodium infection rates, highlighting ongoing transmission. These findings emphasize the urgent need for sustained entomological surveillance and resistance management to guide and optimize insecticide-based malaria control strategies.
Keywords:
Malaria
Anopheles gambiae s.l.
Insecticide
Synergist
Resistance
Burkina Faso
A
A
Background
A
Malaria remains a globally endemic disease, with control strategies primarily based on the use of long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS) (1, 2). Four major classes of insecticides are employed in vector control programs: pyrethroids, organophosphates, carbamates, and organochlorines (3, 4). Among these, pyrethroids are currently the only class recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) for insecticide treatment net (ITN), due to their low irritant effect, rapid action, and low toxicity to humans (5). However, widespread resistance to all four insecticide classes has been reported in Anopheles gambiae s.l. across sub-Saharan Africa, seriously undermining the effectiveness of LLIN- and IRS-based interventions(68). These tools, which have been instrumental in significantly reducing Plasmodium falciparum infection prevalence over the past decade, are now facing growing limitations in their efficacy (9, 10). In response to this threat, one of the most promising approaches involves combining two active ingredients with distinct modes of action within a single LLIN. This combined strategy could enhance the sustainability of interventions and support improved management of insecticide resistance in malaria vectors (11, 12). Insecticide resistance among malaria vectors is a dynamic and unstable phenomenon, with intensity that can rapidly increase under multiple selection pressures particularly those induced by public health interventions and intensive agricultural practices using insecticides belonging to the same chemical classes (13, 14). The role of agricultural practices in selection An. gambiae resistant populations to chemicals were shown by several authors. According to Amara and collaborators, a study conducted in the city of Bobo-Dioulasso revealed that the An. gambiae s.l. complex is largely dominated by An. arabiensis, which accounted for most mosquitoes collected across various urban districts (17). This predominance suggests a specific ecological adaptation of An. arabiensis to local urban conditions, with important implications for targeted vector control strategies (17). However, a previous study conducted in Dioulassoba, a city from Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso, highlighted strong pyrethroid resistance in An. Arabiensis populations. Among the An. gambiae s.l. complex mosquitoes collected, over 31% belonged to the An. arabiensis species (Namountougou et al. 2019). These populations exhibited mortality rates below 30% following exposure to deltamethrin, indicating high phenotypic resistance. Furthermore, a high frequency (0.98) of the kdr 995F mutation known to confer resistance to pyrethroids was detected (6). This study aims to assess and characterize the current level of insecticide resistance in malaria vectors belonging to the Anopheles gambiae s.l. complex in Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso. It provides an updated data on observed resistance profiles and key entomological determinants of malaria transmission, thereby contributing to a better understanding of local transmission and the optimization of vector control strategies.
Methods
Study area
The study was conducted in six districts of the city of Bobo-Dioulasso, characterized by a rainy season extending from May to September, with an average annual rainfall exceeding 1200 mm. The geographical coordinates of Bobo-Dioulasso, the principal city of the region, are 11°10′37″ N, 4°17′52″ W (Fig. 1). It is the second capital of Burkina Faso, located in the Hauts-Bassins region in the southwestern part of the country. The city experiences a southern Sudanian climate and is marked by intensive agricultural activity in peri-urban areas. The selected districts are intersected by permanent watercourses, around which vegetable farming zones (notably in Kua, Sarfalao, and Sabaribougou) and rice cultivation areas (in Dogona, Farakan, and Kodeni) have developed. These agricultural developments, combined with the proximity of human dwellings to humid environments, promote the formation of numerous larval habitats for malaria vector mosquitoes.
Fig. 1
Study Areas (Bobo-Dioulasso, western Burkina Faso).
Click here to Correct
Mosquito collection and rearing
During the 2025 rainy season, Anopheles larvae were collected from natural breeding sites using the standard dipping method. At each location, sampling was conducted across multiple distinct larval habitats, including all developmental stages.
A
Specimens were then pooled by locality. The larvae were reared at the IRSS/Centre Muraz insectary in Bobo-Dioulasso under controlled environmental conditions (temperature: 27–30 ± 1°C; relative humidity: 80 ± 10%; photoperiod: 12 hours of light and 12 hours of darkness, including a one-hour transition at dawn and dusk), until adult emergence (F0). They were fed daily with Tetramin® fish food. Upon emergence, female mosquitoes belonging to the Anopheles gambiae complex were maintained on a 10% sugar solution prior for insecticide susceptibility tests. Subsequently, adult specimens were morphologically identified using the taxonomic keys of Gillies and De Meillon, (1968) (19).
Insecticide susceptibility tests
A
A
Insecticide susceptibility tests were conducted on 2 to 5-day-old, non-blood-fed adult female mosquitoes of the Anopheles gambiae complex using the WHO tube test protocol (20). Test papers impregnated with pyrethroids (alpha-cypermethrin 0.05%, deltamethrin 0.05%, permethrin 0.75%), an organochlorine (DDT 4%), a carbamate (bendiocarb 0.1%), and an organophosphate (pirimiphos-methyl 0.25%) were used. The An. gambiae s.s. Kisumu strain served as the biological control. Four replicates of 20 to 25 mosquitoes were introduced into WHO test tubes and observed for 60 minutes to ensure post-transfer recovery and to exclude any handling-related mortality. Environmental conditions were standardized at a temperature of 25 ± 2°C and relative humidity between 70% and 80%, to ensure optimal testing conditions. Mosquitoes were then exposed to insecticides for a strictly controlled duration of 60 minutes. Following exposure, they were transferred to observation tubes and maintained for 24 hours under the same thermo-hygrometric conditions, with access to a 10% sugar solution provided on cotton pads. Mortality was assessed 24 hours post-exposure. Alive and dead individuals were counted separately and preserved in Eppendorf tubes containing silica gel covered with cotton, according to sampling site and insecticide type. Samples were stored at − 20°C for molecular analyses, including species identification and detection of resistance-associated mutations (West and East kdr).
Synergist-Based Bioassays
To investigate the potential role of detoxification enzymes in pyrethroid resistance, complementary bioassays were conducted using the synergist Piperonyl Butoxide (PBO) at 4%, known to inhibit monooxygenases and, to a lesser extent, esterases (21). Non-blood-fed Anopheles gambiae s.l. females aged 2 to 5 days were pre-exposed to PBO for one hour before being transferred onto insecticide-impregnated papers (alpha-cypermethrin 0.05%, deltamethrin 0.05%, permethrin 0.75%). Control mosquitoes underwent identical pre-exposure on untreated papers. Following exposure, individuals were placed in observation tubes containing cotton soaked in a 10% sugar solution and maintained under controlled conditions for 24 hours prior to mortality assessment. The same procedures were applied to the susceptible An. gambiae s.s. Kisumu strain. Each treatment was replicated four times, with batches of 20 to 25 mosquitoes per replicate.
Human Landing Catch (HLC)
A
A cross-sectional entomological survey was carried out between March 2023 and September 2024 in the same areas targeted for the bioassays. Human landing collections were performed in accordance with the World Health Organization (WHO) standard protocol (20). This study was conducted with the informed consent of participants, obtained from household heads in agreement with local authorities, including traditional leaders and the presidents of the respective study sites. In each of the six selected neighborhoods, eight trained adult volunteers were mobilized as mosquito collectors, with two individuals (outdoor and indoor) assigned per household. This collection was conducted in four households per neighborhood. Each collection team operated in two shifts: the first from 6:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m., and the second from 1:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Collectors served as live bait by sitting on chairs with their legs exposed and used flashlights to visually detect and capture mosquitoes landing on their limbs before blood-feeding occurred. Mosquitoes were caught using hemolysis tubes. To reduce potential bias due to differential attractiveness of individuals to mosquitoes, collectors alternated hourly between indoor and outdoor collection positions. Each collection site was supervised by a technician from the Institut de Recherche en Sciences de la Santé (IRSS) / Centre MURAZ and a local field assistant. Mosquitoes captured in hemolysis tubes were grouped by hour of collection into separate bags and transported daily to the entomology laboratory of IRSS/Centre MURAZ. Upon arrival at the laboratory, specimens were immediately sorted. Each mosquito was then individually transferred into a labeled Eppendorf tube containing silica gel to ensure proper desiccation and preservation for subsequent molecular analyses. The captured mosquitoes were first identified at the genus level using a binocular magnifying glass (AmScope; United Scope LLC) and based on the morphological identification key by Gillies et De Meillon (1968).
Molecular Analysis
Molecular form detection
Anopheles specimens were first morphologically identified using a binocular microscope, following the taxonomic key developed by Gillies and De Meillon, (1968). Genomic DNA was extracted from homogenized mosquitoes using the cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB) method (2% CTAB buffer), adapted from Myriam and Cécile (2003). The extraction process included chloroform purification followed by isopropanol precipitation. Identification of sibling species within the Anopheles gambiae complex was then performed using allele-specific polymerase chain reactions (PCR), targeting insertion polymorphisms of the SINE200 retrotransposable element, as described by Santolamazza et al, (2008). The primers used were: S200X 6.1F: TCG-CCT-TAG-ACC-TTG-CGT-TA; S200X 6.1R: CGC-TTC-AAG-AAT-TCG-AGA-TAC. PCR reactions were carried out in 20 µL volumes under standard thermal cycling conditions. Amplified products were separated on 2% agarose gels to distinguish target species, with expected band sizes of 479 base pair (bp) for An. coluzzii, 249 bp for An. gambiae, and 223 bp for An. arabiensis.
Detection of kdr Mutation (Kdr-West and Kdr-East)
The kdr L995F mutation was detected using an allele-specific PCR (AS-PCR) protocol described by Martinez-Torres et al. (1998). The primers Agd1 (5′-ATA GAT TCC CCG ACC ATG-3′) and Agd2 (5′-AGA CAA GGA TGA TGA ACC-3′) were used to amplify a common fragment of 293 base pairs (bp) in mosquitoes belonging to the Anopheles gambiae s.l. complex. To distinguish between alleles, the specific primers Agd3 (5′-AAT TTG CAT TAC TTA CGA CA-3′) and Agd4 (5′-CTG TAG TGA TAG GAA ATT TA-3′) were used to identify the L995F mutation. In parallel, detection of the kdr L995S mutation, characteristic of East Africa, was performed using the primers Agd1, Agd2, Agd4, and Agd5 (5′-TTT GCA TTA CTT ACG ACT G-3′), following the protocol adapted from Ranson et al. (2000) and validated by Verhaeghen et al. (2006). This combination specifically targets the substitution of leucine by serine at codon 995 of the voltage-gated sodium channel gene. The primers were used to amplify two distinct fragments: a 195 bp product corresponding to the mutated (resistant) allele, and a 137 bp product corresponding to the non-mutated (susceptible) allele. PCR products were separated on 2% agarose gels, enabling clear visualization of the banding patterns and accurate genotype determination for each individual.
Three genotypes were considered in the interpretation of kdr L995F and L995S mutations: Homozygous resistant (RR): bands at 293 bp and 195 bp, Heterozygous (RS): bands at 293 bp, 195 bp, and 137 bp and Homozygous susceptible (SS): bands at 293 bp and 137 bp. The presence of the common 293 bp fragment, amplified by primers Agd1 and Agd2, was essential to validate each PCR reaction and confirm the integrity of the amplification process.
Detection of Plasmodium infections
Detection of Plasmodium species was performed on gravid, semi-gravid, and non-blood-fed female Anopheles mosquitoes from the samples of HLC, following the PCR protocol described by Morlais et al in 2004. PCR amplification was carried out in a 25 µL reaction volume. The thermal cycling conditions included an initial denaturation at 95°C for 5 minutes, followed by 35 amplification cycles: denaturation at 95°C for 30 seconds, annealing at 58°C for 45 seconds, and elongation at 72°C for 1 minute. A final extension step was performed at 72°C for 5 minutes. PCR products were separated by electrophoresis on a 2% agarose gel stained with ethidium bromide, and visualized under UV illumination. Fragment sizes were determined by comparison with a 100 bp molecular weight marker. The expected amplicon sizes for each Plasmodium species were 276 bp, 376 bp and 411 bp for P. falciparum, P. ovale and P. malariae respectively.
Then, the following entomological parameters were calculated:
Anopheline density (ma):
ma = Total number of Anopheles mosquitoes captured / (Number of collectors x Number of capture days)
(m = anopheline density; a = The daily probability that a vector bites the host, expressed as the ratio of the anthropophily rate to the duration of the gonotrophic cycle (in days)
Infection rate (IR):
IR = (Number of anopheles infected with P. falciparum / Total number of anopheles analyzed) 𝑥 100
Entomological inoculation rate (EIR):
EIR = ma 𝑥 𝐼R;
Statistical Analyses
Mortality rates and 95% confidence intervals for the WHO susceptibility tests were calculated using the exact binomial method with RStudio software (version 4.4.2). The frequency of L995F and L995S mutations was calculated using the following formula: F(kdr) = (2nRR + nRS) / 2N, where nRR represents the number of homozygous resistant individuals, nRS the number of heterozygotes, and N the total number of specimens analyzed. Pearson correlation tests were performed to compare the abundance of mosquito species collected indoors and outdoors. A significance threshold of α = 0.05 was adopted, and results with p-values below 0.05 were considered statistically significant.
Results
Distribution of Anopheles complex Species
A total of 360 individuals An. gambiae s.l were analyzed by PCR for Anopheles gambiae complex species identification. An. arabiensis (96.67%, 348/360) and An. gambiae s.s (3.33%, 12/360) were identified as members of the An. gambiae complex. Our data shown a clear predominance of An. arabiensis across all surveyed localities, with proportions ranging from 91.7% in Dogona to 100% in Kua and Sabaribougou. An. gambiae s.s. was marginally present, with frequencies below 10% in most sites and completely absent in Kua and Sabaribougou. This specific distribution suggests that malaria transmission dynamics in the area are primarily driven by An. arabiensis, a species known for its more exophilic and zoophilic behavior (Fig. 2).
Fig. 2
Distribution of identified species in the study area
Click here to Correct
Susceptibility Status of Anopheles gambiae to Pyrethroids
The data revealed heterogeneity in insecticide efficacy across the study sites, with mortality rates frequently below the 90% threshold established by WHO to confirm vector phenotypic resistance status. This observation indicates widespread resistance to pyrethroids, particularly permethrin and deltamethrin, in several surveyed areas. Additionally, DDT although historically used in control programs shows reduced effectiveness, suggesting possible cross-resistance with pyrethroids (Fig. 3). These findings underscore the need for continuous entomological surveillance and a reassessment of insecticides used in vector control strategies.
Fig. 3
Mortality rates of Anopheles gambiae s.l. exposed to pyrethroids across districts
Click here to Correct
Susceptibility Status of Anopheles gambiae to PBO + Pyrethroids
Exposure of Anopheles gambiae to insecticide combinations enhanced with the synergist PBO (Piperonyl butoxide) resulted in a notable increase in mortality rates across all surveyed localities. The combinations PBO + permethrin, PBO + deltamethrin, and PBO + alpha-cypermethrin proved more effective than the insecticides used alone, indicating partial inhibition of metabolic resistance mechanisms in most sites. PBO restores either partially or totally the susceptibility to pyrethroids according to investigated localities.
However, in Sabaribougou, the markedly improved efficacy observed with PBO-containing formulations suggests a predominant, if not exclusive, involvement of metabolic resistance mechanisms in the local mosquito population (Fig. 4). These findings confirm the value of PBO as a complementary tool in targeted vector control strategies.
Fig. 4
Mortality rates of Anopheles gambiae s.l. following exposure to pyrethroid and pyrethroid–PBO combinations
Click here to Correct
Susceptibility Status of Species to Organophosphates and Carbamates
The tests conducted demonstrated consistently high efficacy of pirimiphos-methyl and bendiocarb across most surveyed sites, with mortality rates exceeding the 98% threshold recommended by WHO to confirm susceptibility. This observation suggests no significant resistance to these two insecticides within local An. gambiae s.l. populations (Fig. 5). These findings support the relevance of pirimiphos-methyl and bendiocarb as effective alternatives in vector control strategies, particularly in areas where pyrethroid resistance is already well established.
Fig. 5
Mortality rates of species following exposure to organophosphates and carbamates across districts
Click here to Correct
Distribution of Kdr-West and Kdr-East mutation Frequencies
Across all study sites, the Kdr-West (L995F) mutation was widely prevalent in An. arabiensis, with frequencies varying according to both species and areas. It varied from 0.533 in Sabaribougou to 0.745 in Sarfalao, indicating strong selection pressure likely driven by pyrethroid use. The Kdr-East L995S mutation was also detected, though less frequently (0.118 in Sarfalao and 0.421 in Kodeni), suggesting co-circulation of both resistance alleles, with a clear predominance of L995F. Observed genotypic frequencies were generally consistent with Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, except in Kua and Kodeni for Kdr-East, where slight deviations were noted. In An. gambiae s.s., although sample sizes were low, Kdr-West frequencies were very high (up to 1 in Sarfalao), suggesting near fixation of the resistant allele. Kdr-East frequencies were more variable (ranging from 0 in Sarfalao to 0.666 in Kodeni) but remained lower than those of L995F (Table 1). A significant deviation from Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium was observed in Sarfalao, likely due to small sample size or intense selective pressure. These findings highlight pronounced genetic resistance in An. gambiae s.s. and moderate to high resistance in An. arabiensis, with major implications for insecticide selection and the optimization of vector control strategies.
Table 1
Allelic Frequencies of Kdr-West and Kdr-East in Anopheles gambiae s.l. populations of Bobo-Dioulasso
Sites
Espèces
 
Genotypes Kdr-West
  
Genotypes Kdr-East
  
  
N
995L 995L
995L 995F
995F 995F
f(995F)
p(HW)
995L 995L
995L 995S
995S 995S
f(995S)
p(HW)
Dogona
An. arabiensis
55
13
20
22
0.581
0.9395
31
17
7
0.281
0.9131
An. gambiae s.s.
5
0
2
3
0.8
0.9905
4
0
1
0.1
0.9747
Farakan
An. arabiensis
57
15
14
28
0.614
0.9998
41
9
7
0.01
0.9996
An. gambiae s.s.
3
0
1
2
0.833
0.3464
0
3
0
0.5
0.9586
Kodeni
An. arabiensis
57
7
18
32
0.719
0.8922
21
24
12
0.421
0.6965
An. gambiae s.s.
3
0
3
0
0.5
0.9586
0
2
1
0.666
0.6937
Kua
An. arabiensis
60
10
20
30
0.666
0.9446
37
20
3
0.216
0.1103
Sabaribougou
An. arabiensis
60
20
16
24
0.533
0.9998
37
19
4
0.225
0.514
Sarfalao
An. arabiensis
59
8
14
37
0.745
0.9942
45
14
0
0.118
0.8308
An. gambiae s.s.
1
0
0
1
1
< 0.0001
1
0
0
0
< 0.0001
Abundance of Anopheles mosquitoes collected both indoor vs outdoor by HLC Sporozoite
A total of 622 mosquitoes were identified, including 283 collected indoors and 339 outdoors. significative difference was found between the collected mosquitoes indoor and outdoor (Pvalue 0.01657). Among the specimens captured indoors, An. arabiensis was predominant, accounting for 87.99% (n = 249), followed by An. gambiae s.s. at 7.77% (n = 22) and An. coluzzii at 4.24% (n = 12). In the outdoor environment, An. arabiensis remained the most prevalent species, with a slightly higher proportion of 93.22% (n = 316), while An. gambiae s.s. and An. coluzzii were less frequent, representing 4.42% (n = 15) and 2.36% (n = 8), respectively (Table 2).
Table 2
Distribution of Anopheles gambiae s.l. collected indoors and outdoors.
Sites
Indoor n (%)
Total
Outdoor n (%)
Total
An. arabiensis
An. gambiae s.s.
An. coluzzii
An. arabiensis
An. gambiae s.s.
An. coluzzii
Sarfalao
54 (84.376)
7 (10.937)
3 (4.687)
64 (22.615)
46 (97.872)
1 (2.128)
0 (0.000)
47 (13.864)
Kua
26 (89.655)
1 (3.448)
2 (6.897)
29 (10.247)
75 (89.286)
5 (5.952)
4 (4.762)
84 (24.779)
Sabaribougou
54 (93.104)
2 (3.448)
2 (3.448)
58 (20.494)
34 (94.444)
1 (2.778)
1 (2.778)
36 (10.619)
Kodeni
20 (74.074)
5 (18.519)
2 (7.407)
27 (9.541)
73 (92.405)
6 (7.595)
0 (0.000)
79 (23.304)
Farakan
27 (90.000)
3 (10.000)
0 (0.000)
30 (10.601)
25 (96.154)
0 (0.000)
1 (3.846)
26 (7.670)
Dogona
68 (90.667)
4 (5.333)
3 (4.000)
75 (26.502)
63 (94.030)
2 (2.985)
2 (2.985)
67 (19.764)
Total
249 (87.986)
22 (7.774)
12 (4.240)
283 (100)
316 (93.215)
15 (4.425)
8 (2.360)
339 (100)
Infection Rate (SIR) and Entomological Inoculation Rate (EIR)
A total of 622 mosquitoes from the Anopheles gambiae complex were analyzed for sporozoite detection. Among the identified species, An. arabiensis was predominant (n = 565), followed by An. gambiae s.s. (n = 37) and An. coluzzii (n = 20). The observed sporozoite infection rates (SIR) were 27.43% for An. arabiensis, 45.00% for An. coluzzii, and 16.21% for An. gambiae s.s. The overall entomological inoculation rate (EIR) was estimated at 10.624 infectious bites per person, with An. arabiensis exhibiting the high rate (EIR = 9.687). Contributions from An. coluzzii and An. gambiae s.s. were more modest, at 0.562 and 0.375 respectively. Marked spatial variability was observed. The district of Sabaribougou recorded the highest EIR (3.499), associated with particularly high infection rates in An. coluzzii (100%) and An. gambiae s.s. (66.67%). The districts of Kua (EIR = 2.412) and Kodeni (EIR = 1.499) also showed notable transmission, mainly attributed to An. arabiensis. In contrast, Farakan (EIR = 0.624) and Dogona (EIR = 1.312) exhibited lower transmission levels, although An. coluzzii occasionally showed high infection rates in these areas (Table 3). These findings confirm the dominant role of An. arabiensis in malaria transmission within the study area. However, the vectorial capacity of An. coluzzii, though limited by its low abundance, may be significant in localized high-prevalence hotspots.
Table 3
Sporozoite infection rate (SIR) and entomological inoculation rate (EIR) recorded in the Anopheles gambiae complex
Sites
An. arabiensis
EIR
An. coluzzii
EIR
An. gambiae s.s.
EIR
EIR (T)
Tested
Infected
SIR (%)
Tested
Infected
SIR (%)
Tested
Infected
SIR (%)
Sarfalao
99
17
17.17
1.062
3
1
33.33
0.062
8
2
25.00
0.125
1.249
Kua
99
36
36.36
2.250
6
3
50.00
0.187
6
0
0
0.000
2.412
Kodeni
98
22
22.44
1.375
2
1
50.00
0.062
11
1
09.09
0.062
1.499
Sabaribougou
86
51
59.30
3.187
3
3
100
0.187
3
2
66.67
0.125
3.499
Farakan
52
9
17.31
0.562
1
1
100
0.062
3
0
0
0.000
0.624
Dogona
131
20
15.27
1.250
5
0
0.00
0.000
6
1
16.67
0.062
1.312
Total
565
155
27.43
9.687
20
9
45.00
0.562
37
6
16.21
0.375
10.624
Discussion
Understanding the current level of insecticide resistance in malaria vectors belonging to the Anopheles gambiae complex in Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso, is prerequisite for developing efficient vector control strategies. Thus, our data obtained provide a foundation for deeper reflection on the current state of insecticide resistance in malaria vectors in this region. It also extends our knowledge upon local malaria transmission.
The predominance of An. Arabiensis associated with the high prevalence of Kdr mutations, the variability in mortality rates across insecticides and study sites, reflect a complex entomological dynamic shaped by local selective pressures. These updated data are essential for refining vector control strategies, particularly by considering species- and locality-specific resistance profiles. They also highlight the need to integrate complementary tools, such as PBO-based formulations or alternative insecticides, into malaria control programs in order to sustain intervention efficacy and mitigate the evolution of resistance. The predominance of An. arabiensis across our study sites may be explained by its remarkable ecological plasticity and its ability to adapt particularly well to semi-arid environments and temporary larval habitats, which are often abundant during the rainy season. Unlike An. gambiae s.s., An. arabiensis tolerates high temperatures and low humidity levels more effectively, giving it a competitive advantage in dry climates (27).
An. arabiensis is known to exhibit relative zoophily and a marked exophilic tendency, reducing its exposure to indoor interventions such as residual spraying or the use of insecticide-treated nets (28). This behavioral shift has been documented in multiple settings, including Guinea-Bissau and southeastern Tanzania, where An. arabiensis was found to dominate outdoor collections and contribute significantly to residual transmission (29, 30). This contrasts with our findings, which show no significant difference in the proportions of An. arabiensis collected indoors and outdoors, highlighting its ability to adapt its biting behavior. Furthermore, genetic studies have highlighted the strong resilience of these populations to environmental pressures and vector control interventions (31). Finally, the increasing resistance to insecticides, particularly pyrethroids, may also contribute to the persistence and dominance of An. arabiensis in certain areas (32).
In contrast, An. gambiae s.s. and An. coluzzii were more frequently encountered indoors, albeit at lower overall proportions. These species are traditionally considered endophilic and anthropophilic, traits that make them more susceptible to indoor interventions. However, their reduced presence in this study may reflect ecological displacement or behavioral changes in response to sustained vector control pressure, as observed in other West African contexts. The observed species distribution has important implications for malaria control strategies. The occurence of An. arabiensis outdoors underscores the need to complement indoor interventions with approaches targeting outdoor biting, such as larval source management, spatial repellents, or community-based environmental modifications. Moreover, the persistence of An. gambiae s.s. and An. coluzzii indoors suggests that ITNs and IRS remain relevant but may require optimization to address evolving vector behaviors (33).
Molecular resistance observed in An. Arabiensis, although generally less pronounced than in An. gambiae s.s., remains a concern in several regions of Africa, notably in Ethiopia, Sudan, and Zimbabwe, where moderate to high levels of resistance have been documented (3436). The observation of widespread resistance to pyrethroids particularly permethrin and deltamethrin in our study area confirms a worrying trend already well documented across West and Central Africa. This resistance appears to be primarily driven by metabolic mechanisms and behavioral adaptations such as exophily and zoophily, which reduce exposure to insecticides used in domestic settings. These traits complicate both the detection and management of resistance, especially in areas where pyrethroids were widely deployed through long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS) campaigns. Recent studies have confirmed that the efficacy of these insecticides is significantly compromised in regions with high resistance prevalence (32, 37). In response to this situation, it is essential to adopt alternative strategies, such as the use of dual-active nets combining a pyrethroid with a synergist like piperonyl butoxide (PBO), or the deployment of insecticides with distinct modes of action that do not exhibit cross-resistance with conventional compounds (38). Strengthening entomological and molecular surveillance also remains critical for tracking the evolution of resistance markers and adapting interventions in real time. Interestingly, combinations of pyrethroids with the synergist piperonyl butoxide (PBO) specifically PBO + permethrin, PBO + deltamethrin, and PBO + alpha-cypermethrin offer superior efficacy compared to pyrethroid-only formulations expressed by the increased mosquito mortality observed across most sites indicates. PBO functions by blocking the enzymatic activity of detoxification systems, thereby allowing pyrethroids to retain their lethal effect on resistant mosquitoes (39).
At the Sabaribougou site, the markedly improved efficacy of PBO-based formulations suggests a predominant, if not exclusive, role of metabolic resistance mechanisms. This hypothesis is supported by the absence of high-frequency kdr mutations in local populations associated with elevated expression levels of metabolic resistance genes, as documented in similar West African contexts (40). These observations highlight the need for uses of dual-active long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs-PBO) in areas where metabolic resistance is dominant. They also reinforce the recommendations of the WHO Global Plan for Insecticide Resistance Management (GPIRM), which advocates for the integration of synergized formulations into vector control programs when metabolic resistance mechanisms are confirmed (21). Finally, these results underscore the need to strengthen molecular and enzymatic surveillance to guide insecticide selection based on local resistance profiles.
Fortunately, tests conducted with organophosphates and carbamates revealed consistently high efficacy for pirimiphos-methyl and bendiocarb, with mortality rates exceeding the 98% threshold recommended by WHO to confirm vector susceptibility (21). This susceptibility suggests that, despite widespread pyrethroid resistance, organophosphates and carbamates remained operationally effective in several entomological settings. Pirimiphos-methyl, in particular, demonstrated strong performance even in areas where kdr and Ace-1 resistance mutations are present at moderate frequencies, highlighting its potential for indoor residual spraying (IRS) campaigns in contexts of multi-resistance (37, 41, 42). Studies conducted in Côte d’Ivoire and Burkina Faso have confirmed that pirimiphos-methyl, when applied to cement or mud walls, maintains residual efficacy for over six months, making it a robust candidate for seasonal interventions (4245). Similarly, bendiocarb continues to produce high mortality rates in several localities, despite emerging resistance linked to the Ace-1 mutation particularly where its frequency remains below 20% (46, 47). These findings emphasize the importance of diversifying insecticide classes used in vector control programs, prioritizing compounds that remain effective under high selective pressure. Ultimately, a comprehensive understanding of resistance mechanisms and their spatial heterogeneity is critical for optimizing interventions and sustaining the long-term effectiveness of vector control strategies in the face of escalating resistance. As recommended by WHO, plant-derived molecules may also represent alternative tools against resistant mosquito populations (4851).
As for malaria transmission and implications for vector control, An. arabiensis plays a key role in the local transmission dynamics of malaria. Although less abundant, An. coluzzii exhibits a relatively high infection rate. This level of infectivity suggests an amplified local vectorial capacity, likely driven by strong anthropophilic behavior and ecological conditions favorable to parasite survival (52). Recent studies have shown that An. coluzzii is particularly well adapted to urban and peri-urban environments, with a preference for permanent and polluted larval habitats conditions that may sustain transmission even at low vector densities (54, 55). In contrast, An. gambiae s.s. appears to play a marginal role in this study, with a moderate sporozoite infection rate (SIR) and a limited contribution to the entomological inoculation rate (EIR). This decline may be attributed to ecological replacement dynamics, as observed in the Kou Valley, where An. arabiensis becomes more prevalent at the onset of the dry season. It may also reflect increased selective pressure from the widespread use of insecticide-treated nets and indoor spraying, which differentially affect species within the complex depending on their feeding behavior and chemical susceptibility (56). The spatial heterogeneity of EIRs observed across neighborhoods highlights the importance of local factors in transmission dynamics. Sabaribougou, which shows high infection rates across all three species, may reflect a combination of high vector density, limited coverage of control interventions, and environmental conditions conducive to larval development. Conversely, Farakan and Dogona exhibit lower EIRs despite the presence of infected mosquitoes, possibly due to reduced vector density or better human protection particularly through net usage and reduced access to larval habitats (43).
A
These findings call for a differentiated approach to vector control, one that accounts for species diversity, local ecology, and vectorial capacity. Targeted entomological surveillance and the adaptation of control strategies to the spatial and behavioral specificities of vector populations are essential to enhance intervention effectiveness.
Conclusion
This study highlights a complex entomological situation in the Bobo-Dioulasso region, characterized by high levels of pyrethroid resistance among malaria vectors and heterogeneous transmission dynamics across neighborhoods and vector species. The predominance of Anopheles arabiensis, its ecological and behavioral resilience, and the notable infection of An. coluzzii in certain sites underscore the need for a localized and differentiated approach to vector control. The results confirm the strategic value of PBO-based synergized formulations, which demonstrate enhanced efficacy in contexts of metabolic resistance. Moreover, the continued susceptibility of vectors to organophosphates and carbamates particularly pirimiphos-methyl and bendiocarb offers robust operational alternatives for indoor residual spraying campaigns. In light of rising multi-resistance and persistent transmission in specific areas, it is imperative to strengthen entomological and molecular surveillance, tailor control tools to local resistance profiles, and implement integrated strategies to preserve intervention effectiveness. A nuanced understanding of vector ecology and behavior, combined with rational insecticide management, is essential to contain residual malaria transmission and guide public health policies toward sustainable solutions.
List of abbreviations
An.
Anopheles
bp
base pair
CTAB
Cetyltrimethylamonium bromide
DDT
dichlorodiphényltrichloroéthane
DNA
Desoxyribonucleic acid
EIR
Entomological Inoculation Rate
F
phenylalanin
HLC
Human Landing Catch
IRS
Indoor Residual Spraying
IRSS
Institut de Recherche en Sciences de la Santé
ITN
insecticide treatment net
Kdr
knockdown resistance
L
Leucine
LLINs
Long-Lasting Insecticidal Nets
PBO
piperonyl butoxide
PCR
Polymerase Chain Reaction
RR
Homozygous resistant
RS
Heterozygous
S
serine
SIR
Sporozoite infection rate
s.l.
sensu lato
s.s.
sensu stricto
SS
Homozygous susceptible
WHO
World Health Organization
Declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
A
This study was approved by the Ethical Research Committee of the Institut de Recherche en Sciences de la Santé (IRSS) under reference number 008-2022/CEIRES, dated 20 January 2022.
A
In accordance with national and institutional guidelines, informed consent was not required, as the study did not involve human participants or the collection of any personal or identifiable information. Only mosquito populations were collected for entomological analysis.
Consent for publication
Not applicable
Availability of data and materials
Not applicable
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests
A
Funding
This study was supported by projet d’innovation n°AAP3 FONRID_SGCI2-collaboratif-02 and CEA/ITECH-MTV, grant ref/letter acceptation CEA/ITECH-MTV du 04/02/2021 à AMARA Miriam Félicité
A
A
Author Contribution
Miriam Félicité AMARA, Study design; Methodology definition; literature review; performed laboratory; data analysis; results interpretation; study implementation; manuscript draftingMoussa NAMOUNTOUGOU, Study design; funding acquisition; protocol validation; manuscript review and approval.Hamadou KONATE, Literature review; study implementation; results interpretation **.**Kouamé Wilfred Ulrich KOUADIO, data analysis; results interpretationSadapawindé Thérèse KAGONE, study implementationAbdoulaye DIABATE, manuscript review and approval.Olivier GNANKINE, Methodology definition; data validation; results interpretation; manuscript review and approval.
Moussa NAMOUNTOUGOU, Study design; funding acquisition; protocol validation; manuscript review and approval.
Hamadou KONATE, Literature review; study implementation; results interpretation.
Kouamé Wilfred Ulrich KOUADIO, data analysis; results interpretation
Sadapawindé Thérèse KAGONE, study implementation
A
Abdoulaye DIABATE, manuscript review and approval.
Olivier GNANKINE, Methodology definition; data validation; results interpretation; manuscript review and approval.
Acknowledgement
The authors are grateful to the technicians at IRSS/Centre Muraz for their key work, especially Mr Ouari Ali. Our sincere appreciation to the communities from all selected sentinel sites for support and cooperation during experiments.
References
1.
WHO. World Malaria Report 2017 [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2025 Sep 16]. Available from: https://www.who.int/teams/global-malaria-programme/reports/world-malaria-report-2017
2.
Zogo MB. Impact entomologique de stratégies complémentaires de lutte intégrée contre le paludisme dans un contexte de résistance des vecteurs aux insecticides au nord de la Côte d’Ivoire. 2020;
3.
WHO. Situation et tendances de la résistance aux insecticides chez les vecteurs du paludisme (2018). 2018;
4.
Dao AS. La résistance des vecteurs du paludisme aux insecticides [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2025 Sep 16]. Available from: https://123dok.net/article/la-r%C3%A9sistance-des-vecteurs-du-paludisme-aux-insecticides.zgw0x6wv
5.
WHO. World malaria report [Internet]. 2023 [cited 2025 Feb 18]. Available from: https://www.who.int/teams/global-malaria-programme/reports/world-malaria-report-2023
6.
Namountougou M, Soma DD, Kientega M, Balboné M, Kaboré DPA, Drabo SF, et al. Insecticide resistance mechanisms in Anopheles gambiae complex populations from Burkina Faso, West Africa. Acta Tropica. 2019;197:105054.
7.
Kone S, Toure M, Loukou KSP, Yapi GY. AFRIQUE SCIENCE - REVUE INTERNANATIONALE. 2023 [cited 2025 Sep 16]. 10 - Résistance aux insecticides chez An. gambiae sl dans quatre localités bioclimatiques différentes en Côte d’Ivoire. Available from: https://afriquescience.net/
8.
Tokponnon TF, Ossè R, Kossou J, Abadame R, Nouwagbe C, Gnacadja O, et al. Resistance Profile of Anopheles gambiae s.l. to Insecticides in the Atlantic, Littoral and Oueme Departments of Benin in West Africa. Advances in Bioscience and Biotechnology. 2025;16(7):261–76.
9.
Soma DD, Poda SB, Hien AS, Namountougou M, Sangaré I, Sawadogo JME, et al. Malaria vectors diversity, insecticide resistance and transmission during the rainy season in peri-urban villages of south-western Burkina Faso. Malar J. 2021;20(1):63.
10.
Sondo P, Valea I, Poda A, Tinto H. Prévention du paludisme en Afrique subsaharienne: états des lieux, enjeux et perspectives. Médecine et Maladies Infectieuses Formation. 2024;3(2):73–8.
11.
Soma DD, Zogo B, Hien DF de S, Hien AS, Kaboré DA, Kientega M, et al. Insecticide resistance status of malaria vectors Anopheles gambiae (s.l.) of southwest Burkina Faso and residual efficacy of indoor residual spraying with microencapsulated pirimiphos-methyl insecticide. Parasites Vectors. 2021;14(1):58.
12.
Oxborough RM, Chilito KLF, Tokponnon F, Messenger LA. Malaria vector control in sub-Saharan Africa: complex trade-offs to combat the growing threat of insecticide resistance. The Lancet Planetary Health. 2024;8(10):e804–12.
13.
Gnankiné O, Bassolé IHN, Chandre F, Glitho I, Akogbeto M, Dabiré RK, et al. Insecticide resistance in Bemisia tabaci Gennadius (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) and Anopheles gambiae Giles (Diptera: Culicidae) could compromise the sustainability of malaria vector control strategies in West Africa. Acta Tropica. 2013;128(1):7–17.
14.
Yaméogo F, Sombié A, Oté M, Saiki, E, Sakurai T, Wangrawa DW, et al. Three years of insecticide resistance evolution and associated mechanisms in Aedes aegypti populations of Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso | PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases [Internet]. 2024 [cited 2025 Sep 16]. Available from: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0012138
A
15.
Namountougou M, Soma DD, Sangare I, Djouaka R, Hien AS, Kientega M, et al. Use of different cotton pest control strategies (conventional, organic and transgenic) had no impact on insecticide resistance in Anopheles gambiae s.l. populations in Burkina Faso, West Africa. International Journal of Pest Management. 2024;70(4):901–12.
A
16.
Nkya TE, Akhouayri I, Kisinza W, David JP. Impact of environment on mosquito response to pyrethroid insecticides: Facts, evidences and prospects. Insect Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. 2013;43(4):407–16.
17.
Amara MF, Konaté H, Kouadio KWU, Yao RK, Ngaffo KL, Diabate A, et al. Human population exposure to residual malaria transmission by the main vector, Anopheles s.l. in the city of Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso | Research Square [Internet]. 2025 [cited 2025 Sep 16]. Available from: https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-7048284/v1
A
18.
Somda Z, Zanré N, Wangrawa DW, Toé HK, Sombié A, Saiki E, et al. High pyrethroid resistance is associated with high frequencies of 1014F and 1014S kdr mutations in Anopheles arabiensis (Diptera: Culicidae) from Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. J Med Entomol. 2025;62(2):381–8.
19.
Gillies MT, De Meillon B. Gillies, M.T. and De Meillon, B. (1968) The Anophelinae of Africa South of the Sahara. Publications of the South African Institute for Medical Research, Johannesburg. - References - Scientific Research Publishing [Internet]. 1968 [cited 2025 Feb 16]. Available from: https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=3151913
20.
WHO. Stratégie Technique Mondiale de Lutte Contre Le Paludisme 2016–2030. World Health Organization; 2016. 39 p.
21.
WHO. Procédure opératoire standard pour déterminer la capacité du PBO à restaurer la sensibilité des moustiques adultes aux insecticides pyréthrinoïdes à l’aide des tests en tubes de l’OMS. 2023;
A
22.
Santolamazza F, Mancini E, Simard F, Qi Y, Tu Z, della Torre A. Insertion polymorphisms of SINE200 retrotransposons within speciation islands of Anopheles gambiae molecular forms. Malar J. 2008;7(1):163.
A
23.
Martinez-Torres D, Chandre F, Williamson MS, Darriet F, Bergé JB, Devonshire AL, et al. Molecular characterization of pyrethroid knockdown resistance (kdr) in the major malaria vector Anopheles gambiae s.s. Insect Mol Biol. 1998;7(2):179–84.
24.
Ranson H, Jensen B, Vulule JM, Wang X, Hemingway J, Collins FH. Identification of a point mutation in the voltage-gated sodium channel gene of Kenyan Anopheles gambiae associated with resistance to DDT and pyrethroids. Insect Molecular Biology. 2000;9(5):491–7.
25.
Verhaeghen K, Van Bortel W, Roelants P, Backeljau T, Coosemans M. Detection of the East and West African kdr mutation in Anopheles gambiae and Anopheles arabiensis from Uganda using a new assay based on FRET/Melt Curve analysis. Malaria Journal. 2006;5(1):16.
A
26.
Morlais I, Ponçon N, Simard F, Cohuet A, Fontenille D. Intraspecific nucleotide variation in Anopheles gambiae: new insights into the biology of malaria vectors. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. 2004;71(6):795–802.
27.
Gimonneau G, Pombi M, Choisy M, Morand S, Dabiré RK, Simard F. Larval habitat segregation between the molecular forms of the mosquito Anopheles gambiae in a rice field area of Burkina Faso, West Africa. Medical and Veterinary Entomology. 2012;26(1):9–17.
28.
Tirados I, Costantini C, Gibson G, Torr SJ. Blood-feeding behaviour of the malarial mosquito Anopheles arabiensis: implications for vector control - TIRADOS – 2006 - Medical and Veterinary Entomology - Wiley Online Library [Internet]. 2006 [cited 2025 Sep 20]. Available from: https://resjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1365-2915.2006.652.x
29.
Limwagu AJ, Msugupakulya BJ, Ngowo HS, Mwalugelo YA, Kilalangongono MS, Samli FA, et al. The bionomics of Anopheles arabiensis and Anopheles funestus inside local houses and their implications for vector control strategies in areas with high coverage of insecticide-treated nets in South-eastern Tanzania. PLOS ONE. 2024;19(12):e0295482.
30.
Pretorius E, Jones RT, Hutchins H, Teixeira Da Silva E, Ceesay S, Ndiath MO, et al. A survey of indoor and outdoor Anopheles density, species composition and circumsporozoite rate of malaria vectors on the Bijagós Archipelago, Guinea-Bissau. Malaria Journal. 2025;24(1):195.
31.
Simard F, Ayala D, Kamdem GC, Pombi M, Etouna J, Ose K, et al. Ecological niche partitioning between Anopheles gambiae molecular forms in Cameroon: the ecological side of speciation | BMC Ecology [Internet]. 2009 [cited 2025 Sep 20]. Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/1472-6785-9-17
32.
Ranson H, N’Guessan R, Lines J, Moiroux N, Nkuni Z, Corbel V. Pyrethroid resistance in African anopheline mosquitoes: what are the implications for malaria control? Trends in Parasitology. 2011;27(2):91–8.
33.
Leal SDV, Sousa C de, Monteiro DDSR, Mendonça M da LL, Gonçalves AALM, DePina AJ. The geographical distribution of the malaria vector Anopheles arabiensis in Cabo Verde, 2016–2023. Front Trop Dis. 2024;5:1353839.
34.
Himeidan YE, Chen H, Chandre F, Donnelly MJ, Yan G. Short report: permethrin and DDT resistance in the malaria vector Anopheles arabiensis from eastern Sudan- fdi:010043751- Horizon [Internet]. 2007 [cited 2025 Sep 20]. Available from: https://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010043751
35.
Munhenga G, Masendu HT, Brooke BD, Hunt RH, Koekemoer LK. Pyrethroid resistance in the major malaria vector Anopheles arabiensis from Gwave, a malaria-endemic area in Zimbabwe. Malar J. 2008;7(1):247.
36.
Balkew M, Ibrahim M, Koekemoer LL, Brooke BD, Engers H, Aseffa A, et al. Insecticide resistance in Anopheles arabiensis (Diptera: Culicidae) from villages in central, northern and south west Ethiopia and detection of kdr mutation. Parasites Vectors. 2010;3(1):40.
37.
Kouadio FPA, Wipf NC, Nygble AS, Fodjo BK, Sadia CG, Vontas J, et al. Relationship between insecticide resistance profiles in Anopheles gambiae sensu lato and agricultural practices in Côte d’Ivoire. Parasites & Vectors. 2023;16(1):270.
38.
Oniha MI, Aina MO. Insecticide Resistance Markers in Anopheles gambiae Complex: Trends and Prospects. In: Isibor PO, Akinduti PA, editors. Harnessing Biotechnology Tools for Product Development: Selected Papers from the International Biotechnology Conference Exhibition and Workshop (IBCEW 2024) [Internet]. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland; 2025 [cited 2025 Sep 20]. p. 159–76. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-86002-7_11
39.
Mavridis K, Wipf N, Medves S, Erquiaga I, Müller P, Vontas J. Rapid multiplex gene expression assays for monitoring metabolic resistance in the major malaria vector Anopheles gambiae. Parasites Vectors. 2019;12(1):9.
40.
Saizonou H, Impoinvil LM, Derilus D, Omoke D, Okeyo S, Dada N, et al. Transcriptomic analysis of Anopheles gambiae from Benin reveals overexpression of salivary and cuticular proteins associated with cross-resistance to pyrethroids and organophosphates. BMC Genomics. 2024;25(1):348.
41.
Kabula B, Mlacha YP, Serbantez N, Nhiga SL, Mkude S, Kiware S, et al. Pyrethroid-resistant malaria vector Anopheles gambiae restored susceptibility after pre-exposure to piperonyl-butoxide: results from country-wide insecticide resistance monitoring in Tanzania, 2023. Malar J. 2024;23(1):395.
42.
Soma DD, Zogo B, Taconet P, Somé A, Coulibaly S, Baba-Moussa L, et al. Quantifying and characterizing hourly human exposure to malaria vectors bites to address residual malaria transmission during dry and rainy seasons in rural Southwest Burkina Faso. BMC Public Health. 2021;21(1):251.
43.
Namountougou M, Kientega M, Kaboré P, Soma D, Pare Toe L, Sawadogo J, et al. Residual malaria transmission: Magnitude and drivers of persistent Plasmodium infections despite high coverage of control interventions in Burkina Faso, West Africa. Acta Tropica. 2023;242:106913.
44.
Kone S, Toure M, Loukou KSP, Yapi YG. Résistance aux insecticides chez An. gambiae sl dans quatre localités bioclimatiques différentes en Côte d’Ivoire. 2023;
45.
Kouamé JKI, Edi CVA, Zahouli JBZ, Kouamé RMA, Kacou YAK, Yokoly FN, et al. Assessing species composition and insecticide resistance of Anopheles gambiae complex members in three coastal health districts of Côte d’Ivoire. Nelli L, editor. PLoS ONE. 2024;19(12):e0297604.
46.
Keïta M, Kané F, Thiero O, Traoré B, Zeukeng F, Sodio AB, et al. Acetylcholinesterase (ace-1R) target site mutation G119S and resistance to carbamates in Anopheles gambiae (sensu lato) populations from Mali. Parasites Vectors. 2020;13(1):283.
47.
Zoh DD, Ahoua Alou LP, Toure M, Pennetier C, Camara S, Traore DF, et al. The current insecticide resistance status of Anopheles gambiae (s.l.) (Culicidae) in rural and urban areas of Bouaké, Côte d’Ivoire. Parasites Vectors. 2018;11(1):118.
48.
Gnankiné O, Bassolé IHN. Essential Oils as an Alternative to Pyrethroids’ Resistance against Anopheles Species Complex Giles (Diptera: Culicidae). Molecules. 2017;22(10):1321.
49.
Balboné M, Diloma Soma D, Fogné Drabo S, Namountougou M, Konaté H, Benson Meda G, et al. Alternatives to Pyrethroid Resistance: Combinations of Cymbopogon nardus and Ocimum americanum Essential Oils Improve the Bioefficiency Control Against the Adults’ Populations of Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae). J Med Entomol. 2022;59(6):2102–9.
50.
Balboné M, Soma DD, Namountougou M, Drabo SF, Konaté H, Toe O, et al. Essential Oils From Five Local Plants: An Alternative Larvicide for Anopheles gambiae s.l. (Diptera: Culicidae) and Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) Control in Western Burkina Faso. Front Trop Dis [Internet]. 2022 Jul 6 [cited 2025 Sep 24];3. Available from: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/tropical-diseases/articles/10.3389/fitd.2022.853405/full
51.
Balboné M, Sawadogo I, Soma DD, Drabo SF, Namountougou M, Bayili K, et al. Essential oils of plants and their combinations as an alternative adulticides against Anopheles gambiae (Diptera: Culicidae) populations. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):19077.
52.
Bouafou L. Ecologie des populations selvatiques d’Anopheles gambiae, vecteur du paludisme [Internet] [phdthesis]. Université de Montpellier; 2024 [cited 2025 Sep 22]. Available from: https://theses.hal.science/tel-04916761
A
53.
Soma DD, Zogo BM, Somé A, Tchiekoi BN, Hien DFDS, Pooda HS, et al. Anopheles bionomics, insecticide resistance and malaria transmission in southwest Burkina Faso: A pre-intervention study. Chitnis N, editor. PLoS ONE. 2020;15(8):e0236920.
54.
Ibrahim B, Waongo M, Sidibe M, Sanfo S, Barry B. Agroclimatological Characteristics of Rainy Seasons in Southwestern Burkina Faso during the 1970–2013 Period [Internet]. 2022 [cited 2025 Jul 28]. Available from: https://scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=116362
55.
Soma DD, Poda SB, Hien AS, Namountougou M, Sangaré I, Sawadogo JME, et al. Malaria vectors diversity, insecticide resistance and transmission during the rainy season in peri-urban villages of south-western Burkina Faso. Malar J. 2021;20(1):63.
56.
Kouadio KWU, Amara MF, Soma DD, Dabiré RK, Diabaté A, Gnankiné O, et al. Residual malaria transmission in Western Burkina Faso: Vector Behavior, insecticide resistance, and the efficacy limits of next-generation LLINs. Acta Tropica. 2025;270:107824.
Total words in MS: 5553
Total words in Title: 17
Total words in Abstract: 264
Total Keyword count: 6
Total Images in MS: 5
Total Tables in MS: 3
Total Reference count: 56