Fluorescent markers rhodamine B and uranine for Anopheles gambiae adults and matings

Background: Marking mosquitoes is vital for mark-release-recapture and many laboratory studies, but their small size precludes the use of methods that are available for larger animals such as unique identifier tags and radio devices. Fluorescent dust is the most commonly used method to distinguish released individuals from the wild population. Numerous colors and combinations can be used, however, dust sometimes affects longevity and behavior so alternatives that do not have these effects would contribute substantially. Rhodamine B has previously been demonstrated to be useful for marking adult Aedes aegypti males when added to the sugar meal. Unlike dust, this also marked the seminal fluid making it possible to detect matings by marked males in the spermatheca of females. Here we evaluate marking in Anopheles gambiae s.s. with rhodamine B and uranine to estimate their potential contribution. Methods:Two fluorescent markers, rhodamine B and uranine, were dissolved in sugar water and fed to adult Anopheles gambiae. Concentrations that are useful for marking individuals and seminal fluid were determined. The effects on adult longevity, the durability of the marking and detection of the marker in mated females was determined. We also evaluated effects on mating competitiveness.Results:Rhodamine B marking in adults is detectable for at least three weeks, however uranine marking declines with time and at low doses can be confused with auto-fluorescence. Both can be used for marking seminal fluid which can be detected in females mated by marked males, but, again, at low concentrations uranine-marking is more easily confused with the natural fluorescence of seminal fluid. Neither dye affected mating competitiveness.Conclusions:Both markers tested could be useful for field and laboratory studies. Their use has substantial potential to contribute to a greater understanding of the bio-ecology of this important malaria vector. Rhodamine B has the advantage that it appears to be permanent and is less easily confused with auto-fluorescence. The primary limitation of both methods is that sugar feeding is necessary for marking and adults must be held for at least 2 nights to ensure all individuals are marked whereas dusts provide immediate and thorough marking.