Background
Malaria is one of the most important infectious diseases seriously endangering human health and safety. The World Health Organization (WHO) lists malaria with AIDS and tuberculosis as the top three public health problems globally. Malaria is also one of the most important mosquito-borne diseases in China. To respond proactively to the global action to eliminate malaria, China launched the Malaria Action Plan [
1] in 2010, which clearly states that “by 2015, the country except for some border areas of Yunnan and other areas have no local malaria cases”; “by 2020, the national malaria elimination.” Currently, most counties (districts) in China have completed an assessment of malaria elimination. However, conditions are still favourable for the spread of malaria in some regions; even if the source of infection can be discovered and cleared in a timely, there is still a risk of local transmission and epidemic rebound. With rapid globalization and implementation of the national “Belt and Road” initiative, the number of people visiting areas of high malaria transmission, such as Africa and Southeast Asia, for business, employment and tourism purposes has increased significantly. As a result, the proportion of overseas imported cases, which reached 99.9% (3317/3321) in 2016, shows an increasing trend [
2]. Such an increase poses a potential risk to relatively stable malaria-endemic areas. For example, a short-term and large-scale clustered imported outbreak occurred in Guangxi Province in 2013 [
3]. In addition, malaria-nonendemic areas lack diagnostic awareness of imported malaria cases, and severe illness and death can occur.
Anopheles sinensis, with a wide distribution and a large population, is an important vector for the spread of malaria in China. The main strategy for the elimination of malaria by the WHO is the timely and effective removal of infection sources and preventing spread among epidemic sites. Given the resistance of
An. sinensis populations to commonly used insecticides, alternative control methods are crucially needed. Researchers have combined
Bacillus thuringiensis var.
israelensis with oviposition attractants in “attract-and-kill” strategies [
4] to collect more gravid females [
5] and [
6] eggs than with control traps. As mosquitoes use their olfactory system to search for oviposition sites, research on these systems is of key importance.
The olfactory system of insects mainly includes olfactory receptors (ORs), odorant-binding proteins (OBPs) and olfactory receptor neurons (ORNs). Previous studies have demonstrated that ORs can convert odour-stimulating chemical signals into electrical signals and transmit nerve impulses to the dendrites of olfactory neurons [
7]. Accordingly, ORs are involved in mating, blood sucking, oviposition site searching and other important life activities of mosquitoes.
ORs in insect olfactory sensory neurons (OSNs) include a coreceptor designated Orco (OR7) and conventional ligand-binding odorant receptors (ORXs). Orco genes from different species are highly conserved [
8,
9]. Other highly divergent ORs are conventional odorant receptors, correlating with some olfactory-mediated behavioural functions [
10], and these ORs have been associated with certain biological information about odorants [
11]. Consistently, AgamOR2, AgamOR5, AgamOR8 and AgamOR65 [
12] are narrowly tuned to indole, 2,3-butanedione, 1-octen-3-ol, and 2-ethylphenol, respectively. In addition, some ORs respond strongly to specific odorants; for example, CquiOR10 [
13] has been shown to respond strongly to 3-methylindole [
14], an oviposition site volatile attractant, whereas AgamOR10 [
12,
15] is highly sensitive to 3-methylindole and indole. Indole [
12,
16] is a volatile attractant component of both human sweat and oviposition sites. In the previous research, AablOR10 was linked to host- and oviposition-seeking behaviours, prompting us to examine the odorant response profile of AsinOR10. This study identified AsinOrco and AsinOR10 of
An. sinensis and examined the odorant response profile of AsinOR10.
Discussion
This study is the first report of the identification and characterization of AsinOrco and AsinOR10. Although ORs typically display a high level of divergence [
24], AsinOrco and AsinOR10 share 97.49% and 90.37% amino acid sequence identity with the coreceptor and OR2-10 subfamilies, respectively. This study utilized the nomenclature for Orco [
27] and found that AsinOrco exhibits at least 50% sequence identity with orthologs from other insect species, and the predicted protein size is larger than that of conventional ORs. Membrane topology predictions show that AsinOrco and AsinOR10 belong to the TM7 protein family and have an intracellular amino-terminus. In addition, AsinOrco has the putative CaM-binding site (
328SAIKYWVER
336) identified in DmelOrco (
336SAIKYWVER
344) and in AalbOrco (
329SAIKYWVER
337) [
8]. This conservation of structure may also account for functional similarity. Overall, identification and functional validation of Orco orthologs are hot research topics. In the previous study, AalbOrco was demonstrated to transmit olfactory signaling, but did not recognize odorants [
8]. In fact, Orco forms a complex with conventional odorant receptors and is essential for odour signal transduction [
20]. Indeed, silencing or mutation of Orco [
8,
28,
29] damages normal odorant responses. Notably, the function of Orco is so similar that some researchers [
21] have even used
Drosophila melanogaster Orco as a heterodimerization partner to examine the function of AalbORs. In this study, AsinOrco was characterized as a new member of the Orco ortholog subfamily. Furthermore, HEK293 cells coexpressing AsinOrco and AsinOR10 responded to odorants.
Conventional OR sequence homology has often been associated with odorant specificity [
21,
30,
31], and the narrow OR response to odorants may be highly relevant to mosquito ecology [
12]. In previous studies, OR2-10 orthologs [
12,
13,
21,
30] were found to be more likely to be highly sensitive to indole and 3-methylindole, attractants of oviposition sites, therefore, this study focused on the ability of AsinOR10 to perceive oviposition attractants. AsinOrco- and AsinOR10-coexpressing cells were exposed to seven odorants, including indole, 1-methylindole, 3-methylindole, 1-octen-3-ol, 2-methylphenol, 2,3-butanedione, and 2-ethylphenol. Indole [
12,
16] is a volatile attractant of oviposition sites and human sweat. 3-Methylindole [
14,
32,
33], also known as skatole, is a ubiquitous oviposition site volatile attractant and an egg raft pheromone; 1-methylindole is another methylindole compound. 1-Octen-3-ol [
33], a volatile attractant from large herbivores and humans, is known to attract some anophelines [
33,
34], and 2-methylphenol [
30], identified as the best ligand among phenols, elicits a strong electrophysiological response from CquiOR2. 2,3-Butanedione [
35] is a metabolic byproduct of human skin microflora, which excites narrowly tuned AgamOR5 [
12], and 2-ethylphenol [
36] is found in the urine of animals and evokes a strong electrophysiological response from AgamOR65 [
12].
In contrast to DMSO, 3-methylindole elicits a fluorescence reaction (measured as relative fluorescence change, ΔF/F0). This finding is similar to previous results showing that CquiOR10 [
13,
30], AalbOR10 [
8] and AgamOR10 [
12] orthologs respond sensitively to 3-methylindole and thus further confirm the functional conservation of OR10 orthologs. Regardless, CquiOR10 [
13,
30], AalbOR10 [
8] and AgamOR10 [
12] responded to a set of aromatic compounds, including each of the methylindoles, 1-octen-3-ol and indole, using the
Xenopus Oocyte System or the
Drosophila melanogaster “empty neuron” system, whereas AsinOR10 showed no significant differences in responses to indole, 1-octen-3-ol and 1-methylindole compared to DMSO in HEK293 cells. These results might be due to differences in the intracellular epitope tags of these systems, which may influence the selectivity of the receptor, or this OR might not be responsive to the chemicals tested. Despite the use of a heterogeneous expression system, the results indicate that AsinOR10 is directly involved in oviposition site-seeking behaviour.
Authors’ contributions
HML, LHL and PC provided the experimental data and wrote the paper. XDH participated the revision of the paper. MQG reviewed and edited the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.