Submit a preprint

Direct submissions to PCI Ecology from are possible using the B2J service


No Evidence for Long-range Male Sex Pheromones in Two Malaria Mosquitoesuse asterix (*) to get italics
Serge Bèwadéyir Poda, Bruno Buatois, Benoit Lapeyre, Laurent Dormont, Abdoulaye Diabaté, Olivier Gnankiné, Roch K. Dabiré, Olivier RouxPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"
<p style="text-align: justify;">Cues involved in mate seeking and recognition prevent hybridization and can be involved in speciation processes. In malaria mosquitoes, females of the two sibling species <em>Anopheles gambiae</em> s.s. and <em>An. coluzzii </em>mate in monospecific male swarms and hybrids are rare. Long-range sex pheromones driving this behavior have been debated in literature but to date, no study has proven their existence or their absence. Here, we attempted to bring to light their existence. To put all the odds in our favor, we used different chemical ecology methods such as behavioral and electrophysiological assays as well chemical analyses, and we worked with mosquitoes at their optimal physiological mating state i.e. with swarming males during their natural swarming windows. Despite all our efforts, our results support the absence of long-range sex pheromones involved in swarm detection and recognition by females. We briefly discuss the implications of this finding in ecology, evolution and for control strategies.</p> should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https:// should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https:// should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://
Anopheles, male swarm, mating behavior, mosquito control
NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).
Behaviour & Ethology, Chemical ecology
No need for them to be recommenders of PCIEcology. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct
e.g. John Doe []
2021-04-26 12:28:36
Niels Verhulst