ABSTRACT
The mosquito Aedes albopictus can transmit various arboviral diseases, posing a severe threat to human health. As an environmentally friendly method, sterile insect technology (SIT) is considered an alternative to traditional methods such as chemical pesticides to control Ae. albopictus. In SIT, the sterility of male mosquitoes can be achieved by γ-ray or X-ray radiation. Compared with γ-rays, X-rays are easier to obtain, cheaper, and less harmful. However, there is a lack of comparative assessment of these two types of radiation for SIT under the same controlled conditions. Here, we compared the effects of X-ray and γ-ray radiation on the sterility of Ae. albopictus males under laboratory-controlled conditions. Neither type of radiation affected the number of eggs but significantly reduced the survival time and hatch rate. The same dose of γ-rays caused a higher sterility effect on males than X-rays but had a more significant impact on survival. However, X-rays could achieve the same sterility effect as γ-rays by increasing the radiation dose. For example, X-rays of 60 Gy induced 99% sterility, similar to γ-rays of 40 Gy. In the test of male mating competitiveness, the induced sterility and the male mating competitiveness index were also identical at the same release ratio (sterile males/fertile males). At a release ratio of 7:1, nearly 80% of eggs failed to hatch. Sterile males produced by X-ray and γ-ray radiation had similar male competitiveness in competition with field males. In conclusion, a higher dose of X-rays is required to achieve the same sterility effect, compared to γ-rays. When γ-rays are not readily available, high-dose X-rays can be used instead. This study provides data supporting the selection of more suitable radiation for the field release of sterile male mosquitoes.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is one of the most common chronic diseases in adults, causing high morbidity and mortality worldwide. In recent years, the prevalence of T2DM has been increasing significantly, and genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have shown that KCNQ1 significantly increases the risk of T2DM. OBJECTIVE: To find large-scale evidence on whether the KCNQ1rs2237892Câ¶T gene polymorphism is associated with T2DM susceptibility. METHODS: A comprehensive review of the Chinese and English literature on the association of T2DM with KCNQ1rs2237892 is published by PubMed and Baidu Academic. The included literature was part or all of the studied loci which were evaluated for association with T2DM. Forest plots were made of the included literature to analyze the association of KCNQ1 with polymorphisms of the studied loci, and funnel plots and Egger's test were used to evaluate the publication bias of the selected included literature. RESULTS: Ten case-control studies including a total of 7027 cases and 8208 controls met our inclusion criteria. Allele (C allele frequency distribution) (OR: 1.19; 95% CI: 0.87,1.62; P < 0.00001), recessive (OR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.45,1.18; P < 0.00001) genetic model under the full population was observed between KCNQ1rs2237892Câ¶T gene polymorphism and T2DM without a significant relationship. In a stratified analysis by race, a meaningful association was found in non-Asian populations under the allelic genetic model, but no association was found in Asian populations. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis showed no significant association between the rs2237892 polymorphism of the KCNQ1 gene and the risk of T2DM.
