SARS-CoV-2 in the Amazon region: A harbinger of doom for Amerindians.

As the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic continues to expand, healthcare resources globally have been spread thin. Now, the disease is rapidly spreading across South America, with deadly consequences in areas with already weakened public health systems. The Amazon region is particularly susceptible to the widespread devastation from Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) because of its immunologically fragile native Amerindian inhabitants and epidemiologic vulnerabilities. Herein, we discuss the current situation and potential impact of COVID-19 in the Amazon region and how further spread of the epidemic wave could prove devastating for many Amerindian people living in the Amazon rainforest.

Deep Sequencing Reveals Occult Mansonellosis Coinfections in Residents From the Brazilian Amazon Village of São Gabriel da Cachoeira.

Mansonella ozzardi and Mansonella perstans infections both cause mansonellosis but are usually treated differently. Using a real-time polymerase chain reaction assay and deep sequencing, we reveal the presence of mansonellosis coinfections that were undetectable by standard diagnostic methods. Our results confirm mansonellosis coinfections and have important implications for the disease's treatment and diagnosis.

Blackflies in the ointment: O. volvulus vector biting can be significantly reduced by the skin-application of mineral oil during human landing catches.

BACKGROUND: Standard human landing catches (sHLCs) have historically been a key component of Onchocerca volvulus transmission monitoring, but expose health-workers to potentially hazardous vector bites. Novel human-bait-free trapping methods have been developed, but do not always work where they are needed and may not generate O. volvulus surveillance data that is directly comparable with historic data. METHODOLOGY: Simuliid sHLCs and mineral-oil protected HLCs (mopHLCs) were performed in a rural village of Amazonas state, Brazil. A four-hour direct comparisons of sHLCs and mopHLCs was carried-out using six vector collectors, each of whom used one leg for a sHLC and one for a mopHLC. Two-person collection teams then exclusively performed either mopHLCs or sHLCs for a further set of 12 four-hour collections. Following the completion of all collections, simuliid-bite mark estimates were made from legs used exclusively in sHLCs and legs used exclusively in mopHLCs. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: All of the 1669 captured simuliids were identified as the O. volvulus vector Simulium oyapockense. Overall, mopHLC simuliids captured per hour (S/H) rates were lower than those obtained with sHLC trapping (15.5 S/H versus 20 S/H). Direct comparisons of simuliid capture rates found that vector-collectors captured simuliids significantly more efficiently ([Formula: see text]: 20.5 S/H) with mopHLC trapping than with sHLC trapping ([Formula: see text]: 16.4 S/H): P-value = 0.002. MopHLCs performed in isolation were, however, observed to capture vectors less efficiently ([Formula: see text]: 13.4 S/H) than sHLCs performed under similar conditions ([Formula: see text]: 19.98 S/H). All six vector collectors had significantly higher simuliid capture per counted bite mark (SC/CBM) rates using mopHLCs than they were observe to have using sHLCs ([Formula: see text]: 21 SC/CBM versus [Formula: see text]: 1 SC/CBM; p-value = 0.03125). CONCLUSIONS: Vector collectors captured significantly more simuliids per counted bite mark with mopHLCs than with sHLCs. Further investigations into the utility of mopHLCs for onchocerciasis xenomonitoring and beyond are merited.