METHODS: We used macaque and mosquito species presence data, background data that captured sampling bias in the presence data, a boosted regression tree model and environmental datasets, including annual data for land classes, to predict the distributions of each vector and host species. We then compared the predicted distribution of each species with cover of each land class.
RESULTS: Fine-scale distribution maps were generated for three macaque host species (Macaca fascicularis, M. nemestrina and M. leonina) and two mosquito vector complexes (the Dirus Complex and the Leucosphyrus Complex). The Leucosphyrus Complex was predicted to occur in areas with disturbed, but not intact, forest cover (> 60% tree cover) whereas the Dirus Complex was predicted to occur in areas with 10-100% tree cover as well as vegetation mosaics and cropland. Of the macaque species, M. nemestrina was mainly predicted to occur in forested areas whereas M. fascicularis was predicted to occur in vegetation mosaics, cropland, wetland and urban areas in addition to forested areas.
CONCLUSIONS: The predicted M. fascicularis distribution encompassed a wide range of habitats where humans are found. This is of most significance in the northern part of its range where members of the Dirus Complex are the main P. knowlesi vectors because these mosquitoes were also predicted to occur in a wider range of habitats. Our results support the hypothesis that conversion of intact forest into disturbed forest (for example plantations or timber concessions), or the creation of vegetation mosaics, will increase the probability that members of the Leucosphyrus Complex occur at these locations, as well as bringing humans into these areas. An explicit analysis of disease risk itself using infection data is required to explore this further. The species distributions generated here can now be included in future analyses of P. knowlesi infection risk.
METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Anopheles spp. were sampled using human landing catch (HLC) method at Paradason village in Kudat district of Sabah. The collected Anopheles were identified morphologically and then subjected to total DNA extraction and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to detect Plasmodium parasites in the mosquitoes. Identification of Plasmodium spp. was confirmed by sequencing the SSU rRNA gene with species specific primers. MEGA4 software was then used to analyse the SSU rRNA sequences and bulid the phylogenetic tree for inferring the relationship between simian malaria parasites in Sabah. PCR results showed that only 1.61% (23/1,425) of the screened An. balabacensis were infected with one or two of the five simian Plasmodium spp. found in Sabah, viz. Plasmodium coatneyi, P. inui, P. fieldi, P. cynomolgi and P. knowlesi. Sequence analysis of SSU rRNA of Plasmodium isolates showed high percentage of identity within the same Plasmodium sp. group. The phylogenetic tree based on the consensus sequences of P. knowlesi showed 99.7%-100.0% nucleotide identity among the isolates from An. balabacensis, human patients and a long-tailed macaque from the same locality.
CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: This is the first study showing high molecular identity between the P. knowlesi isolates from An. balabacensis, human patients and a long-tailed macaque in Sabah. The other common simian Plasmodium spp. found in long-tailed macaques and also detected in An. balabacensis were P. coatneyi, P. inui, P. fieldi and P. cynomolgi. The high percentage identity of nucleotide sequences between the P. knowlesi isolates from the long-tailed macaque, An. balabacensis and human patients suggests a close genetic relationship between the parasites from these hosts.
METHODS: A total of 93 blood samples from Macaca fascicularis, Macaca leonina and Macaca arctoides were collected from four locations in Thailand: 32 were captive M. fascicularis from Chachoengsao Province (CHA), 4 were wild M. fascicularis from Ranong Province (RAN), 32 were wild M. arctoides from Prachuap Kiri Khan Province (PRA), and 25 were wild M. leonina from Nakornratchasima Province (NAK). DNA was extracted from these samples and analysed by nested PCR assays to detect Plasmodium, and subsequently to detect P. knowlesi, P. coatneyi, P. cynomolgi, P. inui and P. fieldi.
RESULTS: Twenty-seven of the 93 (29%) samples were Plasmodium-positive by nested PCR assays. Among wild macaques, all 4 M. fascicularis at RAN were infected with malaria parasites followed by 50% of 32 M. arctoides at PRA and 20% of 25 M. leonina at NAK. Only 2 (6.3%) of the 32 captive M. fascicularis at CHA were malaria-positive. All 5 species of Plasmodium were detected and 16 (59.3%) of the 27 macaques had single infections, 9 had double and 2 had triple infections. The composition of Plasmodium species in macaques at each sampling site was different. Macaca arctoides from PRA were infected with P. knowlesi, P. coatneyi, P. cynomolgi, P. inui and P. fieldi.
CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence and species of Plasmodium varied among the wild and captive macaques, and between macaques at 4 sampling sites in Thailand. Macaca arctoides is a new natural host for P. knowlesi, P. inui, P. coatneyi and P. fieldi.