Table 2 Comparison of morphological and molecular identifications in Anopheles mosquitoes from western Kenya.

Molecular identification	n	Morphological identification				% of misidentification
Molecular identification	n	An. gambiae s.l	An. funestus s.l	An. coustani	An. pharoensis	% of misidentification
An. gambiae	1288	1216	66	5	1	4.3^a
An. arabiensis	678	665	12	1	0
An. funestus	833	47	779	7	0	6.8^b
An. cf.rivulorum	17	1	14	2	0
An. leesoni	7	1	6	0	0
An. coustani	61	9	2	50	0	18.0
An. christyi	66	66	0	0	0	100
An. maculipalpis	9	6	1	2	0	100
An. pharoensis	5	5	0	0	0	100
An. pretoriensis	8	7	1	0	0	100
An. rufipes	45	27	1	17	0	100
An. sp.1	69	62	6	1	0	100
An. sp.6	25	9	16	0	0	100
An. sp.7	23	6	17	0	0	100
An. sp.9	6	4	2	0	0	100
An. sp.11	4	3	0	0	1	100
An. sp.14	2	0	2	0	0	100
An. sp.15	22	8	10	4	0	100
An. sp.17	56	48	3	5	0	100
An. sp.18	1	1	0	0	0	100
An. sp.19	1	1	0	0	0	100
Total	3226	2192	938	94	2
% of matches		85.8%	85.2%	53.2%	0.0%
% of misassignment		14.2%	14.8%	46.8%	100%

Number in bold indicates those individuals identified by both molecular assay and morphological identification. n, total number of individuals identified by molecular assay. ‘misidentification’ means those molecularly determined specimens being morphologically identified as other species; ‘misassignment’ indicates those morphologically assigned specimens being molecularly identified as other species.
^aAn. arabiensis and An. gambiae were combined as An. gambiae s.l. for morphology.
^bAn. funestus, An. cf.rivulorum, and An. leesoni were combined as funestus group for morphology.

Quick links

Search