Skip to main content
PLOS ONE logoLink to PLOS ONE
. 2020 Mar 19;15(3):e0230643. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0230643

Prospective assessment of malaria infection in a semi-isolated Amazonian indigenous Yanomami community: Transmission heterogeneity and predominance of submicroscopic infection

Daniela Rocha Robortella 1,2, Anderson Augusto Calvet 3, Lara Cotta Amaral 2, Raianna Farhat Fantin 2, Luiz Felipe Ferreira Guimarães 2, Michelle Hallais França Dias 2, Cristiana Ferreira Alves de Brito 2, Tais Nobrega de Sousa 2, Mariza Maia Herzog 3, Joseli Oliveira-Ferreira 3,*, Luzia Helena Carvalho 1,2,*
Editor: Adriana Calderaro4
PMCID: PMC7081991  PMID: 32191777

Abstract

In the Amazon basin, indigenous forest-dwelling communities typically suffer from a high burden of infectious diseases, including malaria. Difficulties in accessing these isolated ethnic groups, such as the semi-nomadic Yanomami, make official malaria data largely underestimated. In the current study, we longitudinally surveyed microscopic and submicroscopic malaria infection in four Yanomami villages of the Marari community in the northern-most region of the Brazilian Amazon. Malaria parasite species-specific PCR-based detection of ribosomal and non-ribosomal targets showed that approximately 75% to 80% of all malaria infections were submicroscopic, with the ratio of submicroscopic to microscopic infection remaining stable over the 4-month follow-up period. Although the prevalence of malaria infection fluctuated over time, microscopically-detectable parasitemia was only found in children and adolescents, presumably reflecting their higher susceptibility to malaria infection. As well as temporal variation, the prevalence of malaria infection differed significantly between villages (from 1% to 19%), demonstrating a marked heterogeneity at micro-scales. Over the study period, Plasmodium vivax was the most commonly detected malaria parasite species, followed by P. malariae, and much less frequently P. falciparum. Consecutive blood samples from 859 out of the 981 studied Yanomami showed that malaria parasites were detected in only 8% of the previously malaria-positive individuals, with most of them young children (median age 3 yrs). Overall, our results show that molecular tools are more sensitive for the identification of malaria infection among the Yanomami, which is characterized by heterogeneous transmission, a predominance of low-density infections, circulation of multiple malaria parasite species, and a higher susceptibility in young children. Our findings are important for the design and implementation of the new strategic interventions that will be required for the elimination of malaria from isolated indigenous populations in Latin America.

Introduction

In the Americas, of the 17 malaria endemic countries, 11 are on target to achieve a ≥40% reduction in case incidence by 2020, while the remaining six are on target for a 20–40% reduction [1]. Despite this overall progress, since 2015, malaria incidence began to rise in the Americas, mainly due to increases in the Amazonian rain forest areas of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Brazil and Colombia [2]. In 2018, Venezuela alone accounted for 50% of all reported cases of malaria in the Americas, followed by Brazil (23%), Colombia (10%) and Nicaragua (6%) [3]. Malaria control in the Amazon region is difficult due to its low population density and scarcity of reliable transport routes, which make it challenging to deliver and sustain preventive healthcare measures [4]. In this context, local control measures need to characterize areas and populations according to their levels of disease transmission, while also considering socio-economic, political and environmental factors.

In the Amazon basin, malaria is endemic among many indigenous people, which is often considered one of the last barriers to malaria elimination due to their geographic isolation [5]. According to the Brazilian Surveillance Secretary of the Ministry of Health (SVS/MS), while malaria increased by 3% among some vulnerable populations living in the Brazilian Amazon, such as gold-miners, in indigenous areas the number of cases increased about 30% over the same period of time (2017–2018) [6]. In this region, indigenous communities, including the traditionally seminomadic and widely dispersed Yanomami ethnic group, suffer from a high burden of infectious diseases [7]. The Yanomami are considered the largest semi-isolated Amazonian indigenous people, which inhabit an area of roughly 74,000 square miles that straddles the Brazilian-Venezuelan border [8]. Partly due to the impact of the current political instability in Venezuela and its associated healthcare crisis, the Yanomami people–who have great vulnerability to malaria, measles, malnutrition and mercury pollution in rivers–are currently confronted with environmental destruction of their homeland and potential ethnocide [9].

In the current study, we prospectively evaluated the prevalence of malaria infection in four Yanomami villages of the Marari community in the northern-most region of the Brazilian Amazon, close to the border with Venezuela. To accurately estimate the burden of malaria infection among the Yanomami, the study design involved the screening of 981 individuals for both microscopic and submicroscopic malaria infection (using species-specific PCR-based assays) during three cross-sectional surveys taken at two-month intervals.

Individuals and methods

Study area

The study was performed in a remote forest-dwelling Yanomami community called Marari located in the northern-most region of the Brazilian Amazon in the state of Amazonas (Fig 1). Although only a few studies have so far reported in detail malaria transmission among the Marari community [10], we have previously identified high rates of infection (1.5–2%) in the main local malaria vector, the mosquito Anopheles darlingi [8]. Marari is one of the basic Health Units in the Brazilian Yanomami Indigenous Territory, which provide health care for four geographically close communities: Taibrapa-I, Gasolina, Alapusi and Ahima/Castanha, with the last one of these listed located close to the Health Unit (Fig 1). Due to the semi-nomadic habits of the Yanomami, the residents of Taibrapa-I also have an alternative residence named Taibrapa-II. The Marari community is located in an area of lowland Amazonian rain forest (139 meters above sea level), which is drained by primary to tertiary tributaries and surrounded nearby by high mountains at the border of Brazil and Venezuela (Fig 1). In Marari, the Yanomami in each village occupy a single large dwelling named a “shabono” or “shapono”, which is a circular, thatch-roofed communal shelter with no internal walls [5]. Due to the seasonal dependence on river transport and the high costs of air transportation, access to health services is extremely limited within such Yanomami regions [11, 12]. In our study area, the Yanomami still maintain traditional modes of subsistence, including hunter-gathering and rural agriculture. In 2014, the Annual Parasitological Index (API) for the Yanomami territory was approximately 100 cases per 1,000 inhabitants, with P. vivax usually predominating over P. falciparum infection [13].

Fig 1. Map of the Brazilian-Venezuelan border showing the study area.

Fig 1

The Marari community (yellow in the top inset map) is located in the Yanomami indigenous area (green in the inset maps) in the northern-most region of the state of Amazonas (red in the bottom inset map), roughly 454 miles from the state capital, Manaus, in Brazil. The studied villages are marked with yellow dots, while the main rivers are shown in blue. Studied villages shown in the main map are located in the municipality of Barcelos (light green) or Santa Isabel do Rio Negro (dark green). Map sources: the Brazilian Water National Agency, Multi-scale Ottocoded Hydrographic Base, and the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE). Amazonas municipal cartographic base (SRC selected- EPSG: 4674, SIRGAS 2000). Scale 1:128.000.

Study design, participants and sample collection

Ethical and methodological aspects of this study were approved by the Brazilian National Research Ethics Commission (CONEP, Protocol #16907), which regulates studies involving Brazilian indigenous people and was locally supervised by their representatives. The study design involved a longitudinal approach with three cross-sectional surveys at two-month intervals. The first survey (baseline) was carried out in September 2014, the second in November 2014 (2 months later), and the third in January 2015 (4 months after the first baseline survey). At that time of cross-sectional surveys, roughly 30 microscopically confirmed cases per 1,000 inhabitants were officially registered in the study area (Fig 2). Recruitment in the Marari community involved a bilingual interpreter that explained to the leaders and/or indigenous representatives, the purpose of the study, the procedures to be carried out, and requested written informed consent of each adult participant, or from the next of kin or guardians on the behalf of minors. Blood for malaria parasite detection was collected by finger prick during the surveys. A few drops of blood were placed directly from the finger prick onto either a glass slide for preparation of thick blood smears or Whatman FTA classic card (GE Healthcare Life Sciences) for dried blood spots (DBS). The blood spots were dried in open air for 15 min, and stored in zip-locked plastic bags containing desiccant, and then transported to the laboratory at Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ) for malaria diagnosis by PCR. At enrollment, age and gender information were recorded for each participant. In total, 981 Yanomami individuals were enrolled in the study, with 707 (72%) recruited in the baseline, 838 (85.4%) during the 2nd survey (November 2014) and 878 (89.5%) in the 3rd survey (January 2015). During the follow-up period, the minimum and maximum number of participants per village ranged from 197 to 235 (Taibrapa I/II), 174 to 231 (Gasolina), 122 to 154 (Alapusi) and 214 to 282 (Castanha/Ahima). A total of 859 (87.5%) individuals participated in at least two cross-sectional surveys, and 583 (59.4%) subjects were present in all three-cross sectional surveys.

Fig 2. Monthly-time series of microscopically-confirmed malaria cases in the Marari community of the Yanomami indigenous area (Amazonas, Brazil) during the study period, 2014–2015.

Fig 2

The study design included three cross-sectional surveys: the first survey (baseline) was carried out in September 2014, the second in November 2014 (2 months later) and the third in January 2015 (4 months after the first baseline survey). Data are presented as microscopically-confirmed cases per 1,000 inhabitants, and were provided by the National Malaria Surveillance System Registry (SIVEP-Malaria) from the Brazilian Ministry of Health. Malaria infection caused by P. vivax (light blue) and P. falciparum (dark blue) are plotted by month.

In the current study, malaria infection was defined as the occurrence of any confirmed malaria infection with or without symptoms according to the general guidelines proposed by the WHO Malaria Policy Advisory Committee [14]. Malaria infections were confirmed by either conventional light microscopy (microscopically-confirmed cases) or species-specific PCR-based assays (submicroscopic infections). As malaria symptoms were not evaluated in the study population, the terms “submicroscopic” and “asymptomatic” infection cannot be used interchangeably. Here, submicroscopic infections refer to low density malaria infections below the limit of detection of microscopy, as proposed by the WHO Evidence Review Group on Low-Density Malaria Infections [15]

Microscopic diagnosis

Thick blood smears were stained with 10% Giemsa solution in phosphate buffer solution at pH 7.2, and examined by light microscopy at the health facilities in Marari by trained microscopists, according to the malaria diagnosis guidelines of the Brazilian Ministry of Health [16]. All microscopically positive cases were treated immediately for malaria, according to the treatment guidelines of the Brazilian Ministry of Health [17].

Molecular diagnosis

DNA extraction

Genomic DNA was extracted from DBS on FTA paper using a commercial extraction kit (QIAamp DNA Blood Mini Kit, Qiagen), according to manufacturer’s instructions. DNA was eluted in 150 μl of AE Buffer and stored at −2000B0030C until it was used in the experiments. As an internal control for the DNA extractions, 10% of the extracted samples were submitted to a PCR assay for the amplification of a constitutive human gene (ABO blood group) using primers previously described [18], with modifications for a real-time PCR assay.

Detection of Plasmodium species by PCR-based protocols

In order to improve the sensitivity of molecular detection of malaria infection, each sample was submitted to at least two PCR-based assays targeting the amplification of different plasmodial genes, i.e., the widely used 18S small subunit ribosomal RNA (18S SSU rRNA) [19] and multi-copy non-ribosomal sequences for the detection of P. vivax (Pvr47) and P. falciparum (Pfr364) [20]. The non-ribosomal PCR assays may identify co-infections that could be missed by the ribosomal PCR assay [21]. Detailed PCR-based protocols are included as Supporting Information (S1 File). Briefly, the real-time PCR amplification of non-ribosomal targets was conducted using species-specific TaqMan probes and the protocol as we described recently [21]. The amplification of 18S SSU rRNA was carried-out using the protocol described by Rougemont and colleagues with modification [22], which includes a pair of genus-specific primers with three different internal species-specific TaqMan probes, one each for P. falciparum, P. vivax and P. malariae. In case of discordance between the different PCR protocols, samples were submitted to an additional third PCR protocol also based on amplification of 18S SSU rRNA, as described previously [23]. If no consensus was obtained between the PCR assays, samples were considered as only genus-positive (Plasmodium spp.). Concordance between at least two species-specific amplifications was considered the minimum criteria to define mixed-species Plasmodium infection.

Statistical analysis

Demographic, epidemiological and parasitological data were entered into a database created using the Epi Info software (Atlanta, GA, USA). For statistical analyses, the following variables were taken into consideration: gender, age, village of origin, malaria infection status at enrollment and during the follow-up. Proportions were compared using 2x2 contingency tables with either chi-squared tests, adjusted by Yates’ continuity correction or Fisher’s exact tests, as appropriate. Odds ratios (OR) were used to quantify the strength of the association between variables. The statistical significance threshold was P < 0.05, with 95% confidence intervals for all hypothesis tests. These analyses were performed using GraphPad InStat, version 3 (GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA, USA).

Results

Malaria infection at enrollment

In our first baseline survey conducted in September 2014, we assessed malarial infection in 707 Yanomami individuals from Marari, with a median age of 14 years (IQR 6–33 years; range 1–79 years) and a male:female ratio of 1:1 (Table 1). Although the number of inhabitants varied between villages (from 122 to 214), subjects were matched by age and gender. The frequency of malaria infection, as detected by optical microscopy, was 1.55% (11 out of 707), ranging from 0.46 to 2.3% between the villages (Table 1). Considering PCR-based protocols, the proportion of positives was higher at 5.95% (42 out of 707), with significant differences between villages that ranged from 1.4% (Castanha/Ahima) to 12.2% (Taibrapa-II) (Table 1). Specifically, the likelihood of having malaria was significantly higher in Taibrapa-II (OR = 9.8, 95% CI 3.05–31.11, P < 0.0001) and Gasolina (OR = 5.2, 95% CI 1.64–17.49; P = 0.0068) compared with Castanha/Ahima (Fig 3), while the odds of having malaria infection were not significantly different between Alapusi and Castanha/Ahima.

Table 1. Baseline demographic, epidemiological and parasitological data from the first survey of the Yanomami villages studied in the Marari community, Amazonas, Brazil, conducted in September 2014.

Characteristics at enrollment
Taibrapa-II* Gasolina Alapusi Castanha/ Ahima** Total
(n = 197) (n = 174) (n = 122) (n = 214) (n = 707)
Gender ratio male:female 1:1.05 1:0.74 1:0.79 1:1.39 1:1
Age (years)
Median (IQR) 15 (6–35) 12 (5–30) 13 (6.25–31) 15 (8–33.25) 14 (6–33)
Range 1–76 1–69 1–76 1–79 1–79
Malaria infection, positive (%)
Microscopy*** 4 (2.0) 4 (2.3) 2 (1.6) 1 (0.46) 11 (1.55)§
PCR-based protocols 24 (12.2) 11 (6.3) 4 (3.3) 3 (1.4) 42 (5.95)£
Total 24 (12.2)a 12 (6.9)ac 4 (3.3)bc 3 (1.4)b 43 (6.1)

IQR = interquartile range.

Microscopy (thick blood smears).

PCR = polymerase chain reaction.

*At the baseline, the inhabitants of Taibrapa were temporarily located in their alternative dwelling (Taibrapa-II).

**Marari Health Unit.

***No statistical differences (Chi-square test, P = 0.4614).

§-£Different symbols indicate statistically significant differences between microscopy and PCR (Fisher’s exact test, P < 0.05).

a-b-cDifferent letters indicate statistically significant differences between the positivity per village (Fisher’s exact test, P < 0.05).

Fig 3. Odds ratios (ORs) for the relative risk of malaria infection in each village compared with Castanha/Ahima (the village with the lowest number of malaria infections, used as the reference).

Fig 3

At first baseline survey, the inhabitants of Taibrapa were temporarily located in their alternative residence (Taibrapa-II). Crude OR were obtained by using 2x2 contingency tables with a 95% confidence interval (CI). P < 0.05 was considered significant. Malaria infection was confirmed by either conventional light microscopy (microscopically-confirmed cases) or species-specific PCR-based assays (submicroscopic or low-density infections).

Overall, at enrollment, a similar proportion of P. vivax and P. malariae infections (35–33%) were found in the study population, followed by P. falciparum (16%) and then mixed infections (9%). Of particular interest, P. malariae infections were largely restricted to Taibrapa-II village, i.e., 12 out of all 14 P. malariae cases detected, suggesting highly localized transmission. Four out of the total of 43 detected infections were mixed: P. malariae was present in all 4 of these mixed infections, while two had P. vivax and two P. falciparum. In three malaria-positive samples, inconsistencies between different species-specific molecular methods did not allow diagnosis of the particular Plasmodium species (i.e., the infections could only be diagnosed as genus-positive).

Only microscopy detected malaria infections in individuals below 16 years old (Fig 4), while PCR-based protocols were able to detect submicroscopic infections in all age groups–including individuals above of 50 years old–showing that submicroscopic malaria infection was prevalent among both children and adults (Fisher’s exact test P > 0.05 for all comparisons between the different age groups) (Fig 4). The frequency of malaria infection was similar between genders (S1 Fig).

Fig 4. Prevalence of microscopic and submicroscopic malaria infection stratified by age at baseline survey.

Fig 4

Submicroscopic infections were determined by PCR-based protocols (PCR) and microscopic infections by conventional Giemsa-stained thick blood smears (Microscopy).

Spatial and temporal dynamics of malaria prevalence

As the majority of malaria infections among the Yanomami were submicroscopic, we sought to evaluate the spatial and temporal dynamics of malaria infection two and four months after the first baseline survey. At these later times, the inhabitants of Taibrapa-II village were now located in their alternative residence Taibrapa-I (Fig 1).

We observed that the number of malaria infections fluctuated both spatially and temporally during the 4 month follow-up period, reflecting areas and periods with decreased (2nd survey) and then increased (3rd survey) malaria positivity (Fig 5). Although malaria positivity varied among villages (S1 Table), all cross-sectional surveys were characterized by a predominance of submicroscopic infection. More specifically, while the overall prevalence of microscopic infections ranged from 0.7 to 2%, PCR ranging from 3.6 to 8.7% (Fig 5), which corresponded to a four to five-fold increase in the prevalence of malaria.

Fig 5. Radar charts showing the malaria prevalence by village over the 4-month study period.

Fig 5

Three cross-sectional surveys were carried as described in the legend of Fig 2 (baseline, and then 2 and 4 months later). On each radar chart the data are shown as the percentage of individuals positive by either conventional microscopy or PCR-based methods. The 4 Yanomami villages are represented as Taibrapa (T-I or T-II, according to the alternative residences used by the Yanomami during the study), Gasolina (G), Alapusi (Al) and Castanha/Ahima (C/Ah). The overall percentage of positive individuals and their 95% confidence intervals for each survey are shown underneath their respective radar charts, with different letters (a-c) indicating statistically significant differences between the surveys (Fisher’s exact test, P < 0.05).

The prevalence of the three detected Plasmodium species also varied during the study period (Fig 6). While the prevalence of P. vivax and P. malariae were similar during the first baseline survey, P. vivax infections predominated at the time of the 2nd and 3rd cross-sectional surveys. A decrease in the prevalence of P. malariae infections at the time of the 2nd survey–that occurred concomitantly with the migration of the inhabitants of Taibrapa to their alternate residence–resulted in a temporary increased in the prevalence of P. falciparum over P. malariae. Regardless of the cross-sectional survey, the distributions of the species-specific prevalences of malaria infection by age confirmed that microscopic infections were only present in those under 16 years old, while submicroscopic infections were prevalent in all age groups (Fig 7).

Fig 6. Comparison of the frequency of species-specific positivity (P. vivax, P. malariae, P. falciparum and mixed infections) during the study period (baseline, 2 and 4 months later).

Fig 6

Fig 7. Species-specific malaria positivity stratified by age during the 4 month study period (baseline, 2 and 4 months later).

Fig 7

Infections caused by P. vivax, P. falciparum and P. malariae were determined by microscopy and/or PCR-based protocols, as described in the methods.

Consecutive blood samples taken from the 859 Yanomami studied allowed us to evaluate within-individual variation in malaria positivity by either microscopy or PCR-based methods. Of the 143 (16.6%) individuals who were positive to malaria at any time during the study (S2 Fig), only 12 (8.4%) had an additional positive sample, most of which were detected using PCR-based protocols (S2A Fig) and were from young children (median age 3 yrs). With regard to single-sample positivity, 35 (24.5%), 22 (15.4%) and 74 (51.7%) individuals were positive to malaria at either the 1st, 2nd or 3rd survey, respectively (S2B–S2D Fig). The median age of individuals with a single positive sample ranged from 9 to 11 years old, and there was no statistically significant difference between this age group and those of young children who had consecutive positive samples (3 vs 9–11 yrs).

Discussion

Although malaria is known to cause a significant burden of disease for many populations of indigenous people in Latin America, inequitable access to healthcare leads to sparse and fragmented data on malaria prevalence [7], which are likely to be underestimates due to the use of conventional diagnosis by light microscopy. In order to provide more realistic estimates of malaria prevalence among the Yanomami of the Amazon, we longitudinally surveyed both microscopic and submicroscopic malaria infections in four villages of the Marari community in northern Brazil. Using distinct multi-copy PCR-based protocols–ribosomal and more sensitive non-ribosomal targets [21]–it was possible to demonstrate that in this group of semi-isolated people approximately 75% to 80% of all malaria infections were submicroscopic, with the ratio of submicroscopic to microscopic infections remaining stable overtime. These results are important for disease control in the Brazilian Amazon region as individuals with submicroscopic malaria infection are likely to be asymptomatic and, therefore, remain an untreated and potentially infectious reservoir [24]. The limited previously available data similarly report relatively high prevalences of submicroscopic malaria infection among other communities of indigenous people in the region close to the border of the Brazilian Amazon, particularly in Venezuela, for which most data are available [11, 25]. Although there is currently no consensus regarding the contribution of submicroscopic malaria infection to the maintenance of malaria transmission, recent findings indicate that such infections may (i) appreciably contribute to the infectious reservoir, (ii) be long-lasting, and (iii) require more sensitive diagnostics in epidemiological settings with lower transmission [26]. Although our findings highlight that molecular diagnosis is more appropriate for the estimation of the prevalence of malaria in indigenous people in the Amazon, surveillance of malaria infection remains a considerable challenge in hard to reach isolated populations [2].

With regard to gender-related malaria positivity, we detected a similar prevalence of infection in males and females. This result was not completely unexpected as in Yanomami areas, in which transmission predominates outdoors around dwellings, socio-cultural habits and the nomadic behavior of large family groups may result in similar levels of exposure for both sexes [25, 27]. In forest-dwelling people, it has been shown that the cultural activities of the entire family in close proximity of their house during the peak hours of vector activity (e.g., going to the river early in the morning to bathe) may facilitate exposure to infection [28]. In addition, the inhabitants of each Yanomami village reside under a single, temporary, non-partitioned communitarian house (roughly 200 people per “shabono”), built in clearings in the forest, which may also promote equal exposure of males and females to infected mosquito bites. Submicroscopic malaria infection was also equally prevalent among adults and children, but microscopically-detectable parasitemia was identified exclusively in children and adolescents (<16 years old). Due to the limited sensitivity of light microscopy at low parasite densities [29], it is possible to postulate an increased susceptibility of children and adolescents to acute malaria with high levels of parasitemia. Although the current study was not designed to investigate malaria morbidity, our findings are consistent with previous reports showing that severe cases of malaria in Yanomami communities usually occur in children under 10 years old [30]. According, a recent overview of the current state of health of indigenous populations in Latin America confirmed the unfavorable scenario for children and adolescents of persistent high morbidity and mortality rates from infectious and parasitic diseases [31].

In the current study, the prevalence of malaria differed considerably among the Yanomami villages, suggesting high heterogeneity in malaria transmission at both spatial and temporal micro-scales. Local variability in natural breeding habitats of anophelines may account for differences in malaria prevalence between villages and surveys. In a previous study, we described a wide variety of larval microhabitats in the Yanomami area, including river-associated lakes, temporary pools of rainwater and flooded areas, as well as forest streams and rivers [10]. Consequently, different larval habitats with different intrinsic characteristics may result in a high heterogeneity in larval density and Anopheles species between indigenous villages and communities [8]. Additionally, as the inhabitants of a given Yanomami village periodically travel as a single large group, exposure to anopheline vectors may also fluctuate according to the time they spend in different residences. During the current study, for example, the inhabitants of Taibrapa traveled between their alternative residences (from Taibrapa-II to I). Coincidentally, we detected a significant decrease in malaria prevalence among the inhabitants of Taibrapa (between the 1st baseline to 2nd cross-sectional survey), possibly reflecting differences in vector exposure between the residences. In addition, infections may be short-lived, and/or the reintroduction of malaria parasites may take time for local transmission to re-establish itself. Overall, our findings are important for guiding and implementing surveillance and control measures, as they indicate that particular locations (i.e., villages) and specific periods of time may be most appropriate for intervention.

Screening for species-specific malaria infections in consecutive cross-sectional surveys confirmed that P. vivax is the predominant malaria parasite species circulating in our study area, with regard to both microscopic and submicroscopic infection. Plasmodium vivax may be able to persist in the human population since it can relapse after variable periods of dormancy [32] and because attempts at radical cure with primaquine often fail in isolated communities. Indeed, P. vivax is typically the most prevalent species in the Amazon area, and the results presented here are consistent with its historical predominance in indigenous areas, previously detected mainly by routine Giemsa-stained microscopy [7, 27, 30].

Although there was some variation in the prevalence of P. malariae between villages and surveys, the molecular protocols we used confirmed that P. malariae is present and a frequently detected malaria parasite species in our study area. Previous assessment of malaria infection in the Yanomami indigenous territory also reported the circulation of P. malariae in indigenous populations [11, 30, 33], which typically occurs in sympatry with other species of Plasmodium [34]. Despite this, only low levels of mixed infection were detected by us, although all but one of them (5 out of 6) included P. malariae. The occurrence of human P. malariae infection in the forested areas inhabited by the Yanomami is consistent with the possibility that monkeys may be acting as reservoirs, as P. malariae appears to be the same species as P. brasilianum, which is a malaria parasite commonly found in New World monkeys [35]). Given that P. malariae can be associated with renal complications, including acute kidney injury and glomerulopathies (reviewed in [36]), our findings indicate that the effects of this malaria parasite species on indigenous people in the Amazon should be systematically investigated.

Although P. falciparum was much less prevalent than P. malariae, the results described here demonstrated that this most pathogenic malaria parasite was present in all the villages studied and infected young children. This is important because in the Venezuelan Amazon rainforest, P. falciparum has been reported to have a higher prevalence among the Yanomami than other ethnic groups [33]. Unfortunately, as illegal mining and timber operations have moved into the forests of the Yanomami indigenous territory, the periodic introduction of P. falciparum has increased [37]. Future studies are needed to evaluate the impact of this increased exposure to P. falciparum on the health of Yanomami children.

Finally, our longitudinal study provided an exceptional opportunity to explore changes in malaria parasite positivity over a 4 month follow-up period. Our results showed that only 8% of all positive individuals remained positive in subsequent surveys, with most of such individuals being very young children (median age 3 years old). This observation–together with microscopic malaria infections being more frequent in young children–is consistent with naturally-acquired immunity increasing with age in the Yanomami population as a function of increased exposure to malaria parasites. Clinical immunity to malaria is known to be acquired after repeated parasite exposure, but its rate of acquisition varies widely depending on the intensity of transmission and geographical setting (reviewed in [38]). Our data fit this epidemiological pattern, with malaria parasite densities within infected individuals not remaining constant, but fluctuating and declining with increasing age, and then eventually falling below the detection threshold of molecular assays [39]. Although we were not able to genotype malaria infections over time, it has been suggested that acquired immunity controls transmission mainly by limiting blood-stage parasite densities rather than changing rates of acquisition or clearance of infections [40]. Future studies of the Yanomami could evaluate individual infections based on the patterns of persistence of individual genotypes (i.e., monitor fluctuations in clone-specific malaria parasite density).

The current study had some limitations that should be taken into consideration when interpreting its results. Regarding the best time for consecutive sampling, a major challenge was the remote location of the Yanomami villages within the Amazon forest, whose accessibility is seasonal and dependent on small planes and local boats. Seasons in the Amazon rainforest are not well-defined, and it is divided into the dry season and the wet season, each lasting about six months. Despite this, our cross-sectional surveys covered months of both the dry season (September and November) and the rainy season (January). Consequently, we are confident that the results presented here are representative of temporal variation in malaria prevalence associated with dry/wet seasons. Overall, our results confirm that molecular methods are a much more sensitive diagnosis tool than traditional light microscopy for the identification of malaria infection among the Yanomami, which are characterized by low-density parasitemias and the circulation of multiple malaria parasite species. Unfortunately, a suitable protocol for nucleic acid amplification (NAATs) in the field is not available yet [41]. Thus, innovative solutions and cost-effective strategies that can accurately identify the real burden of malaria infection in remote and isolated areas are urgently required as part of the global initiative for malaria elimination [42].

Supporting information

S1 File. Conditions for the different PCR-based protocols used to amplify genes from P. vivax, P. falciparum and P. malariae.

(DOCX)

S1 Fig. Prevalence of malaria according to age group (years) and gender (male and female).

Malaria positivity was defined by PCR-based protocols (PCR) or by conventional light microscopy (Microscopy). The number (n) of individuals in each age group is represented in the respective bars.

(TIFF)

S2 Fig. Species-specific malaria positivity of each positive individual who participated during the cross-sectional surveys.

Each row represents a single individual coded (#) and grouped according to their profile of positive samples in each of the three cross-sectional surveys (columns I, II and III, respectively, of the colored matrix). (A) shows individuals who were positive in at least two of the three cross-sectional surveys (n = 12). (B), (C) and (D) show individuals who were positive in only one of the three cross-sectional surveys: either (B) the 1st baseline survey (I; n = 35), (C) the 2nd survey (II, n = 22) or (D) the 3rd survey (III; n = 74). Species-specific PCR positivity is represented using different colors, as indicated in the legend: P. vivax (Pv) in light blue; P. falciparum (Pf) in dark blue; P. malariae (Pm) in orange; and mixed infections by the other different colors. The dark dot (•) inside each square indicates positivity by microscopy as well as PCR, while the asterisks (*) indicate positivity only by microscopy. Individual age, gender and place of dwelling were included in the left part of figure. Each village was coded as according to the legend of Fig 5.

(TIF)

S1 Table

(TIF)

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the Yanomami people for participating in this study and for their help in many ways during the fieldwork, the Secretaria Especial de Saúde Indígena (SESAI) and DSEI-Y and their employees for logistic support and assistance with the fieldwork, the Program for Technological Development in Tools for Health-PDTIS-FIOCRUZ for use of the Real-Time PCR (RPT09D) facility, and Dr. Luke A. Baton for revising the manuscript.

Data Availability

All relevant data are available within the article and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by the CNPq-Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico, Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) – Finance code 001, PAEF/FIOCRUZ (IOC-FIO-18-2-47 by JOF), Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro - FAPERJ (E-26/110.803/2013 by JOF), Yanomami Special Indigenous Sanitary District (DSEI-Y) for Air transport (by JOF). CFAB, TNS, JOF and LHC are CNPq Research Productivity fellows. Scholarships were sponsored by CAPES (LFFG, LCA and MHFD) and CNPq (DRR and RFF). We also thank the financial support from the Program for Institutional Internationalization of the Higher Education Institutions and Research Institutions of Brazil-CAPES-Print from FIOCRUZ. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.WHO (2018) World Malaria Report 2018. Geneva: World Health Organization; https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/275867/9789241565653-eng.pdf?ua=1. Acessed 9 Apr 2019. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Recht J, Siqueira AM, Monteiro WM, Herrera SM, Herrera S, Lacerda MVG (2017) Malaria in Brazil, Colombia, Peru and Venezuela: current challenges in malaria control and elimination. Malar J 16:273 10.1186/s12936-017-1925-6 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.WHO (2019) World Malaria Report 2019. Geneva: World Health Organization; https://www.who.int/publications-detail/world-malaria-report-2019. Acessed 20 Dec 2019. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Siqueira AM, Mesones-Lapouble O, Marchesini P, Sampaio VS, Brasil P, Tauil PL, et al. (2016) Plasmodium vivax Landscape in Brazil: Scenario and Challenges. Am J Trop Med Hyg 95: 87–96. 10.4269/ajtmh.16-0204 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Leandro-Reguillo P, Thomson-Luque R, Monteiro WM, de Lacerda MV (2015) Urban and architectural risk factors for malaria in indigenous Amazonian settlements in Brazil: a typological analysis. Malar J 14:284 10.1186/s12936-015-0806-0 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Ministry of Health of Brazil (2018) Malaria epidemiologic status in Brazil. Brazil: Ministry of Health of Brazil; https://portalarquivos2.saude.gov.br/images/pdf/2018/agosto/30/3.c-malaria_CIT_30_ago_2018_cassiopeterka.pdf. Acessed 9 Apr 2019. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Grenfell P, Fanello CI, Magris M, Goncalves J, Metzger WG, Vivas-Martinez S, et al. (2008) Anaemia and malaria in Yanomami communities with differing access to healthcare. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 102(7):645–52. 10.1016/j.trstmh.2008.02.021 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Sanchez-Ribas J, Oliveira-Ferreira J, Gimnig JE, Pereira-Ribeiro C, Santos-Neves MSA, Silva-do-Nascimento TF (2017) Environmental variables associated with anopheline larvae distribution and abundance in Yanomami villages within unaltered areas of the Brazilian Amazon. Parasit Vectors 10(1):571 10.1186/s13071-017-2517-6 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Mondolfi AEP, Grillet ME, Tami A, Oliveira-Miranda MA, Noguera LD, Hotez P, et al. (2019) Venezuela’s upheaval threatens Yanomami. Science 365(6455):766–7. 10.1126/science.aay6003 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Sanchez-Ribas J, Oliveira-Ferreira J, Rosa-Freitas MG, Trilla L, Silva-do-Nascimento TF (2015) New classification of natural breeding habitats for Neotropical anophelines in the Yanomami Indian Reserve, Amazon Region, Brazil and a new larval sampling methodology. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 110(6):760–70. 10.1590/0074-02760150168 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Lalremruata A, Magris M, Vivas-Martinez S, Koehler M, Esen M, Kempaiah P, et al. (2015) Natural infection of Plasmodium brasilianum in humans: Man and monkey share quartan malaria parasites in the Venezuelan Amazon. EBioMedicine 2(9):1186–92. 10.1016/j.ebiom.2015.07.033 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Vega CM, Orellana JDY, Oliveira MW, Hacon SS, Basta PC (2018) Human Mercury Exposure in Yanomami Indigenous Villages from the Brazilian Amazon. Int J Environ Res Public Health 8;15(6). 10.3390/ijerph15061051 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Sánchez-Ribas J (2015) Aspectos ecológicos da transmissão da malária em área indígena Yanomami. Ph.D. Thesis. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil: Fundação Oswaldo Cruz.
  • 14.WHO (2016) WHO Malaria terminology. Geneva: World Health Organization; https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/208815/WHO_HTM_GMP_2016.6_eng.pdf;jsessionid=0E04CF71BBECEAF2D970CA975EDE65F0?sequence=1. Acessed 20 Dec 2019. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.WHO (2017) Meeting report of the WHO Evidence Review Group on Low-Density Malaria Infections. Geneva: World Health Organization; https://www.who.int/malaria/mpac/mpac-oct2017-erg-malaria-low-density-infections-session2.pdf?ua=1. Acessed 20 Dec 2019. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Ministério da Saúde (2009) Manual de Diagnóstico Laboratorial da Malária. Brasília: Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde; http://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/publicacoes/malaria_diag_manual_final.pdf. Acessed 9 Apr 2019. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Ministério da Saúde (2010) Guia prático de tratamento da malária no Brasil. Brasília: Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde; http://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/publicacoes/guia_pratico_malaria.pdf. Acessed 9 Apr 2019. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Olsson M, Hansson C, Avent N, Akesson I, Green C, Daniels G (1998) A clinically applicable method for determining the three major alleles at the Duffy (FY) blood group locus using polymerase chain reaction with allele-specific primers. Transfusion 38(2):168–73. 10.1046/j.1537-2995.1998.38298193099.x . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Snounou G, Viriyakosol S, Jarra W, Thaithong S, Brown K (1993) Identification of the four human malaria parasite species in field samples by the polymerase chain reaction and detection of a high prevalence of mixed infections. Mol Biochem Parasitol 58(2):283–92. 10.1016/0166-6851(93)90050-8 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Demas A, Oberstaller J, DeBarry J, Lucchi NW, Srinivasamoorthy G, Sumari D, et al. (2011) Applied genomics: data mining reveals species-specific malaria diagnostic targets more sensitive than 18S rRNA. J Clin Microbiol 49(7):2411–8. 10.1128/JCM.02603-10 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Amaral LC, Robortella DR, Guimaraes LFF, Limongi JE, Fontes CJF, Pereira DB, et al. (2019) Ribosomal and non-ribosomal PCR targets for the detection of low-density and mixed malaria infections. Malar J 18(1):154 10.1186/s12936-019-2781-3 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Rougemont M, Van Saanen M, Sahli R, Hinrikson HP, Bille J, Jaton K (2004) Detection of four Plasmodium species in blood from humans by 18S rRNA gene subunit-based and species-specific real-time PCR assays. J Clin Microbiol 42(12):5636–43. 10.1128/JCM.42.12.5636-5643.2004 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Costa DC, Madureira AP, Amaral LC, Sanchez BA, Gomes LT, Fontes CJ, et al. (2014) Submicroscopic malaria parasite carriage: how reproducible are polymerase chain reaction-based methods? Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 109(1):21–8. 10.1590/0074-0276140102 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Almeida ACG, Kuehn A, Castro AJM, Vitor-Silva S, Figueiredo EFG, Brasil LW, et al. (2018) High proportions of asymptomatic and submicroscopic Plasmodium vivax infections in a peri-urban area of low transmission in the Brazilian Amazon. Parasit Vectors 11(1):194 10.1186/s13071-018-2787-7 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Laserson KF, Petralanda I, Hamlin DM, Almera R, Fuentes M, Carrasquel A, et al. (1994) Use of the polymerase chain reaction to directly detect malaria parasites in blood samples from the Venezuelan Amazon. Am J Trop Med Hyg 50(2):169–80. 10.4269/ajtmh.1994.50.169 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Slater HC, Ross A, Felger I, Hofmann NE, Robinson L, Cook J, et al. (2019) The temporal dynamics and infectiousness of subpatent Plasmodium falciparum infections in relation to parasite density. Nat Commun 10(1):1433 10.1038/s41467-019-09441-1 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Laserson KF, Wypij D, Petralanda I, Spielman A, Maguire JH (1999) Differential perpetuation of malaria species among Amazonian Yanomami Amerindians. Am J Trop Med Hyg 60(5):767–73. 10.4269/ajtmh.1999.60.767 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Sá DR, Souza-Santos R, Escobar AL, Coimbra CE Jr (2005) Malaria epidemiology in the Pakaanova (Wari’) Indians, Brazilian Amazon. Bull Soc Pathol Exot 98(1):28–32. . [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Payne D (1988) Use and limitations of light microscopy for diagnosing malaria at the primary health care level. Bull World Health Organ 66(5):621–6. . [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Marcano TJ, Morgado A, Tosta CE, Coura JR (2004) Cross-sectional study defines difference in malaria morbidity in two Yanomami communities on Amazonian boundary between Brazil and Venezuela. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 99(4):369–76. 10.1590/s0074-02762004000400005 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Tavares FG, Ferreira AA (2019) The health of indigenous children and adolescents in Latin America. Cad Saude Publica 35 Suppl 3 (Suppl 3). 10.1590/0102-311X00130819 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Krotoski WA, Collins WE, Bray RS, Garnham PC, Cogswell FB, Gwadz RW, et al. (1982) Demonstration of hypnozoites in sporozoite-transmitted Plasmodium vivax infection. Am J Trop Med Hyg 31(6):1291–3. 10.4269/ajtmh.1982.31.1291 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Metzger WG, Vivas-Martinez S, Rodriguez I, Goncalves J, Bongard E, Fanello CI, et al. (2007) Malaria diagnosis under field conditions in the Venezuelan Amazon. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 102(1):20–4. 10.1016/j.trstmh.2007.08.007 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Mueller I, Zimmerman PA, Reeder JC (2007) Plasmodium malariae and Plasmodium ovale—the "bashful" malaria parasites. Trends Parasitol 23(6):278–83. 10.1016/j.pt.2007.04.009 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Collins WE, Jeffery GM (2007) Plasmodium malariae: parasite and disease. Clin Microbiol Rev 20(4):579–92. 10.1128/CMR.00027-07 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Silva GBDJ, Pinto JR, Barros EJG, Farias GMN, Daher EF (2017) Kidney involvement in malaria: an update. Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo 59:e53 10.1590/S1678-9946201759053 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Shanks GD (2016) Historical review: Does falciparum malaria destroy isolated tribal populations? Travel Med Infect Dis 14(6):646–51. 10.1016/j.tmaid.2016.08.003 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Bousema T, Okell L, Felger I, Drakeley C (2014) Asymptomatic malaria infections: detectability, transmissibility and public health relevance. Nat Rev Microbiol 12(12):833–40. 10.1038/nrmicro3364 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Nguyen TN, von Seidlein L, Nguyen TV, Truong PN, Hung SD, Pham HT, et al. (2018) The persistence and oscillations of submicroscopic Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax infections over time in Vietnam: an open cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis 18(5):565–72. 10.1016/S1473-3099(18)30046-X . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Felger I, Maire M, Bretscher MT, Falk N, Tiaden A, Sama W, et al. (2012) The dynamics of natural Plasmodium falciparum infections. PLoS One 7(9):e45542 10.1371/journal.pone.0045542 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.WHO (2018) Nucleic acid amplification-based diagnostics. Geneva: World Health Organization; https://www.who.int/malaria/areas/diagnosis/nucleic-acid-amplification-tests/en/. Accessed 9 Apr 2019. [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Tedla M (2019) A focus on improving molecular diagnostic approaches to malaria control and elimination in low transmission settings: Review. Parasite Epidemiol Control 6:e00107 10.1016/j.parepi.2019.e00107 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Adriana Calderaro

9 Dec 2019

PONE-D-19-31210

Prospective assessment of malaria infection in a semi-isolated Yanomami Amazon indigenous community: heterogeneity of transmission and predominance of submicroscopic infection

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Carvalho,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

The Authors should address to the Reviewer's suggestions. The manuscript should be strongly shortened, avoiding the frequent repetitions, in order to improve the readability. furthermore, the English language should be revised by a native English.

We would appreciate receiving your revised manuscript by Jan 23 2020 11:59PM. When you are ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter.

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). This letter should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Manuscript'.

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Adriana Calderaro

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements:

  1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at http://www.plosone.org/attachments/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and http://www.plosone.org/attachments/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2.  We note that [Figure 1] in your submission contain [map/satellite] images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

  1. You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure1 to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license. 

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

  1. If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful:

USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/

The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/

Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html

NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/

Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/

USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/#

Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/

2. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Malaria infections in remote indigenous population of South American countries such as Brazil are of interest both because of the light they shed on the importance of malaria in such communities and because these remote communities may require special measures to facilitate malaria elimination on this region. This investigation reports results of 3 surveys 2 months apart in Yanomami populations from 4 villages in North West Brazil near the Venezuela border. With over 800 samples collected at each visit, microscopic malaria was restricted to children with adult participants with malaria infection identified only by PCR based techniques. Among infections found, P vivax was most common, with P malariae relatively frequently detected, and P falciparum was rare. There is interesting heterogeneity in parasite positivity between sites, the cause of which this study is not designed to identify.

Major comments

1. This is a very long paper (the pdf generated, including supporting information, had 47 pages). There are also a lot of minor errors in English grammar and usage. This makes it a tiring read. Some general condensing of the text in particular would be helpful, as there is presently quite extensive repetition and (in the discussion) some off-topic speculations. The many different ways the data are presented in the supplementary material, on top of the seven figures in the text, add only marginal value. An expert in English language should be engaged to correct the many minor errors that abound through the manuscript. These are too numerous to record here.

2. The authors misuse the term “malaria cases” which refer to episodes of symptomatic malaria (see Abstract but also text). “Parasitemias” or similar is more appropriate.

3. The lack of infections being repeatedly detected, with no intervention between surveys, is of interest. To my mind the leading explanation is clearance of infections through immune mechanisms (assuming participants did not receive drugs). To support the idea that it is due to infections falling below the threshold of detection would require confirmation e.g. by genotyping infections detected at first and third, but not second visits. These “ultralow density infections” to my mind are controversial- many countries have eliminated malaria in the last decade without being able to find such infections, such that their significance is highly questionable.

4. Methods: while the authors make a significant point regarding the importance of using two different PCR methods to detect infection they do not seem to present any data on the performance of the two. This oversight should be corrected e.g. in a summary table of case detection by different techniques for each species. It does not need to be divided by sample collection or site of origin.

5. Figure 2: the “case reports” presented are not well integrated into the paper and seem of limited relevance to these surveys.

6. Statistics: The number of cases is very small, and no confidence levels are presented around any of the estimates. This makes it difficult to evaluate possible changes over time.

7. Line 411-64: this is much too long a discussion of differences in parasite prevalence between species.

Minor comments

1. The singular of species is species. Specie means money, in coin form. Multiple instances of this.

2. Line 58-60, introduction: surely this figure is incorrect as it omits Venezuela.

3. Line 86-9: example of text that is repeated and or not relevant (e.g.“rich cultural display”). Similarly what is most relevant in lines 100-128?

4. On the other hand, we are told very little about patterns of malaria transmission in these communities. In particular from figure 2 it appears the surveys may have been done at times of lower transmission but this is not described here, or discussed later on. This would have implications for the generalisability of these snapshots.

5. Line 109 masl?

6. Line 232: frequency of microscopic infection, we cannot say it was “acute”

7. Line 318-9: please rewrite this sentence, your point is not clear.

8. Line 331-40: This section on proportions of people infected at more than one time point is important, but it is not clearly presented. In the discussion the authors should discuss the importance of genotyping to determine whether re-infection or persistence are the reason.

9. Line 361-2: “case detection” is not the right terminology. “Detection of infections” would be better.

10. Line 365 onwards: the discussion of gender could be improved. Specifically do men and women undertake similar or different activities within the settlement? AS the authors will know malaria in S E Asia is basically becoming a disease of adult males related often to specific occupations.

11. Line 386: this statement about “influence” does not make sense.

12. 12 Line 4000-1: This decline with translocation suggests infections may be short lived.

Reviewer #2: It is possible to guess what the authors are saying but many sentences are grammatically incorrect. The text would benefit from careful editing by someone fluent in English.

P2 L50: “… the results confirm molecular tools as more appropriate to identify under-registered malaria infection …”: What is under-registered malaria? Asymptomatic Plasmodium infections?

P4 L60: “… malaria incidence began to rise in the Americas, …” when?

P5 Last paragraph of introduction: better to state the research question the authors set out to address than provide a summary of the findings.

Were infected participants diagnosed by PCR offered treatment?

P11 L237 “… the likelihood of having malaria …” does this refer to the prevalence asymptomatic Plasmodium infections? If so, there is a major error running throughout the paper: malaria is defined as evidence of infection with clinical signs. In the absence of clinical signs, the study participants do not have malaria but an asymptomatic Plasmodium infections. Please decide whether you describe clinical malaria or asymptomatic Plasmodium infections? The difference is critical for the comprehension of the study. (If I misunderstood the paper and the authors describe also clinical episodes, they should describe the clinical signs detected.)

P13 “ … PCR-based protocols were able to detect submicroscopic infection in all age groups -- including individuals above of 50 years old -- showing that submicroscopic malaria infections were equally prevalent among adults and children.” If this is true why the drop off in at age 55-60 in Fig 4?

Fig 1: map – has three maps inserted on the right. There are no litles what the three maps illustrate/show. Please add legends to each of the insert-maps?

Fig 2: please indicate where the data on malaria cases shown in the chart comes from?

Fig 3: why are only 3 of 5 study villages included?

Fig 4: the x-axis indicates age groups yet the chart/graph is a line/area graph. This does not make a lot of sense if ages are grouped a bar chart is appropriate. If an area graph is used the ages should be continuous variables not age groups.

Fig 5: Great idea to present the data this way! Please explain why is T(II) not included?

Fig 6: lines and areas are confusing. Probably better as bar chart?

Fig 7: the x-axis indicates age groups yet the chart/graph is a line chart. This does not make a lot of sense if ages are grouped a bar chart is appropriate. If an area graph is used the ages should be continuous variables not age groups.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files to be viewed.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2020 Mar 19;15(3):e0230643. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0230643.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


12 Feb 2020

RESPONSES TO REVIEWERS

REVIEWER #1 – MAJOR COMMENTS:

(1) This is a very long paper (…). There are also a lot of minor errors in English grammar and usage. (…) Some general condensing of the text in particular would be helpful (…). The many different ways the data are presented in the supplementary material (…). An expert in English language should be engaged to correct the many minor errors that abound through the manuscript.

AUTHORS: First of all, we thank the reviewer for the careful examination of our manuscript, and consider the results presented here relevant for this field of investigation. As requested, the MS´s text was shortened (mainly methods and discussion) and figures were properly adjusted, with a significant reduction in redundant supplementary figures/Tables. More specifically, we have eliminated Fig. S2; Fig. S3 and Table S1). The English language was revised by a native English speaker (Dr. Luke Baton, https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Luke_Baton/research). We hope that the MS is now suitable for publication.

(2): The authors misuse the term “malaria cases” which refer to episodes of symptomatic malaria. “Parasitemias” or similar is more appropriate.

AUTHORS: As requested by the reviewer, in the revised version of the MS we replace “malaria cases” in the text to “malaria infection” or “detection of malaria parasites”, as appropriate.

However, in some part of text was essential to include the number of malaria cases per 1,000 inhabitants”. To avoid confusion, we included in the methods of the revised version of the MS (please see pages 8/9, lines 180-190) the general consensus definition of “malaria cases” according to the WHO Malaria Policy Advisory Committee as follow “the occurrence of any confirmed malaria infection with or without symptoms.” In the current study, malaria infections were confirmed by either conventional light microscopy (microscopically-confirmed cases) or species-specific PCR-based assays (low-parasite infections or submicroscopic infections).The follow reference was included in the revised version of the MS: WHO Malaria Terminology (https://www.who.int/malaria/publications/atoz/malaria-terminology/en/).

(3): The lack of infections being repeatedly detected, with no intervention between surveys, is of interest. To my mind the leading explanation is clearance of infections through immune mechanisms (assuming participants did not receive drugs). (…)

AUTHORS: We totally agree with the reviewer that immune response probably contribute for low parasite densities that often fall below the detection threshold of the molecular assays. In fact, immunity is acquired after repeated exposure to malaria, which varies widely depending on the intensity of transmission and geographical settings (revised by Bousema et al, Nat Rev Microbiol,2014; PMID: 25329408). We clarify this topic in the revised MS (Discussion, pages 21/22 ; lines: 495-498, revised version of the MS).

(…) To support the idea that it is due to infections falling below the threshold of detection would require confirmation e.g. by genotyping infections detected at first and third, but not second visits.

AUTHORS: Unfortunately, the current study was not design to genotype malaria parasites. Furthermore, our research protocol approved by the Ethics Commission for Research on Brazilian Indigenous Populations (CONEP) did not allow us to go beyond the identification of malaria species. Although we were not able to genotype malaria infections over time, it has been suggested that acquired immunity controls transmission mainly by limiting blood-stage parasite densities rather than changing rates of acquisition or clearance of infections (Felger et al., 2012; PMID: 23029082). Future studies in Yanomami area should evaluate the individual infections based on the patterns of persistence of individual genotypes (clone-specific density fluctuations). As requested, this limitation of our study was included in the discussion of revised text (page 22; lines: 501-507).

(…) These “ultralow density infections” to my mind are controversial- many countries have eliminated malaria in the last decade without being able to find such infections, such that their significance is highly questionable.

AUTHORS: Regarding the ultralow density infections, a better understanding of the dynamic of submicroscopic infections in semi-immune populations is necessary to clarify whether there is a need to identify and treat these low-density infections. There are several examples in which microscopy-based detection alone, as part of a robust control programme, resulted in major reductions in the transmission of malaria, but it is unclear whether such reductions could have been achieved sooner if low-density parasitaemias were detected by molecular methods.

In a recent study published in Nature Communication (Slater et al, Nat Commun.;10(1):1433, 2019; PMID: 30926893), the authors analyzed a series of datasets (15 articles consisting of data from 22 locations in a wide range of transmission intensities), harnessing the increasing quantities of molecular data generated in recent years, to investigate the density, temporal dynamics and infectiousness of low-density malaria infections. The authors demonstrate that although these infections may be less infectious compared with patent infections, submicroscopic infections contribute to the infectious reservoir, may be long lasting and require more sensitive diagnostics to detect them in lower transmission settings.

Aiming to attend this concern raised by the reviewer, we have addressed this topic in the discussion section (page 18, Discussion, lines: 396-400).

4. Methods: while the authors make a significant point regarding the importance of using two different PCR methods to detect infection they do not seem to present any data on the performance of the two. This oversight should be corrected e.g. in a summary table of case detection by different techniques for each species. It does not need to be divided by sample collection or site of origin.

AUTHORS: Recently, we described a species-specific non-ribosomal PCR assay with potential to identify low-density P. vivax and P. falciparum infections (Amaral et al., Malar J. 18(1):154, 2019; PMID: 31039781). In that paper, we have compared the performance of non-ribosomal vs. ribosomal PCR assays in clinical and subclinical malaria infections, and demonstrate that the non-ribosomal assay was the most sensitive protocol to detect low-levels of P. vivax/P. falciparum in co-infections. Consequently, the current study was not design to compare PCR assays. Here, we included the non-ribosomal PCR assay to increase the chances to detect possible low-density and co-infections that could be missed by ribosomal PCR assays.

As requested by the reviewer, we clarified this topic in the Methods section (please see methods, page 10; lines: 216-217 ).

5. Figure 2: the “case reports” presented are not well integrated into the paper and seem of limited relevance to these surveys.

AUTHORS: We have decided to keep Figure 2 in the MS because it provides relevant information that are now incorporated in the revised version of MS. For that, Fig. 2 was modified and malaria cases were expressed per 1,000 inhabitants. More specifically, data from figure 2 were included in the methods (page 7; lines: 145-147) as well as in the discussion as study/sampling limitations (page 22; lines: 508-518). Thus, we are confident that Fig 2 are now integrated in the MS.

6. Statistics: The number of cases is very small, and no confidence levels are presented around any of the estimates. This makes it difficult to evaluate possible changes over time.

AUTHORS: As requested we have included an estimate of confidence intervals to allow a better assessment of the fluctuation of the number of cases over time (please see figure 5, page 15).

7. Line 411-64: this is much too long a discussion of differences in parasite prevalence between species.

AUTHORS: We have substantially reduced this part of the discussion (about 20 lines shorter, please see track changes version of the MS, all strikethrough lines in red)

REVIEWER #1 MINOR COMMENTS

1. The singular of species is species. Specie means money, in coin form. Multiple instances of this.

AUTHORS: The error was corrected.

2. Line 58-60, introduction: surely this figure is incorrect as it omits Venezuela.

AUTHORS: As requested by the reviewer, we include an additional sentence showing that in 2018 Venezuela accounted for 50% of all reported cases of malaria in the Americas (World Malaria Report 2019) (please see first paragraph of introduction; page 4, lines 63-66).

3. Line 86-9: example of text that is repeated and or not relevant (e.g.“rich cultural display”). Similarly what is most relevant in lines 100-128?

AUTHORS: the original Line 86-9 – sentence rewritten; Line 100-128 – the description of the study area was reduced (~ 10 lines shorter, please see track changes version of the MS, all strikethrough lines in red;).

4. On the other hand, we are told very little about patterns of malaria transmission in these communities. (…)

AUTHORS: Few studies so far have reported in detail malaria transmission in the Brazilian Yanomami communities. Despite of that, malaria incidence is unevenly distributed across the Yanomami area, with some areas with reduced malaria receptivity and other localities that are hotspots of intense malaria transmission. The high heterogeneity in anopheline composition, larval habitats and densities between Yanomami communities and villages may explain heterogeneity in local malaria transmission (Sanchez-Ribas et al, 2015,). In the study area, we previously identified high infection rates of Anopheles darlingi (1.5-2%), the main neotropical malaria vector (Sanchez-Ribas et al, 2017; PMID: 29145867).

Aiming to clarify this topic raised by the reviewer, we have provided more detail about vector transmission in the study area (Methods, page 5, lines: 101-104). Also, this topic was highlighted in the discussion as vector breeding sites may explain heterogeneity of malaria transmission between villages (page 19; lines: 431-439).

(…) In particular, from figure 2 it appears the surveys may have been done at times of lower transmission but this is not described here, or discussed later on. This would have implications for the generalizability of these snapshots.

AUTHORS: The current study present limitations that should be taken into consideration when interpreting the results. Regarding the best time for consecutive sampling, a major challenge was the remote localization of the Yanomami villages in the Amazon forest whose accessibility is seasonal and dependent on small planes and local boats. Seasons in the Amazon rainforest are not well-defined, and it is divided into the dry season and the wet season, each lasting about six months. Despite of that, our cross-sectional surveys covered months of the dry season (September and November) and rainy season (January). Consequently, we are confident that the results presented here are representative of malaria prevalence in dry/wet seasons. Considering this scenario, we emphasized again the relevance of keep figure 2 in the MS because it shows how variable is malaria transmission in the study area. For example, in January of 2014, malaria infection as detected by conventional microscopy identified 160 cases per 1000 inhabitants; however, in January of next year (2015) only 34 cases/1000 were recorded i.e., a reduction of 5-times.

We included a paragraph in the discussion section about sampling limitation in the study population (please see discussion, page 22 , lines: 508-518).

5. Line 109 masl?

AUTHORS: meters above sea level is commonly abbreviated as “masl”. We clarify this topic in the MS.

6. Line 232: frequency of microscopic infection, we cannot say it was “acute”

AUTHORS: Okay, it was corrected.

7. Line 318-9: please rewrite this sentence, your point is not clear.

AUTHORS: Okay, it was done.

8. Line 331-40: This section on proportions of people infected at more than one time point is important, but it is not clearly presented. In the discussion the authors should discuss the importance of genotyping to determine whether re-infection or persistence are the reason.

AUTHORS: Okay, it was done.

9. Line 361-2: “case detection” is not the right terminology. “Detection of infections” would be better.

AUTHORS: Okay, it was done. However, I would clarify that WHO use “case detection” terminology to classify malaria cases based on a positive microscopy.

10. Line 365 onwards: the discussion of gender could be improved. Specifically do men and women undertake similar or different activities within the settlement? AS the authors will know malaria in S E Asia is basically becoming a disease of adult males related often to specific occupations.

AUTHORS: We agree with the reviewer that in many endemic areas men have a greater occupational risk of contracting malaria than women if they work in mines, fields or forests at peak biting times. This profile of gender asymmetry in malaria transmission is not restrict to SE Asia but it is also common in the Amazon area (Feitosa Souza, P et al., Plos One, 2019 PMID: 31211772). However, this classical epidemiological model may not apply to semi-nomadic forest dwelling tribes whose activities of men and women during peak biting times may result in equal risks of infection. In these areas, the cultural activities of the entire family outside their house in peak hours of vector activity (e.g., coming to the river early in the morning for bathing or to draw water, fishing, engaging in hunting camps, etc.) may facilitated exposition to infection (Sa et al., 2005; PMID: 15915970). Also, each Yanomami village resides under a single, temporary, non-partitioned communitarian house without walls (“shabono”), built in clearings in the jungle, which may exposure equally male and female to infected mosquitoes-bites. Consequently, it was not surprised that in our study we did not find any statistically significant association between infection and gender.

As requested, we clarify this topic in the discussion section page 18; lines:405-416).

11. Line 386: this statement about “influence” does not make sense.

AUTHORS: It is possible that the original sentence was not clear enough. Here, the idea is to show that the number of malaria cases fluctuated overtime. In the revised version we clarified this topic.

12. Line 400-1: This decline with translocation suggests infections may be short lived.

AUTHORS: Yes, it is possible that infections are short-lived (we included this possibility in the revised version of the MS).

Thank you very much for all the suggestions to improve the Manuscript.

___________________________________________________________________________

REVIEWER #2: It is possible to guess what the authors are saying but many sentences are grammatically incorrect. The text would benefit from careful editing by someone fluent in English.

AUTHORS: We thank the reviewer for the careful examination of our manuscript. At this time, we would like to clarify that the English language was revised by a native English speaker (Dr. Luke A. Baton, https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Luke_Baton/research). We hope that the MS is now suitable for publication.

P2 L50: “… the results confirm molecular tools as more appropriate to identify under-registered malaria infection …”: What is under-registered malaria? Asymptomatic Plasmodium infections?

AUTHORS: We included “under-registered” in the sense that a high proportion of malaria infections were characterized by low parasite densities undetectable by conventional microscopy (i.e., underestimated). To avoid misunderstanding we deleted the word “under-registered”.

P4 L60: “… malaria incidence began to rise in the Americas, …” when?

AUTHORS: Since 2015 malaria incidence began to rise in the Americas, mainly due to increases in Amazon rain forest areas of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Brazil and Colombia. As requested this information was included in the first paragraph of the introduction (please see page 4, lines: 61-63)

P5 Last paragraph of introduction: better to state the research question the authors set out to address than provide a summary of the findings.

AUTHORS: As suggested, we stated the research question instead summary of findings.

Were infected participants diagnosed by PCR offered treatment?

AUTHORS: No, submicroscopic malaria carriers remain untreated in the Brazilian Amazon region. According to the treatment guidelines of the Brazilian Ministry of Health, only microscopically or rapid diagnostic testing (RDT) positive cases are treated for malaria. In the revised version of the MS, this information was included in the discussion (Discussion, page 17; lines: 389-392).

P11 L237 “… the likelihood of having malaria …” does this refer to the prevalence asymptomatic Plasmodium infections? If so, there is a major error running throughout the paper: malaria is defined as evidence of infection with clinical signs. In the absence of clinical signs, the study participants do not have malaria but an asymptomatic Plasmodium infections. Please decide whether you describe clinical malaria or asymptomatic Plasmodium infections? The difference is critical for the comprehension of the study. (If I misunderstood the paper and the authors describe also clinical episodes, they should describe the clinical signs detected.)

AUTHORS: Evaluation of symptoms and pathogenesis was outside the scope of the current study. Consequently, in our study “malaria infection” was defined according to the general consensus proposed by the WHO Malaria Policy Advisory Committee as “the occurrence of any confirmed malaria infection with or without symptoms” (WHO Malaria Terminology; https://www.who.int/malaria/publications/atoz/malaria-terminology/en/). In the present study, malaria infections were confirmed by both conventional light microscopy (microscopically-confirmed cases) and species-specific PCR-based assays (submicroscopic or low-density infections). In this case, we also follow the recommendation that the terms “submicroscopic ” and “asymptomatic” infections were not interchangeably (although often used in the literature generating confusion) as proposed by Meeting report of the WHO Evidence Review Group on Low-Density Malaria Infections 15–16 May 2017 https://www.who.int/malaria/mpac/mpac-oct2017-erg-malaria-low-density-infections-session2.pdf?ua=1.

Aiming to clarify this relevant topic raised by the reviewer, we included in the Methods the definition of malaria infection used in our study, according to the reference of the WHO malaria terminology publication (please see pages 8/9, lines 180-185). In addition, in the study design we included a sentence to explain that that the terms “submicroscopic ” and “asymptomatic” infections were not interchangeably here (page 9; 185-190 ). Finally, as requested by the reviewer, in the legend of Figure 3 we include the definition of the likelihood of having malaria, i.e., malaria confirmed by conventional microscopy or species-specific PCR-based assays.

P13 “ … PCR-based protocols were able to detect submicroscopic infection in all age groups -- including individuals above of 50 years old -- showing that submicroscopic malaria infections were equally prevalent among adults and children.” If this is true why the drop off in at age 55-60 in Fig 4?

AUTHORS: There were no statistically significant differences between age groups. In the results we have clarified this topic (included statistical data analysis in page 14).

Fig 1: Map – has three maps inserted on the right. There are no litles what the three maps illustrate/show. Please add legends to each of the insert-maps?

AUTHORS: We added the legends of Figure 1.

Fig 2: please indicate where the data on malaria cases shown in the chart comes from?

AUTHORS: Monthly-time series of microscopically-confirmed malaria cases per 1,000 inhabitants were provided by the National Malaria Surveillance System Registry (SIVEP-Malaria) from the Brazilian Ministry of Health (we included the source of data in the legend of the figure 2, page 8)

Fig 3: why are only 3 of 5 study villages included?

AUTHORS: The current study involved 4 villages (and not 5): (1) Taibrapa; (2) Gasolina, (3) Alapusi, and (4) Castanha/Ahima (methods, revised MS, page 6; lines: 106-109). However, due to the seminomadic habits of the natives, Taibrapa has alternative residences (I and II). Figure 3 represents the baseline of the study, i.e., the moment when Taibrapa’s inhabitants were temporary located in their area II (named Taibrapa-II). For the odds ratio calculation Castanha/Ahima (lower malaria prevalence) was set as ‘reference category’ with value=1, and then odds ratio for the other three villages (Alapusi, Gasolina and Taibrapa-II) were relative to that reference category. To clarify this topic, we included this information in the legend of figure 3.

Fig 4: the x-axis indicates age groups yet the chart/graph is a line/area graph. This does not make a lot of sense if ages are grouped a bar chart is appropriate. If an area graph is used the ages should be continuous variables not age groups.

AUTHORS: As requested, Figure 4 was modified to bar chart.

Fig 5: Great idea to present the data this way! Please explain why is T(II) not included?

AUTHORS: Due to their seminomadic habits, inhabitants of Taibrapa have alternative residences (I and II). In the legend of figure Taibrapa temporary residences were named Taibrapa-I (T-I) or Taibrapa-II (T-II) according to their location during the follow-up period.

Fig 6: lines and areas are confusing. Probably better as bar chart?

AUTHORS: As requested we have adjusted this figure to make the results easier to read

Fig 7: the x-axis indicates age groups yet the chart/graph is a line chart. This does not make a lot of sense if ages are grouped a bar chart is appropriate. If an area graph is used the ages should be continuous variables not age groups.

AUTHORS: The bar chart as suggested by the reviewer worked very well in figure 4 but not in this figure. Figure 7 includes so many information that bar chart was not easy to visualize. So, we decided to include “dots” corresponding to each grouped age, and keep connecting lines to show the fluctuation in the prevalence.

Thank you very much for all the suggestions to improve the Manuscript.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Robortella_et al_Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Adriana Calderaro

5 Mar 2020

Prospective assessment of malaria infection in a semi-isolated Amazonian indigenous Yanomami community: transmission heterogeneity and predominance of submicroscopic infection

PONE-D-19-31210R1

Dear Dr. Carvalho,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it complies with all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you will receive an e-mail containing information on the amendments required prior to publication. When all required modifications have been addressed, you will receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will proceed to our production department and be scheduled for publication.

Shortly after the formal acceptance letter is sent, an invoice for payment will follow. To ensure an efficient production and billing process, please log into Editorial Manager at https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page, and update your user information. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, you must inform our press team as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

With kind regards,

Adriana Calderaro

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: No further comments.I apparently have to wrtie 100 characters as a minimum. The English is now very good.

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Acceptance letter

Adriana Calderaro

6 Mar 2020

PONE-D-19-31210R1

Prospective assessment of malaria infection in a semi-isolated Amazonian indigenous Yanomami community: transmission heterogeneity and predominance of submicroscopic infection

Dear Dr. Carvalho:

I am pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper at this point, to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

For any other questions or concerns, please email plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE.

With kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

MD, PhD, Associate Professor Adriana Calderaro

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 File. Conditions for the different PCR-based protocols used to amplify genes from P. vivax, P. falciparum and P. malariae.

    (DOCX)

    S1 Fig. Prevalence of malaria according to age group (years) and gender (male and female).

    Malaria positivity was defined by PCR-based protocols (PCR) or by conventional light microscopy (Microscopy). The number (n) of individuals in each age group is represented in the respective bars.

    (TIFF)

    S2 Fig. Species-specific malaria positivity of each positive individual who participated during the cross-sectional surveys.

    Each row represents a single individual coded (#) and grouped according to their profile of positive samples in each of the three cross-sectional surveys (columns I, II and III, respectively, of the colored matrix). (A) shows individuals who were positive in at least two of the three cross-sectional surveys (n = 12). (B), (C) and (D) show individuals who were positive in only one of the three cross-sectional surveys: either (B) the 1st baseline survey (I; n = 35), (C) the 2nd survey (II, n = 22) or (D) the 3rd survey (III; n = 74). Species-specific PCR positivity is represented using different colors, as indicated in the legend: P. vivax (Pv) in light blue; P. falciparum (Pf) in dark blue; P. malariae (Pm) in orange; and mixed infections by the other different colors. The dark dot (•) inside each square indicates positivity by microscopy as well as PCR, while the asterisks (*) indicate positivity only by microscopy. Individual age, gender and place of dwelling were included in the left part of figure. Each village was coded as according to the legend of Fig 5.

    (TIF)

    S1 Table

    (TIF)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Robortella_et al_Response to Reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are available within the article and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES