Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2023 Feb 1.
Published in final edited form as: Trends Parasitol. 2021 Sep 18;38(2):124–135. doi: 10.1016/j.pt.2021.08.009

Figure 1, Key Figure. Summary of Plasmodium interactions with human-biting Anopheles.

Figure 1, Key Figure.

The four quadrants represent four different conditions with outcomes on several mosquito and parasite factors relative to a natural association, P. falciparum infecting human-biting Anopheles (top left), indicated. Infection with P. falciparum does not reduce egg numbers or mosquito survival and parasites suppress TEP1-mediated immune responses. In contrast, when P. berghei infects human-biting Anopheles (non-natural association – top right), immune responses are increased and both egg and parasite numbers and mosquito survival are decreased. Manipulations to 20E signaling (bottom left) decrease egg numbers and P. falciparum parasites, although fewer in number through TEP1-independent immunity or otherwise, can exploit remaining resources to grow faster. When lipid transport is perturbed (bottom right), eggs and parasites are both decreased in number, and differences emerge between P. falciparum and P. berghei: while lack of lipophorin slows growth of P. berghei and renders parasites vulnerable to TEP1-mediated killing, the role of immunity is less clear for P. falciparum, which does not rely on lipids for growth.