Volume 89, Issue 5
  • ISSN: 0002-9637
  • E-ISSN: 1476-1645



Geometric morphometrics is an approach that has been increasingly applied in studies with insects. A limiting factor of this technique is that some mosquitoes have wings with dark spots or many scales, which jeopardizes the visualization of landmarks for morphometric analysis. Recently, in some studies, chemically treatment (staining) of the wings was used to improve the viewing of landmarks. In this study, we evaluated whether this method causes deformation of the wing veins and tested whether it facilitates the visualization of the most problematic landmarks. In addition, we tested whether mechanical removal of the scales was sufficient for this purpose. The results showed that the physical and chemical treatments are equally effective in improving visualization of the landmarks. The chemical method did not cause deformation of the wing. Thus, some of these treatments should be performed before beginning geometric morphometric analysis to avoid erroneous landmark digitizing.

[open-access] This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene's Re-use License which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


Article metrics loading...

The graphs shown below represent data from March 2017
Loading full text...

Full text loading...



  1. Henry A, Thongsripong P, Fonseca-Gonzalez I, Jaramillo-Ocampo N, Dujardin JP, , 2010. Wing shape of dengue vectors from around the world. Infect Genet Evol 10: 207214.[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  2. Morais SAD, Moratore C, Suesdek L, Marrelli MT, , 2010. Genetic-morphometric variation in Culex quinquefasciatus from Brazil and La Plata, Argentina. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 105: 672676.[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  3. Kuclu O, Aldemir A, Demirci B, , 2011. Altitudinal variation in the morphometric characteristics of Aedes vexans Meigen from northeastern Turkey. J Vector Ecol 36: 3041.[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  4. Motoki MT, Suesdek L, Bergo ES, Sallum MAM, , 2012. Wing geometry of Anopheles darlingi Root (Diptera: Culicidae) in five major Brazilian ecoregions. Infect Genet Evol 12: 12461252.[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  5. Demirci B, Lee Y, Lanzaro GC, Alten B, , 2012. Altitudinal genetic and morphometric variation among populations of Culex theileri Theobald (Diptera: Culicidae) from northeastern Turkey. J Vector Ecol 37: 197209.[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  6. Calle DA, Quiñones ML, Erazo HF, Jaramillo N, , 2008. Discriminación por morfometría geométrica de once especies de Anopheles (Nyssorhynchus) presentes en Colombia. Biomedica 28: 371385. [Google Scholar]
  7. Vidal PO, Rocha LS, Peruzin MCJ, , 2011. Wing diagnostic characters for mosquitoes Culex quinquefasciatus and Culex nigripalpus (Diptera; Culicidae). Rev Bras Entomol 55: 132142.[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  8. Lorenz C, Marques TC, Sallum MAM, Suesdek L, , 2012. Morphometrical diagnosis of the malaria vectors Anopheles cruzii, An. homunculus and An. bellator . Parasit Vectors 5: 17.[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  9. Vidal PO, Suesdek L, , 2012. Comparison of wing geometry data and genetic data for assessing the population structure of Aedes aegypti . Infect Genet Evol 12: 591596.[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  10. Carter HF, Macfie AJWS, , 1920. Observations on the ceratopogoninem idges of the Gold Coast, with descriptions of new species. Part I. Ann Trop Med Parasitol 14: 187210.[Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  11. Lutz A, , 1922. Contribution aux methods d'observations microscopiques de biologiques. Ann Biol Lacustre 11: 90102. [Google Scholar]
  12. Rohlf FJ, , 2006. TpsDig2, Digitize Landmarks and Outlines, version 2.10. Stony Brook, NY: State University of New York. [Google Scholar]
  13. Rohlf FJ, , 2003. TpsRelw, Relative Warps Analysis Computer Program, version 1.36. Stony Brook, NY: State University of New York. [Google Scholar]
  14. Automotive Industry Action Group and American Society for Quality Control Supplier Quality Requirements Task Force, 1999. Fundamental Statistical Process Control: Reference Manual. AIAG. Southfield, MI: United States of America. [Google Scholar]
  15. Arnqvist G, Mårtensson T, , 1998. Measurement error in geometric morphometrics: empirical strategies to assess and reduce its impact on measures of shape. Acta Zool Acad Scientiarum Hungaricae 44: 7396. [Google Scholar]
  16. StatSoft, Inc., 2004. Statistica for Windows Computer Program Manual. Tulsa, OK: StatSoft, Inc. [Google Scholar]
  17. Minitab Pty, Ltd., 2000. Level 6. Sydney, New South Wales, Australia: Minitab Pty, Ltd. [Google Scholar]
  18. Microsoft Excel, 1987. Version 2010. Microsoft Corporation, One Microsoft Way, Redmond, WA: United States of America.

Data & Media loading...

  • Received : 17 Jun 2013
  • Accepted : 13 Aug 2013
  • Published online : 06 Nov 2013

Most Cited This Month

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error