Review 2: "Changing Species Dynamics and Species-specific Associations Observed between Anopheles and Plasmodium Genera in Diebougou Health District, Southwest Burkina Faso"

RR\ID Evidence Scale rating by reviewer:

• Reliable. The main study claims are generally justified by its methods and data. The results and conclusions are likely to be similar to the hypothetical ideal study. There are some minor caveats or limitations, but they would/do not change the major claims of the study. The study provides sufficient strength of evidence on its own that its main claims should be considered actionable, with some room for future revision.

***************************************

Review: Overall, the authors answer a key question regarding vector competence between An. gambiae s.l and An. funestus with a unique data set

Abstract:

• The authors succinctly provide a lean in into the study findings and provide for a curious read into the manuscript. 

Introduction:

• This body of text was found to be informative and relevant to the study subject, covering several aspects including the malaria situation in Burkina Faso, malaria control tools, challenges to control, multiplicity of infection, diagnostic limitations, Anopheles species diversity, utilization of Ivermectin and the specific trial details. The introduction provides sufficient literature references and highlights the importance of tracking non-Plasmodium falciparum malaria in disease control as well as underscoring the need for understanding vector-parasite associations.

Results :

• The results are presented in fine detail, well described and coherent. They make for a note taking read to clearly tease out the differences in the RIMDAMAL trials and implementation variables, this is facilitated by the visual in Table 1.  The description of the differences in prevalence of Plasmodium species between participants, Anopheles speciation and blood meal analysis, and sporozoite rates between the two trials makes the results palatable amidst great detail. The key observations in the study, particularly the change in prevalence of Plasmodium falciparum to non-pf infections and the higher vector competence of An. funestus to non-pf infections compared to An. gambiae s.l is backed up with sufficient detail. The authors show differences in sporozoite infection rates between the two trials in Table 3.The figures presented are a reflection of the description in the text body.

Discussion:

• The discussion addresses the key findings in the study, underscores the paucity of data on non-Plasmodium falciparum infections. The discussion divulges into other potential drivers of the observed outcomes including poor diagnostics and the environment in which the study is conducted including the potential impact of seasonal malaria chemoprophylaxis. Given that this is an observational study, it doesn't draw any inferences on data but provides pointers to potential explanations for the observations and leaves room for further investigation. Notably the study does highlight its limitations particularly the fact that these findings are isolated to a single site and may not be generalisable. Key to note is that the impact of Ivermectin and the Seasonal Malaria Chemoprevention on the observed differences in vector competence were not teased out, and cannot be ignored either. 

Conclusion: 

• The conclusion is drawn from the results and speaks to the key findings. The message is maintained and suggests more rigorous hypothesis testing to validate the observations

Methods:

• The methods provide sufficient description and laboratory analysis detail for interested individuals to run similar assays

Overall, I found this manuscript to be expertly written and a compelling read.