| Literature DB >> 12513703 |
Wolfgang R Mukabana1, Willem Takken, Richard Coe, Bart G J Knols.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many studies have suggested that variability in the attractiveness of humans to host-seeking mosquitoes is caused by differences in the make-up of body emanations, and olfactory signals in particular. Most investigations have either been laboratory-based, utilising odour obtained from sections of the body, or have been done in the field with sampling methods that do not discriminate between visual, physical and chemical cues of the host. Accordingly, evidence for differential attractiveness based on body emanations remains sparse in spite of the far-reaching epidemiological implications of this phenomenon.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2002 PMID: 12513703 PMCID: PMC149388 DOI: 10.1186/1475-2875-1-17
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Malar J ISSN: 1475-2875 Impact factor: 2.979
Figure 1Top (A), cross-sectional (B) and three-dimensional (C) views of the experimental setup. The fan (a) drew air (~130 L/min/tent) from the three tents (b) to the outside environment via PVC pipes (c), trap chambers (d) and central choice chamber (e). Each trap chamber contained a collecting cage (f) into which an exit trap opened (g). The fan pipe and release cup (h) were fitted to the top and bottom of the choice chamber, respectively. Diagrams are not shown to scale; all dimensions are in centimeters.
The number of mosquitoes caught per trap in the absence of host-seeking stimuli. N, number of replicates. n, total number of mosquitoes trapped per test period also expressed (in parentheses) as the proportion of the total number of mosquitoes released.
| Test period | N | Mean number trapped | n (proportion) | ||
| Trap A | Trap B | Trap C | |||
| 20.00 – 21.00 | 2 | 8 | 9 | 3 | 20 (0.12)a |
| 22.00 – 23.00 | 2 | 6 | 8 | 6 | 20 (0.12)a |
| 24.00 – 01.00 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 5 | 9 (0.05)a |
| Total | 6 | 20 (3.33)a | 20 (3.33)a | 14 (2.33)a | 49 (0.096) |
Numbers followed by the same letter (between traps or test periods) are not significantly different (P > 0.05).
The mean number of mosquitoes attracted to each of nine Kenyan males and parameter estimates calculated for each individual person from the log-linear model. Calculations used person P1 as the reference standard. Ranks of attractiveness are based on the level of significance of differences in the number mosquitoes attracted by pairs of persons. N, number of replicates. s.e., standard error of the mean.
| Person | N | Estimate (β) | Mean catch ± s.e. | Rank of attractiveness |
| P1 | 21 | 0 | 20.14 ± 3.17 a | 1 |
| P2 | 15 | 0.030 | 18.20 ± 3.65 a | 1 |
| P4 | 21 | - 0.667 | 11.95 ± 1.83 b | 2 |
| P5 | 21 | - 0.651 | 11.33 ± 1.72 b | 2 |
| P7 | 12 | - 0.843 | 9.92 ± 1.55 b | 2 |
| P9 | 9 | - 0.711 | 9.67 ± 3.54 b | 2 |
| P8 | 18 | - 1.155 | 6.78 ± 1.01 c | 3 |
| P6 | 15 | - 1.204 | 6.73 ± 1.41 c | 3 |
| P3 | 12 | - 1.193 | 6.17 ± 1.12 c | 3 |
Means not followed by the same letter are significantly different (P < 0.05).
The number of mosquitoes caught per trap in the presence (test period I, 20.00 – 20.45 hours) and absence (test period II, 21.30 – 22.15 hours) of host-seeking stimuli. Traps A, B and C were linked to tents occupied by persons P2, P6 and P5, respectively. n, the total number of mosquitoes trapped per test period also expressed (in parentheses) as a proportion of the total number of mosquitoes released.
| Day | Test Period | Number of mosquitoes trapped | n (proportion) | ||
| Trap A | Trap B | Trap C | |||
| 1 | I | 36 | 10 | 12 | 58 (0.55) |
| II | 2 | 4 | 2 | 8 (0.09) | |
| 2 | I | 33 | 3 | 8 | 44 (0.49) |
| II | 8 | 8 | 8 | 24 (0.25) | |
| 3 | I | 49 | 9 | 14 | 72 (0.72) |
| II | 5 | 2 | 5 | 12 (0.13) | |
| 4 | I | 27 | 4 | 20 | 51 (0.53) |
| II | 4 | 4 | 5 | 13 (0.13) | |
| Total | I | 145 (0.64)a | 26 (0.12)b | 54 (0.24)c | 225 (0.57) |
| II | 20 (0.34)a | 18 (0.31)a | 20 (0.34)a | 58 (0.15) | |
Totals not followed by the same letter in the same row are significantly different (P < 0.001).