Literature DB >> 14971695

Comparative field evaluation of the Mbita trap, the Centers for Disease Control light trap, and the human landing catch for sampling of malaria vectors in western Kenya.

Evan M Mathenge1, George O Omweri, Lucy W Irungu, Paul N Ndegwa, Elizabeth Walczak, Tom A Smith, Gerry F Killeen, Bart G J Knols.   

Abstract

The mosquito sampling efficiency of a new bed net trap (the Mbita trap) was compared with that of the Centers for Disease Control miniature light trap (hung adjacent to an occupied bed net) and the human landing catch in western Kenya. Overall, the Mbita trap caught 48.7 +/- 4.8% (mean +/- SEM) the number of Anopheles gambiae Giles sensu lato caught in the human landing catch and 27.4 +/- 8.2% of the number caught by the light trap. The corresponding figures for Anopheles funestus Giles were 74.6 +/- 1.3% and 39.2 +/- 1.9%, respectively. Despite the clear differences in the numbers of mosquitoes caught by each method, both the Mbita trap and light trap catches were directly proportional to human landing catches regardless of mosquito density. No significant differences in parity or sporozoite incidence were observed between mosquitoes caught by the three methods for either An. gambiae s.l. or An. funestus. Identification of the sibling species of the An. gambiae complex by a polymerase chain reaction indicated that the ratio of An. gambiae Giles sensu stricto to An. arabiensis Patton did not vary according to the sampling method used. It is concluded that the Mbita trap is a promising tool for sampling malaria vector populations since its catch can be readily converted into equivalent human biting catch, it can be applied more intensively, it requires neither expensive equipment nor skilled personnel, and it samples mosquitoes in an exposure-free manner. Such intensive sampling capability will allow cost-effective surveillance of malaria transmission at much finer spatial and temporal resolution than has been previously possible.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14971695

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Trop Med Hyg        ISSN: 0002-9637            Impact factor:   2.345


  42 in total

1.  Design and testing of a novel, protective human-baited tent trap for the collection of anthropophilic disease vectors.

Authors:  Benjamin J Krajacich; Jeremiah R Slade; Robert T Mulligan; Brendan Labrecque; Kevin C Kobylinski; Meg Gray; Wojtek S Kuklinski; Timothy A Burton; Jonathan A Seaman; Massamba Sylla; Brian D Foy
Journal:  J Med Entomol       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 2.278

2.  Methods to collect Anopheles mosquitoes and evaluate malaria transmission: a comparative study in two villages in Senegal.

Authors:  Mamadou O Ndiath; Catherine Mazenot; Ablaye Gaye; Lassana Konate; Charles Bouganali; Ousmane Faye; Cheikh Sokhna; Jean-Francois Trape
Journal:  Malar J       Date:  2011-09-19       Impact factor: 2.979

3.  Analysis of Anopheles arabiensis blood feeding behavior in southern Zambia during the two years after introduction of insecticide-treated bed nets.

Authors:  Christen M Fornadel; Laura C Norris; Gregory E Glass; Douglas E Norris
Journal:  Am J Trop Med Hyg       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 2.345

4.  Centers for Disease Control light traps for monitoring Anopheles arabiensis human biting rates in an area with low vector density and high insecticide-treated bed net use.

Authors:  Christen M Fornadel; Laura C Norris; Douglas E Norris
Journal:  Am J Trop Med Hyg       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 2.345

5.  Sampling host-seeking anthropophilic mosquito vectors in west Africa: comparisons of an active human-baited tent-trap against gold standard methods.

Authors:  Benjamin J Krajacich; Jeremiah R Slade; Robert F Mulligan; Brendan LaBrecque; Haoues Alout; Nathan D Grubaugh; Jacob I Meyers; Lawrence S Fakoli; Fatorma K Bolay; Doug E Brackney; Timothy A Burton; Jonathan A Seaman; Joseph W Diclaro; Roch K Dabiré; Brian D Foy
Journal:  Am J Trop Med Hyg       Date:  2014-11-24       Impact factor: 2.345

6.  Unexpected anthropophily in the potential secondary malaria vectors Anopheles coustani s.l. and Anopheles squamosus in Macha, Zambia.

Authors:  Christen M Fornadel; Laura C Norris; Veronica Franco; Douglas E Norris
Journal:  Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis       Date:  2010-12-13       Impact factor: 2.133

7.  View point: Ethical dilemmas in malaria vector research in Africa: making the difficult choice between mosquito, science and humans.

Authors:  P Ndebele; R Musesengwa
Journal:  Malawi Med J       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 0.875

8.  Habitat Partitioning of Malaria Vectors in Nchelenge District, Zambia.

Authors:  Smita Das; Mbanga Muleba; Jennifer C Stevenson; Douglas E Norris
Journal:  Am J Trop Med Hyg       Date:  2016-03-21       Impact factor: 2.345

9.  A new tent trap for sampling exophagic and endophagic members of the Anopheles gambiae complex.

Authors:  Nicodemus J Govella; Prosper P Chaki; Yvonne Geissbuhler; Khadija Kannady; Fredros Okumu; J Derek Charlwood; Robert A Anderson; Gerry F Killeen
Journal:  Malar J       Date:  2009-07-14       Impact factor: 2.979

Review 10.  The multiplicity of malaria transmission: a review of entomological inoculation rate measurements and methods across sub-Saharan Africa.

Authors:  Louise A Kelly-Hope; F Ellis McKenzie
Journal:  Malar J       Date:  2009-01-23       Impact factor: 2.979

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.