| Literature DB >> 17062142 |
Benjamin G Jacob1, Ephantus J Muturi, Jose E Funes, Josephat I Shililu, John I Githure, Ibulaimu I Kakoma, Robert J Novak.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: For remote identification of mosquito habitats the first step is often to construct a discrete tessellation of the region. In applications where complex geometries do not need to be represented such as urban habitats, regular orthogonal grids are constructed in GIS and overlaid on satellite images. However, rice land vector mosquito aquatic habitats are rarely uniform in space or character. An orthogonal grid overlaid on satellite data of rice-land areas may fail to capture physical or man-made structures, i.e paddies, canals, berms at these habitats. Unlike an orthogonal grid, digitizing each habitat converts a polygon into a grid cell, which may conform to rice-land habitat boundaries. This research illustrates the application of a random sampling methodology, comparing an orthogonal and a digitized grid for assessment of rice land habitats.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2006 PMID: 17062142 PMCID: PMC1636646 DOI: 10.1186/1475-2875-5-91
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Malar J ISSN: 1475-2875 Impact factor: 2.979
Figure 1Base map of Kangichiri, Kuria and Rurumi study sites in the Mwea rice scheme Kenya.
Figure 2A digitized GIS grid overlaid on QuickBird 0.61 m image within 1 km buffer in Kangichiri agro-village, Mwea Rice Scheme, Kenya.
Figure 3A 63.3 m × 63.3 m GIS overlaid on QuickBird 0.61 m image within 1 km buffer in Kangichiri agro-village, Mwea Rice Scheme, Kenya.
Abundance of An. arabiensis larvae in paddies and canals identified using digitized grid cell and field sampled data
| Village | habitat type | No. of habitat | Proportion positive for | 1st instars | 2nd instars | 3rd instars | 4th instars | Pupae |
| Kangichiri | Paddy | 160 | 57.10 | 1.64 ± 0.38 | 1.18 ± 0.25 | 0.24 ± 0.13 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 0.40 ± 0.13 |
| Canal | 135 | 42.90 | 2.28 ± 1.16 | 0.99 ± 0.25 | 0.17 ± 0.10 | 0.07 ± 0.03 | 0.17 ± 0.05 | |
| Kiuria | Paddy | 122 | 62.80 | 5.50 ± 2.00 | 1.83 ± 0.59 | 0.14 ± 0.07 | 0.37 ± 0.35 | 0.27 ± 0.11 |
| Canal | 69 | 37.20 | 3.66 ± 0.85 | 2.59 ± 0.85 | 0.40 ± 0.10 | 0.04 ± 0.03 | 0.19 ± 0.09 | |
| Rurumi | Paddy | 106 | 68.60 | 1.42 ± 0.34 | 1.12 ± 0.45 | 0.08 ± 0.04 | 0.05 ± 0.03 | 0.16 ± 0.11 |
| Canal | 98 | 31.40 | 0.59 ± 0.12 | 0.23 ± 0.07 | 0.11 ± 0.04 | 0.01 ± 0.01 | 0.04 ± 0.02 |
Immature stages of An. arabiensis sampled in paddies containing different stages of rice growth using digitized grid data
| Kangichiri | Ploughed | 25 | 1.41 | 0.95 | 0.09 | 0.00 | 0.36 |
| Flooded | 23 | 1.67 | 1.10 | 0.30 | 0.00 | 0.36 | |
| Post transplanting | 30 | 6.02 | 3.00 | 1.89 | 1.20 | 0.99 | |
| Tillering | 28 | 8.00 | 6.67 | 2.00 | 3.22 | 0.67 | |
| Flowering/maturation | 27 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.00 | |
| Fallow | 27 | 1.00 | 0.67 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.01 | |
| Kiuria | Ploughed | 22 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Flooded | 23 | 1.23 | 0.65 | 0.07 | 0.01 | 0.0 | |
| Post transplanting | 21 | 5.58 | 1.63 | 0.17 | 0.51 | 0.19 | |
| Tillering | 22 | 8.50 | 5.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 1.25 | |
| Flowering/maturation | 20 | 0.02 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.0 | 0.00 | |
| Fallow | 14 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.0 | 0.01 | 0.00 | |
| Rurumi | Ploughed | 18 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Flooded | 21 | 1.56 | 1.28 | 0.09 | 0.06 | 0.19 | |
| Post transplanting | 20 | 5.73 | 3.37 | 1.17 | 1.03 | 0.47 | |
| Tillering | 20 | 4.91 | 4.67 | 1.19 | 1.11 | 1.00 | |
| Flowering/maturation | 15 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| Fallow | 12 | 1.17 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
Average number (± SE) of An. arabiensis larvae in vegetated and non-vegetated canals using the digitized grid data
| VILLAGE | Vegetation | 1st instars | 2nd instars | 3rd instars | 4th instars | Pupae |
| Kangichiri | Present | 1.20 ± 0.31 | 0.87 ± 0.21 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 0.00 ± 0.00 |
| Absent | 24.50 ± 24.50 | 3.50 ± 3.50 | 0.18 ± 0.10 | 0.07 ± 0.03 | 0.17 ± 0.05 | |
| Kiuria | Present | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 0.00 ± 0.00 |
| Absent | 3.83 ± 088 | 2.71 ± 0.89 | 0.72 ± 0.11 | 0.5 ± 0.03 | 0.20 ± 0.09 | |
| Rurumi | Present | 0.4 ± 0.17 | 0.10 ± 0.10 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 0.00 ± 0.00 |
| Absent | 0.64 ± 0.14 | 0.27 ± 0.08 | 0.14 ± 0.05 | 0.01 ± 0.01 | 0.05 ± 0.03 |
Statistical values comparing the differences in An. arabiensis larval densities between the vegetated and non-vegetated canals
| Kangichiri | Kiuria | Rurumi | |||||||
| df | t | Sig. | df | t | Sig. | df | t | Sig. | |
| 1st instars | 134 | 22.22 | 0.00 | 68 | 0.86 | 0.03 | 97 | 0.87 | 0.35 |
| 2nd instars | 134 | 4.97 | 0.03 | 68 | 0.43 | 0.04 | 97 | 3.75 | 0.05 |
| 3rd instars | 134 | 0.15 | 0.70 | 68 | 0.68 | 0.04 | 97 | 0.02 | 0.04 |
| 4th instars | 134 | 0.23 | 0.64 | 68 | 0.08 | 0.06 | 97 | 0.01 | 0.93 |
| Pupae | 134 | 0.60 | 0.44 | 68 | 0.22 | 0.64 | 97 | 0.35 | 0.55 |