| Literature DB >> 26104719 |
Marta Andrés1,2, Lena M Lorenz3,4, Edgar Mbeleya5, Sarah J Moore6,7,8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Efforts to control malaria vectors have primarily focused on scaling-up of long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying. Although highly efficient against indoor-biting and indoor-resting vectors, these interventions have lower impact on outdoor-biting mosquitoes. Innovative vector control tools are required to prevent outdoor human-mosquito contacts. In this work, the potential of spatial repellents, delivered in an active system that requires minimal user compliance, to provide personal protection against exophagic mosquitoes active in the early evening was explored.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26104719 PMCID: PMC4477292 DOI: 10.1186/s12936-015-0762-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Malar J ISSN: 1475-2875 Impact factor: 2.979
Figure 1Modified mosquito landing box. a The lateral panels from the mosquito landing box (MLB) previously described in Matowo et al. [13] were removed to allow a better dispersion of the repellent. A solar battery (arrowhead) provides the energy to power the fan that draws the air emanated by the strips. b A deflecting dish (asterisk) is attached to the underside top cover to disperse the air driven by the fan. c The dispensing unit consists of a PVC pipe (arrowhead) with a fan on the top of it. The polyester strips are hanging from a cable wire within the dispensing tube (arrow).
Figure 2Semi-field system. The walls and the roof of the semi-field system (SFS) are made of metal frames and fiberglass netting material. The SFS has two sections separated by heavy-duty polyurethane. Each of these sections contains one experimental unit.
Figure 3Study design. a, b Within each semi-field compartment, a human volunteer sat between the two MLBs at a distance of 5 m from each. The volunteer exposed his lower legs to the mosquito bites and was provided with a protective net to avoid mosquito bites elsewhere on the body, a torch to catch the mosquito in the darkness, a mouth aspirator to collect the mosquito and four paper cups for mosquito collection during the 4 h of the experiment. c Schematic of the study design. The two compartments in the SFS are located side by side. Fifteen mosquitoes were released from each of four cages (total of 60 mosquitoes) located behind the MLBs. Four plastic strings connected the chair to the cages to allow the volunteer to open the cages remotely. Each night, either treatment or control were dispersed by the two MLBs in each semi-field compartment.
Figure 4Knock-down test. a Polyester strips treated with transfluthrin were kept in half paper cups and hung from a thread to mimic the light and ventilation condition in the modified MLBs. b, d The polyester strips were placed at the bottom of the plastic bottle, and covered with a plastic mesh to avoid contact between the strips and the mosquitoes (c). e Both sides of the cylinder were closed using a net. f Example of an experiment with polyester strips treated with 90 mg transfluthrin. After a few minutes all mosquitoes were knocked down at the base.
Effect of 90 mg transfluthrin and sources of experimental bias during the evaluation
| Median IQR mosquito landings/night | OR [95% CI] | z value | p value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment | ||||
| Control | 37 [28–40] | 1 | – | – |
| Treatment | 10 [7.5–12.5] | 0.17 [0.09–0.29] | −6.20 |
|
| Person | ||||
| V1 | 13 [25–36] | 1 | – | – |
| V2 | 12 [8–28.5] | 1.04 [0.61–1.79] | 0.16 | 0.873 |
| V3 | 18.5 [11–28] | 0.83 [0.49–1.42] | −0.67 | 0.504 |
| V4 | 25.5 [10–38.5] | 1.22 [0.71–2.09] | 0.72 | 0.471 |
| Treatment#person | ||||
| Treat–V1 | 13 [9–16.5] | 1 | – | – |
| Treat–V2 | 8 [6.5–10.5] | 0.49 [0.21–1.13] | −1.66 | 0.096 |
| Treat–V3 | 11 [10–12] | 0.88 [0.39–1.98] | −0.30 | 0.763 |
| Treat–V4 | 10 [7–12] | 0.74 [0.33–1.66] | −0.73 | 0.467 |
| Compartment | ||||
| C1 | 20.5 [11–37] | 1 | – | – |
| C2 | 15.5 [10–32.5] | 1.04 [0.60–1.78] | 0.13 | 0.894 |
| Treatment#compartment | ||||
| Treat–C1 | 11 [7.5–12.5] | 1 | – | – |
| Treat–C2 | 10 [7.5–12.5] | 1.00 [0.45–2.22] | 0.01 | 0.994 |
| Person#compartment | ||||
| V1–C2 | 25 [13–37.5] | 1 | – | – |
| V2–C2 | 11.5 [9–17] | 0.30 [0.14–0.64] | −3.11 |
|
| V3–C2 | 18.5 [11–27.5] | 0.56 [0.26–1.21] | −1.47 | 0.141 |
| V4–C2 | 23.5 [7–38.5] | 1.11 [0.52–2.40] | 0.27 | 0.784 |
| Treatment#person#compartment | ||||
| Treat–V1–C2 | 13 [9–18] | 1 | – | – |
| Treat–V2–C2 | 9.5 [8–11.5] | 4.49 [1.40–14.38] | 2.53 |
|
| Treat–V3–C2 | 11 [10–13.5] | 2.08 [0.91–4.75] | 1.73 | 0.083 |
| Treat–V4–C2 | 7 [6.5–8.5] | 0.49 [0.15–1.55] | −1.22 | 0.223 |
Statistical parameters estimated by fitting a mixed effect logistic regression model to the data.
Significant p values (p < 0.05) are in italics.
Figure 5Personal protection provided by the transfluthrin bubble in the SFS. a The number of An. arabiensis mosquitoes caught under treatment conditions (right) was significantly lower compared to the number of mosquitoes caught under control conditions (left). Graph showing median and IQR. b Distribution of number of mosquitoes caught with human landing catches during each hour of the experiment. Median number of mosquitoes caught per hour and IQR for control and treatment. c Proportion of mosquitoes caught per hour.
Toxicity of 90 mg volatile transfluthrin
| Proportion of mosquitoes | % [95% CI] | OR [95% CI] | z value | p value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 23/304 | 7.6% [4.8–11.1] | 1 | – | – |
| Treatment | 16/94 | 17% [10–26.2] | 2.64 [1.28–5.44] | 2.64 | 0.008 |
Proportion of death mosquitoes 24 h after the SFS experiment. OR, z value and p value of treatment compared to control estimated by fitting a mixed effect logistic regression.
Figure 6Knock-down and mortality of Anopheles gambiae s.s. mosquitoes after exposure to transfluthrin-impregnated strips of different ages using the closed cylinder method. a Kaplan–Meier survival estimates of An. gambiae s.s. knock-down test during 15 min for strips of different age. Gray areas show the estimated 95% CI. b Assessment of 24-h An. gambiae s.s. mortality caused by the polyester strips of different ages after exposure to the knock-down test. Graph showing mean and 95% CI.
Effect of age on the estimated time for knock down of 50% of the mosquitoes (KD50) and toxicity of transfluthrin-impregnated strips when mosquitoes are exposed in a cylinder assay
| Age of transfluthrin strip | Estimated KD50 (min) [IQR] | 24-h mortality [95% CI] | 24-h mortality | z value | p value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | – | 6.13% [2.9–9.37] | – | – | – |
| 24 h | 2 [1–2] | 91% [86.26–95.14] | 265.8 [180.41–391.65] | 28.23 | <0.001 |
| 1 week | 2 [1–3] | 76.29% [68.17–84.41] | 72.97 [52.48–101.46] | 25.51 | <0.001 |
| 2 weeks | 4 [2–6] | 54.04% [46.33–61.75] | 24.44 [17.88–33.41] | 20.03 | <0.001 |
| 3 weeks | 7 [5–10] | 28.15 [22.57–33.72] | 6.89 [3.64–7.37] | 5.02 | <0.001 |
KD50 in minutes was estimated from Kaplan–Meier survival curve. The 24-h mortality statistical parameters were estimated by fitting a mixed effect logistic regression model.
24-h mortality OR of strips of different age compared to the control strips gets lower the older the strips are. However, 3-week old strips still kill significantly more mosquitoes than control strips.
OR odds ratio, CI confidence intervals.