| Literature DB >> 29261766 |
Bryson Alberto Ndenga1, Francis Maluki Mutuku2, Harun Njenga Ngugi3,4, Joel Omari Mbakaya1, Peter Aswani1, Peter Siema Musunzaji5, John Vulule6, Dunstan Mukoko7, Uriel Kitron8, Angelle Desiree LaBeaud9.
Abstract
Aedes aegypti is the main vector for yellow fever, dengue, chikungunya and Zika viruses. Recent outbreaks of dengue and chikungunya have been reported in Kenya. Presence and abundance of this vector is associated with the risk for the occurrence and transmission of these diseases. This study aimed to characterize the presence and abundance of Ae. aegypti adult mosquitoes from rural and urban sites in western and coastal regions of Kenya. Presence and abundance of Ae. aegypti adult mosquitoes were determined indoors and outdoors in two western (urban Kisumu and rural Chulaimbo) and two coastal (urban Ukunda and rural Msambweni) sites in Kenya. Sampling was performed using quarterly human landing catches, monthly Prokopack automated aspirators and monthly Biogents-sentinel traps. A total of 2,229 adult Ae. aegypti mosquitoes were collected: 785 (35.2%) by human landing catches, 459 (20.6%) by Prokopack aspiration and 985 (44.2%) by Biogents-sentinel traps. About three times as many Ae. aegypti mosquitoes were collected in urban than rural sites (1,650 versus 579). Comparable numbers were collected in western (1,196) and coastal (1,033) sites. Over 80% were collected outdoors through human landing catches and Prokopack aspiration. The probability of collecting Ae. aegypti mosquitoes by human landing catches was significantly higher in the afternoon than morning hours (P<0.001), outdoors than indoors (P<0.001) and in urban than rural sites (P = 0.008). Significantly more Ae. aegypti mosquitoes were collected using Prokopack aspiration outdoors than indoors (P<0.001) and in urban than rural areas (P<0.001). Significantly more mosquitoes were collected using Biogents-sentinel traps in urban than rural areas (P = 0.008) and in western than coastal sites (P = 0.006). The probability of exposure to Ae. aegypti bites was highest in urban areas, outdoors and in the afternoon hours. These characteristics have major implications for the possible transmission of arboviral diseases and for the planning of surveillance and control programs.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29261766 PMCID: PMC5736227 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0189971
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Study site map.
A map showing the four study areas: Kisumu, Chulaimbo, Ukunda and Msambweni.
Fig 2Mean numbers + 95% confidence interval (CI) of Aedes aegypti mosquitoes collected hourly by human landing catches.
Parameters associated with the abundance of Aedes aegypti mosquitoes collected by human landing catches, Prokopack aspirators and Bio-Gents sentinel traps.
| Method | Parameter | Occasions (N) | Mean (95% CI) | Odds Ratio (95% CI) | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Afternoon | 290 | 1.8 (1.4–2.2) | 3.0 (1.7–5.4) | <0.001 | |
| Morning | 430 | 0.6 (0.5–0.8) | 1.0 | ||
| Outdoors | 360 | 1.6 (1.3–2.0) | 2.7 (1.8–4.2) | <0.001 | |
| Indoors | 360 | 0.5 (0.3–0.8) | 1.0 | ||
| Urban | 360 | 1.6 (1.3–2.0) | 2.9 (1.3–6.3) | 0.008 | |
| Rural | 360 | 0.6 (0.3–0.8) | 1.0 | ||
| Coastal | 360 | 1.5 (1.1–1.9) | 2.0 (0.9–4.4) | 0.087 | |
| Western | 360 | 0.7 (0.5–0.9) | 1.0 | ||
| Outdoors | 100 | 4.1 (3.1–5.1) | 8.0 (5.7–11.3) | <0.001 | |
| Indoors | 100 | 0.5 (0.3–0.7) | 1.0 | ||
| Urban | 100 | 3.5 (2.5–4.5) | 3.4 (2.5–4.8) | <0.001 | |
| Rural | 100 | 1.1 (0.7–1.6) | 1.0 | ||
| 200 | 107.9 (94.6–121.1) | 1.0 (1.0–1.0) | 0.121 | ||
| Urban | 28 | 25.5 (15.7–35.3) | 1.8 (1.2–2.9) | 0.008 | |
| Rural | 28 | 9.7 (6.8–12.6) | 1.0 | ||
| Coastal | 28 | 10.4 (7.1–13.8) | 0.5 (0.3–0.8) | 0.006 | |
| Western | 28 | 24.8 (15.0–34.5) | 1.0 | ||
| 56 | 119.1 (89.8–148.3) | 1.0 (1.0–1.0) | 0.046 |
Fig 3Mean numbers + 95% CI of Aedes aegypti mosquitoes collected by Prokopack aspirators.
Fig 4Mean numbers + 95% CI of Aedes aegypti mosquitoes collected by Bio-Gents sentinel trap.