| Literature DB >> 29703229 |
Lassané Percoma1, Adama Sow2,3,4, Soumaïla Pagabeleguem2,5, Ahmadou H Dicko6, Oumarou Serdebéogo2, Mariam Ouédraogo7, Jean-Baptiste Rayaissé3, Jérémy Bouyer5,8, Adrien M G Belem9, Issa Sidibé2,3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tsetse flies are the sole vectors of human and animal trypanosomosis. In Burkina Faso, a project aiming to create zones free of tsetse flies and trypanosomosis was executed from June 2006 to December 2013. After the determination of tsetse distribution in the intervention area from December 2007 to November 2008, the control campaign was launched in November 2009 and ended in December 2013. The goal was to eliminate tsetse flies from 40,000 km2 of area, through an integrated control campaign including insecticide targets, traps and cattle, sequential aerial treatment (SAT) and the mass treatment of livestock using trypanocides. The campaign involved assistance of the beneficiary communities at all the steps of the control strategy with insecticide impregnated targets.Entities:
Keywords: Burkina Faso; Control; Eliminate; Glossina; Target; Trypanosomosis; Tsetse fly
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29703229 PMCID: PMC5923030 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-017-2609-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Fig. 1PATTEC intervention area in Burkina Faso
Fig. 2Insecticide targets density along the Mouhoun River and its main tributaries
Fig. 3Location of the sequential aerial spraying between Ghana and Burkina Faso
Surface of treated zones by ground spraying
| Treated zone | Length of river (km) | Swath width (m) | Total length treated (km) | Surface treated (ha) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Right bank | Left bank | |||||
| Barrier | Mare aux hippopotames | 2 | 2 | 50 | 4 | 20 |
| Zangoma | 1 | 5 | 50 | 6 | 30 | |
| Tsetse fly persistance zones | Lery-Kouri | 10 | 10 | 50 | 20 | 10 |
| Dedougou | 8 | 8 | 50 | 16 | 80 | |
| Darsalam | 4 | 4 | 50 | 8 | 40 | |
| Tansila | 7.5 | 7.5 | 50 | 15 | 75 | |
| Lery-Bouni | 14 | 14 | 50 | 28 | 140 | |
| Siou river and its tributaries | 40.63 | 40.43 | 50 | 81.06 | 405.3 | |
Fig. 4Distribution of trypanocide and mass epicutaneous treatment of cattle in the study area
Trypanocide and mass epicutaneous treatments in the control area
| Year | No. of departments | No. of producers | Number of animals ( | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Curative treatments | Preventive treatments | Epicutaneous treatment | Total | |||
| 2010 | 60 | 19,728 | 512,668 | 375,296 | 238,738 | 1,126,702 |
| 2011 | 59 | 10,799 | 380,088 | 208,799 | 60,064 | 648,951 |
Fig. 5Location of sentinel traps
Fig. 6Dynamics of tsetse apparent densities in the target area by river section. Tsetse densities during the fighting against tsetse fly in impregnated target area in different periods, the data are presented by species and river section. Boxplots present the median (bold line), quartiles (boxes), 95% confidence intervals (horizontal lines) and erratic values (circles)
Fixed-effect coefficients for the AICc-best Linear mixed-effects model of the dynamics of tsetse apparent densities
| Parameters | Value | SE | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Intercept) | 2.554 | 0.200 | 12.821 | < 0.0001 |
| Time | -0.602 | 0.053 | -11.445 | < 0.0001 |
| Species | 0.791 | 0.260 | 3.037 | 0.002 |
| Section LAB | 0.020 | 0.132 | 0.148 | 0.882 |
| Section RDB | -0.476 | 0.136 | -3.498 | 0.001 |
| Section LDB | -0.216 | 0.126 | -1.710 | 0.087 |
| Time: species | -0.212 | 0.074 | -2.846 | 0.004 |
aDegrees of freedom = 3895
Glossina tachinoides were used as references for analysis
Abbreviations: Gpg Glossina palpalis gambiensis, LAB left ascendant branch, RDB right descendant branch, LDB left descendant branch, RAB right ascendant branch, SE standard error
Results from comparisons of tseste ADT before and at the end of the project (one-tailed Wilcoxon signed rank test with continuity correction)
| V-statistic (sum of positive ranks) | Test type | |
|---|---|---|
| 8701 | < 0.0001 | Global |
| 3176 | < 0.0001 |
|
| 8220 | < 0.0001 |
|
Fig. 7Tsetse distribution before (a) and at the end of the project (b)
Fig. 8Dynamics of tsetse flies apparent densities per trap per day (ADT) before and after ground spraying
Impact of aerial spraying on tsetse density
| Control | Period | No. of traps | Male | Female | Total | Reduction rate (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before spraying | 16/03/10 | 52 | 1.68 ± 2.7 | 2.70 ± 3.6 | 4.38 ± 6.0 | 0.00 |
| After 1st cycle | 06/04/10 | 26 | 0.77 ± 1.2 | 1.31 ± 1.4 | 2.08 ± 2.5 | 52.63 |
| After spraying | 25/12/10 | 69 | 0.03 ± 0.1 | 0.01 ± 0.1 | 0.04 ± 0.2 | 99.01 |
| 10/12/11 | 76 | 0.14 ± 0.3 | 0.11 ± 0.3 | 0.25 ± 0.5 | 94.20 | |
| 10/05/13 | 62 | 0.09 ± 0.3 | 0.08 ± 0.3 | 0.16 ± 0.6 | 96.32 |
Fig. 9Dynamics of tsetse apparent densities per trap per day (ADT) before and after aerial spraying
Fig. 10Prevalence of trypanosomosis in the sentinel herds during the survey
Fixed-effect coefficients for the AICc-best linear mixed-effects model of the trypanosomosis prevalence
| Parameters | Value | SE | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Intercept) | -13.800 | 2.288 | -6.030 | < 0.0001 |
| Time | 0.001 | 0.0001 | 4.344 | < 0.0001 |
| Loc Bendougou | 0.668 | 0.635 | 1.053 | 0.292 |
| Loc Boromissi | 0.409 | 0.636 | 0.643 | 0.520 |
| Loc Debé | 0.388 | 0.638 | 0.608 | 0.543 |
| Loc Dokuy | 0.043 | 0.676 | 0.064 | 0.949 |
| Loc Fini | 0.921 | 0.662 | 1.390 | 0.164 |
| Loc Kengotenga | 0.483 | 0.638 | 0.757 | 0.449 |
| Loc Laro | 1.370 | 0.613 | 2.235 | 0.025 |
| Loc Mou | 1.174 | 0.616 | 1.908 | 0.056 |
| Loc Nokuy | 0.183 | 0.645 | 0.284 | 0.776 |
| Loc Saint Michel | 1.910 | 0.619 | 3.085 | 0.002 |
| Loc Sokoura | 0.289 | 0.650 | 0.444 | 0.657 |
| Loc Zamo | 0.508 | 0.643 | 0.789 | 0.430 |
| Status calve | -1.812 | 0.7622 | -2.377 | 0.017 |
Abbreviations: Loc locality, SE standard error