Henry Ddumba Mawejje1,2, Maxwell Kilama3, Simon P Kigozi3, Alex K Musiime3, Moses Kamya3,4, Jo Lines5, Steven W Lindsay6, David Smith7, Grant Dorsey8, Martin J Donnelly9, Sarah G Staedke5. 1. Infectious Diseases Research Collaboration, Kampala, Uganda. mawejjehenry@yahoo.com. 2. London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK. mawejjehenry@yahoo.com. 3. Infectious Diseases Research Collaboration, Kampala, Uganda. 4. Department of Medicine, Makerere University College of Health Sciences, Kampala, Uganda. 5. London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK. 6. Department of Biosciences, Durham University, Durham, UK. 7. Department of Health Metrics Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. 8. Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, USA. 9. Department of Vector Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place Liverpool, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS) are the malaria control interventions primarily responsible for reductions in transmission intensity across sub-Saharan Africa. These interventions, however, may have differential impact on Anopheles species composition and density. This study examined the changing pattern of Anopheles species in three areas of Uganda with markedly different transmission intensities and different levels of vector control. METHODS: From October 2011 to June 2016 mosquitoes were collected monthly using CDC light traps from 100 randomly selected households in three areas: Walukuba (low transmission), Kihihi (moderate transmission) and Nagongera (high transmission). LLINs were distributed in November 2013 in Walukuba and Nagongera and in June 2014 in Kihihi. IRS was implemented only in Nagongera, with three rounds of bendiocarb delivered between December 2014 and June 2015. Mosquito species were identified morphologically and by PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction). RESULTS: In Walukuba, LLIN distribution was associated with a decline in Anopheles funestus vector density (0.07 vs 0.02 mosquitoes per house per night, density ratio [DR] 0.34, 95% CI: 0.18-0.65, p = 0.001), but not Anopheles gambiae sensu stricto (s.s.) nor Anopheles arabiensis. In Kihihi, over 98% of mosquitoes were An. gambiae s.s. and LLIN distribution was associated with a decline in An. gambiae s.s. vector density (4.00 vs 2.46, DR 0.68, 95% CI: 0.49-0.94, p = 0.02). In Nagongera, the combination of LLINs and multiple rounds of IRS was associated with almost complete elimination of An. gambiae s.s. (28.0 vs 0.17, DR 0.004, 95% CI: 0.002-0.009, p < 0.001), and An. funestus sensu lato (s.l.) (3.90 vs 0.006, DR 0.001, 95% CI: 0.0005-0.004, p < 0.001), with a less pronounced decline in An. arabiensis (9.18 vs 2.00, DR 0.15 95% CI: 0.07-0.33, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: LLIN distribution was associated with reductions in An. funestus s.l. in the lowest transmission site and An. gambiae s.s. in the moderate transmission site. In the highest transmission site, a combination of LLINs and multiple rounds of IRS was associated with the near collapse of An. gambiae s.s. and An. funestus s.l. Following IRS, An. arabiensis, a behaviourally resilient vector, became the predominant species, which may have implications for malaria vector control activities. Development of interventions targeted at outdoor biting remains a priority.
BACKGROUND: Long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS) are the malaria control interventions primarily responsible for reductions in transmission intensity across sub-Saharan Africa. These interventions, however, may have differential impact on Anopheles species composition and density. This study examined the changing pattern of Anopheles species in three areas of Uganda with markedly different transmission intensities and different levels of vector control. METHODS: From October 2011 to June 2016 mosquitoes were collected monthly using CDC light traps from 100 randomly selected households in three areas: Walukuba (low transmission), Kihihi (moderate transmission) and Nagongera (high transmission). LLINs were distributed in November 2013 in Walukuba and Nagongera and in June 2014 in Kihihi. IRS was implemented only in Nagongera, with three rounds of bendiocarb delivered between December 2014 and June 2015. Mosquito species were identified morphologically and by PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction). RESULTS: In Walukuba, LLIN distribution was associated with a decline in Anopheles funestus vector density (0.07 vs 0.02 mosquitoes per house per night, density ratio [DR] 0.34, 95% CI: 0.18-0.65, p = 0.001), but not Anopheles gambiae sensu stricto (s.s.) nor Anopheles arabiensis. In Kihihi, over 98% of mosquitoes were An. gambiae s.s. and LLIN distribution was associated with a decline in An. gambiae s.s. vector density (4.00 vs 2.46, DR 0.68, 95% CI: 0.49-0.94, p = 0.02). In Nagongera, the combination of LLINs and multiple rounds of IRS was associated with almost complete elimination of An. gambiae s.s. (28.0 vs 0.17, DR 0.004, 95% CI: 0.002-0.009, p < 0.001), and An. funestus sensu lato (s.l.) (3.90 vs 0.006, DR 0.001, 95% CI: 0.0005-0.004, p < 0.001), with a less pronounced decline in An. arabiensis (9.18 vs 2.00, DR 0.15 95% CI: 0.07-0.33, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: LLIN distribution was associated with reductions in An. funestus s.l. in the lowest transmission site and An. gambiae s.s. in the moderate transmission site. In the highest transmission site, a combination of LLINs and multiple rounds of IRS was associated with the near collapse of An. gambiae s.s. and An. funestus s.l. Following IRS, An. arabiensis, a behaviourally resilient vector, became the predominant species, which may have implications for malaria vector control activities. Development of interventions targeted at outdoor biting remains a priority.
Entities:
Keywords:
Anopheles density; Interventions; Malaria control; Seasonality; Species composition
Authors: Maureen Coetzee; Richard H Hunt; Richard Wilkerson; Alessandra Della Torre; Mamadou B Coulibaly; Nora J Besansky Journal: Zootaxa Date: 2013 Impact factor: 1.091
Authors: Robert S McCann; Eric Ochomo; M Nabie Bayoh; John M Vulule; Mary J Hamel; John E Gimnig; William A Hawley; Edward D Walker Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2014-01-27 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: Agaba Katureebe; Kate Zinszer; Emmanuel Arinaitwe; John Rek; Elijah Kakande; Katia Charland; Ruth Kigozi; Maxwell Kilama; Joaniter Nankabirwa; Adoke Yeka; Henry Mawejje; Arthur Mpimbaza; Henry Katamba; Martin J Donnelly; Philip J Rosenthal; Chris Drakeley; Steve W Lindsay; Sarah G Staedke; David L Smith; Bryan Greenhouse; Moses R Kamya; Grant Dorsey Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2016-11-08 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Emmanuel W Kaindoa; Nancy S Matowo; Halfan S Ngowo; Gustav Mkandawile; Arnold Mmbando; Marcelina Finda; Fredros O Okumu Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-05-18 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: John P Masalu; Marceline Finda; Gerry F Killeen; Halfan S Ngowo; Polius G Pinda; Fredros O Okumu Journal: Malar J Date: 2020-03-10 Impact factor: 2.979
Authors: Akua Obeng Forson; Isaac A Hinne; Shittu B Dhikrullahi; Isaac Kwame Sraku; Abdul Rahim Mohammed; Simon K Attah; Yaw Asare Afrane Journal: Parasit Vectors Date: 2022-07-08 Impact factor: 4.047
Authors: Dónall Eoin Cross; Amy J E Healey; Niall J McKeown; Christopher James Thomas; Nicolae Adrian Macarie; Vincent Siaziyu; Douglas Singini; Francis Liywalii; Jacob Sakala; Andrew Silumesii; Paul W Shaw Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-01-07 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Ross M Boyce; Enid Muhindo; Emmanuel Baguma; Rabbison Muhindo; Bwambale Shem; Ruthly François; Sam Hawke; Bonnie E Shook-Sa; Moses Ntaro; Aisha Nalusaji; Dan Nyehangane; Raquel Reyes; Jonathan J Juliano; Mark J Siedner; Sarah G Staedke; Edgar M Mulogo Journal: Malar J Date: 2022-02-23 Impact factor: 2.979
Authors: Margaux L Sadoine; Audrey Smargiassi; Ying Liu; Philippe Gachon; Guillaume Dueymes; Grant Dorsey; Michel Fournier; Joaniter I Nankabirwa; John Rek; Kate Zinszer Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-07-07 Impact factor: 4.996