Comparative Evaluation of Methods Used for Sampling Malaria Vectors in the Kilombero Valley, South Eastern Tanzania

Fredros O. Okumu, M. Kotas, J. Kihonda, E. Mathenge, G. Killeen, S. Moore
{"title":"Comparative Evaluation of Methods Used for Sampling Malaria Vectors in the Kilombero Valley, South Eastern Tanzania","authors":"Fredros O. Okumu, M. Kotas, J. Kihonda, E. Mathenge, G. Killeen, S. Moore","doi":"10.2174/1874315300801010051","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To monitor malaria transmission, effective sampling methods for host seeking vectors are necessary. The suit- ability of these methods can be determined by field measurements of their trapping efficiencies. We compared the effi- ciencies of the Human Landing Catch (HLC), the Centers for Disease Control light trap (CDC-LT) placed next to occu- pied bednets and the Mbita trap for sampling Anopheles gambiae s.l and Anopheles funestus. The sampling methods were rotated through three houses, each with a human bait, for 8 cycles in a 3 x 3 Latin-square design. Relative to the HLC, the efficiency (and 95% c. i) of the CDC-LT for sampling An. gambiae s.l. was 0.331 (0.237 - 0.460) while that for Mbita trap was 0.031 (0.013 - 0.077). For An. funestus however, the sampling efficiencies were 0.818 (0.611 - 1.096) and 0.022 (0.003-0.165) respectively. We conclude that both the CDC-LT placed next to an occupied bednet and the Mbita trap are less efficient than HLC, the latter being evidently unsuitable for use in the Kilombero Valley.","PeriodicalId":88762,"journal":{"name":"The open tropical medicine journal","volume":"1 1","pages":"51-55"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"42","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The open tropical medicine journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/1874315300801010051","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 42

Abstract

To monitor malaria transmission, effective sampling methods for host seeking vectors are necessary. The suit- ability of these methods can be determined by field measurements of their trapping efficiencies. We compared the effi- ciencies of the Human Landing Catch (HLC), the Centers for Disease Control light trap (CDC-LT) placed next to occu- pied bednets and the Mbita trap for sampling Anopheles gambiae s.l and Anopheles funestus. The sampling methods were rotated through three houses, each with a human bait, for 8 cycles in a 3 x 3 Latin-square design. Relative to the HLC, the efficiency (and 95% c. i) of the CDC-LT for sampling An. gambiae s.l. was 0.331 (0.237 - 0.460) while that for Mbita trap was 0.031 (0.013 - 0.077). For An. funestus however, the sampling efficiencies were 0.818 (0.611 - 1.096) and 0.022 (0.003-0.165) respectively. We conclude that both the CDC-LT placed next to an occupied bednet and the Mbita trap are less efficient than HLC, the latter being evidently unsuitable for use in the Kilombero Valley.
坦桑尼亚东南部Kilombero山谷疟疾病媒取样方法的比较评价
为了监测疟疾传播,需要有效的宿主寻找媒介抽样方法。这些方法的适用性可以通过实地测量它们的捕获效率来确定。我们比较了人类着陆捕蚊器(HLC)、美国疾病控制与预防中心的灯诱蚊器(CDC-LT)和取样冈比亚按蚊和funestus按蚊的Mbita诱蚊器的效率。采样方法在三个房屋中轮换,每个房屋都有一个人饵,在3 × 3拉丁方形设计中进行8个周期。相对于hplc, CDC-LT取样An的效率(和95% c. i)。gambiae s.l.为0.331 (0.237 ~ 0.460),Mbita陷阱为0.031(0.013 ~ 0.077)。对于一个。鼠的采样效率分别为0.818(0.611 ~ 1.096)和0.022(0.003 ~ 0.165)。我们得出结论,将CDC-LT放置在被占用的蚊帐旁边和Mbita陷阱的效率都低于HLC,后者显然不适合在Kilombero山谷使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信