Cargando…

Comparative evaluation of four mosquitoes sampling methods in rice irrigation schemes of lower Moshi, northern Tanzania

BACKGROUND: Adult malaria vector sampling is the most important parameter for setting up an intervention and understanding disease dynamics in malaria endemic areas. The intervention will ideally be species-specific according to sampling output. It was the objective of this study to evaluate four sa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kweka, Eliningaya J, Mahande, Aneth M
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2712478/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19580663
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-8-149
_version_ 1782169494266839040
author Kweka, Eliningaya J
Mahande, Aneth M
author_facet Kweka, Eliningaya J
Mahande, Aneth M
author_sort Kweka, Eliningaya J
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Adult malaria vector sampling is the most important parameter for setting up an intervention and understanding disease dynamics in malaria endemic areas. The intervention will ideally be species-specific according to sampling output. It was the objective of this study to evaluate four sampling techniques, namely human landing catch, pit shelter, indoor resting collection and odour-baited entry trap. METHODOLOGY: These four sampling methods were evaluated simultaneously for thirty days during October 2008, a season of low mosquitoes density and malaria transmission. These trapping methods were performed in one village for maximizing homogeneity in mosquito density. The cattle and man used in odour-baited entry trap were rotated between the chambers to avoid bias. RESULTS: A total of 3,074 mosquitoes were collected. Among these 1,780 (57.9%) were Anopheles arabiensis and 1,294 (42.1%) were Culex quinquefasciatus. Each trap sampled different number of mosquitoes, Indoor resting collection collected 335 (10.9%), Odour-baited entry trap-cow 1,404 (45.7%), Odour-baited entry trap-human 378 (12.3%), Pit shelter 562 (18.3%) and HLC 395 (12.8%). General linear model univariate analysis method was used, position of the trapping method had no effect on mosquito density catch (DF = 4, F = 35.596, P = 0.78). Days variation had no effect on the collected density too (DF = 29, F = 4.789, P = 0.09). The sampling techniques had significant impact on the caught mosquito densities (DF = 4, F = 34.636, P < 0.0001). The Wilcoxon pair-wise comparison between mosquitoes collected in human landing catch and pit shelter was significant (Z = -3.849, P < 0.0001), human landing catch versus Indoor resting collection was not significant (Z = -0.502, P = 0.615), human landing catch versus odour-baited entry trap-man was significant (Z = -2.687, P = 0.007), human landing catch versus odour-baited entry trap-cow was significant (Z = -3.127, P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Odour-baited traps with different baits and pit shelter have shown high productivity in collecting higher densities of mosquitoes than human landing catch. These abilities are the possibilities of replacing the human landing catch practices for sampling malaria vectors in areas with An. arabiensis as malaria vectors. Further evaluations of these sampling methods need to be investigated is other areas with different species.
format Text
id pubmed-2712478
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-27124782009-07-18 Comparative evaluation of four mosquitoes sampling methods in rice irrigation schemes of lower Moshi, northern Tanzania Kweka, Eliningaya J Mahande, Aneth M Malar J Methodology BACKGROUND: Adult malaria vector sampling is the most important parameter for setting up an intervention and understanding disease dynamics in malaria endemic areas. The intervention will ideally be species-specific according to sampling output. It was the objective of this study to evaluate four sampling techniques, namely human landing catch, pit shelter, indoor resting collection and odour-baited entry trap. METHODOLOGY: These four sampling methods were evaluated simultaneously for thirty days during October 2008, a season of low mosquitoes density and malaria transmission. These trapping methods were performed in one village for maximizing homogeneity in mosquito density. The cattle and man used in odour-baited entry trap were rotated between the chambers to avoid bias. RESULTS: A total of 3,074 mosquitoes were collected. Among these 1,780 (57.9%) were Anopheles arabiensis and 1,294 (42.1%) were Culex quinquefasciatus. Each trap sampled different number of mosquitoes, Indoor resting collection collected 335 (10.9%), Odour-baited entry trap-cow 1,404 (45.7%), Odour-baited entry trap-human 378 (12.3%), Pit shelter 562 (18.3%) and HLC 395 (12.8%). General linear model univariate analysis method was used, position of the trapping method had no effect on mosquito density catch (DF = 4, F = 35.596, P = 0.78). Days variation had no effect on the collected density too (DF = 29, F = 4.789, P = 0.09). The sampling techniques had significant impact on the caught mosquito densities (DF = 4, F = 34.636, P < 0.0001). The Wilcoxon pair-wise comparison between mosquitoes collected in human landing catch and pit shelter was significant (Z = -3.849, P < 0.0001), human landing catch versus Indoor resting collection was not significant (Z = -0.502, P = 0.615), human landing catch versus odour-baited entry trap-man was significant (Z = -2.687, P = 0.007), human landing catch versus odour-baited entry trap-cow was significant (Z = -3.127, P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Odour-baited traps with different baits and pit shelter have shown high productivity in collecting higher densities of mosquitoes than human landing catch. These abilities are the possibilities of replacing the human landing catch practices for sampling malaria vectors in areas with An. arabiensis as malaria vectors. Further evaluations of these sampling methods need to be investigated is other areas with different species. BioMed Central 2009-07-06 /pmc/articles/PMC2712478/ /pubmed/19580663 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-8-149 Text en Copyright © 2009 Kweka and Mahande; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Methodology
Kweka, Eliningaya J
Mahande, Aneth M
Comparative evaluation of four mosquitoes sampling methods in rice irrigation schemes of lower Moshi, northern Tanzania
title Comparative evaluation of four mosquitoes sampling methods in rice irrigation schemes of lower Moshi, northern Tanzania
title_full Comparative evaluation of four mosquitoes sampling methods in rice irrigation schemes of lower Moshi, northern Tanzania
title_fullStr Comparative evaluation of four mosquitoes sampling methods in rice irrigation schemes of lower Moshi, northern Tanzania
title_full_unstemmed Comparative evaluation of four mosquitoes sampling methods in rice irrigation schemes of lower Moshi, northern Tanzania
title_short Comparative evaluation of four mosquitoes sampling methods in rice irrigation schemes of lower Moshi, northern Tanzania
title_sort comparative evaluation of four mosquitoes sampling methods in rice irrigation schemes of lower moshi, northern tanzania
topic Methodology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2712478/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19580663
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-8-149
work_keys_str_mv AT kwekaeliningayaj comparativeevaluationoffourmosquitoessamplingmethodsinriceirrigationschemesoflowermoshinortherntanzania
AT mahandeanethm comparativeevaluationoffourmosquitoessamplingmethodsinriceirrigationschemesoflowermoshinortherntanzania