Cargando…

Relative performance of indoor vector control interventions in the Ifakara and the West African experimental huts

BACKGROUND: West African and Ifakara experimental huts are used to evaluate indoor mosquito control interventions, including spatial repellents and insecticides. The two hut types differ in size and design, so a side-by-side comparison was performed to investigate the performance of indoor intervent...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Oumbouke, Welbeck A., Fongnikin, Augustin, Soukou, Koffi B., Moore, Sarah J., N’Guessan, Raphael
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5606011/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28927465
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13071-017-2365-4
_version_ 1783265083203256320
author Oumbouke, Welbeck A.
Fongnikin, Augustin
Soukou, Koffi B.
Moore, Sarah J.
N’Guessan, Raphael
author_facet Oumbouke, Welbeck A.
Fongnikin, Augustin
Soukou, Koffi B.
Moore, Sarah J.
N’Guessan, Raphael
author_sort Oumbouke, Welbeck A.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: West African and Ifakara experimental huts are used to evaluate indoor mosquito control interventions, including spatial repellents and insecticides. The two hut types differ in size and design, so a side-by-side comparison was performed to investigate the performance of indoor interventions in the two hut designs using standard entomological outcomes: relative indoor mosquito density (deterrence), exophily (induced exit), blood-feeding and mortality of mosquitoes. METHODS: Metofluthrin mosquito coils (0.00625% and 0.0097%) and Olyset® Net vs control nets (untreated, deliberately holed net) were evaluated against pyrethroid-resistant Culex quinquefasciatus in Benin. Four experimental huts were used: two West African hut designs and two Ifakara hut designs. Treatments were rotated among the huts every four nights until each treatment was tested in each hut 52 times. Volunteers rotated between huts nightly. RESULTS: The Ifakara huts caught a median of 37 Culex quinquefasciatus/ night, while the West African huts captured a median of 8/ night (rate ratio 3.37, 95% CI: 2.30–4.94, P < 0.0001) and this difference in mosquito entry was similar for Olyset® Net and more pronounced for spatial repellents. Exophily was greater in the Ifakara huts with > 4-fold higher mosquito exit relative to the West African huts (odds ratio 4.18, 95% CI: 3.18–5.51, P < 0.0001), regardless of treatment. While blood-feeding rates were significantly higher in the West African huts, mortality appeared significantly lower for all treatments. CONCLUSIONS: The Ifakara hut captured more Cx. quinquefasciatus that could more easily exit into windows and eave traps after failing to blood-feed, compared to the West African hut. The higher mortality rates recorded in the Ifakara huts could be attributable to the greater proportions of Culex mosquitoes exiting and probably dying from starvation, relative to the situation in the West African huts.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5606011
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56060112017-09-20 Relative performance of indoor vector control interventions in the Ifakara and the West African experimental huts Oumbouke, Welbeck A. Fongnikin, Augustin Soukou, Koffi B. Moore, Sarah J. N’Guessan, Raphael Parasit Vectors Research BACKGROUND: West African and Ifakara experimental huts are used to evaluate indoor mosquito control interventions, including spatial repellents and insecticides. The two hut types differ in size and design, so a side-by-side comparison was performed to investigate the performance of indoor interventions in the two hut designs using standard entomological outcomes: relative indoor mosquito density (deterrence), exophily (induced exit), blood-feeding and mortality of mosquitoes. METHODS: Metofluthrin mosquito coils (0.00625% and 0.0097%) and Olyset® Net vs control nets (untreated, deliberately holed net) were evaluated against pyrethroid-resistant Culex quinquefasciatus in Benin. Four experimental huts were used: two West African hut designs and two Ifakara hut designs. Treatments were rotated among the huts every four nights until each treatment was tested in each hut 52 times. Volunteers rotated between huts nightly. RESULTS: The Ifakara huts caught a median of 37 Culex quinquefasciatus/ night, while the West African huts captured a median of 8/ night (rate ratio 3.37, 95% CI: 2.30–4.94, P < 0.0001) and this difference in mosquito entry was similar for Olyset® Net and more pronounced for spatial repellents. Exophily was greater in the Ifakara huts with > 4-fold higher mosquito exit relative to the West African huts (odds ratio 4.18, 95% CI: 3.18–5.51, P < 0.0001), regardless of treatment. While blood-feeding rates were significantly higher in the West African huts, mortality appeared significantly lower for all treatments. CONCLUSIONS: The Ifakara hut captured more Cx. quinquefasciatus that could more easily exit into windows and eave traps after failing to blood-feed, compared to the West African hut. The higher mortality rates recorded in the Ifakara huts could be attributable to the greater proportions of Culex mosquitoes exiting and probably dying from starvation, relative to the situation in the West African huts. BioMed Central 2017-09-19 /pmc/articles/PMC5606011/ /pubmed/28927465 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13071-017-2365-4 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Oumbouke, Welbeck A.
Fongnikin, Augustin
Soukou, Koffi B.
Moore, Sarah J.
N’Guessan, Raphael
Relative performance of indoor vector control interventions in the Ifakara and the West African experimental huts
title Relative performance of indoor vector control interventions in the Ifakara and the West African experimental huts
title_full Relative performance of indoor vector control interventions in the Ifakara and the West African experimental huts
title_fullStr Relative performance of indoor vector control interventions in the Ifakara and the West African experimental huts
title_full_unstemmed Relative performance of indoor vector control interventions in the Ifakara and the West African experimental huts
title_short Relative performance of indoor vector control interventions in the Ifakara and the West African experimental huts
title_sort relative performance of indoor vector control interventions in the ifakara and the west african experimental huts
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5606011/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28927465
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13071-017-2365-4
work_keys_str_mv AT oumboukewelbecka relativeperformanceofindoorvectorcontrolinterventionsintheifakaraandthewestafricanexperimentalhuts
AT fongnikinaugustin relativeperformanceofindoorvectorcontrolinterventionsintheifakaraandthewestafricanexperimentalhuts
AT soukoukoffib relativeperformanceofindoorvectorcontrolinterventionsintheifakaraandthewestafricanexperimentalhuts
AT mooresarahj relativeperformanceofindoorvectorcontrolinterventionsintheifakaraandthewestafricanexperimentalhuts
AT nguessanraphael relativeperformanceofindoorvectorcontrolinterventionsintheifakaraandthewestafricanexperimentalhuts