Cargando…
The Centres for Disease Control light trap (CDC-LT) and the human decoy trap (HDT) compared to the human landing catch (HLC) for measuring Anopheles biting in rural Tanzania
BACKGROUND: Vector mosquito biting intensity is an important measure to understand malaria transmission. Human landing catch (HLC) is an effective but labour-intensive, expensive, and potentially hazardous entomological surveillance tool. The Centres for Disease Control light trap (CDC-LT) and the h...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9188237/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35690745 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-022-04192-9 |
_version_ | 1784725330493177856 |
---|---|
author | Namango, Isaac Haggai Marshall, Carly Saddler, Adam Ross, Amanda Kaftan, David Tenywa, Frank Makungwa, Noely Odufuwa, Olukayode G. Ligema, Godfrey Ngonyani, Hassan Matanila, Isaya Bharmal, Jameel Moore, Jason Moore, Sarah J. Hetzel, Manuel W. |
author_facet | Namango, Isaac Haggai Marshall, Carly Saddler, Adam Ross, Amanda Kaftan, David Tenywa, Frank Makungwa, Noely Odufuwa, Olukayode G. Ligema, Godfrey Ngonyani, Hassan Matanila, Isaya Bharmal, Jameel Moore, Jason Moore, Sarah J. Hetzel, Manuel W. |
author_sort | Namango, Isaac Haggai |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Vector mosquito biting intensity is an important measure to understand malaria transmission. Human landing catch (HLC) is an effective but labour-intensive, expensive, and potentially hazardous entomological surveillance tool. The Centres for Disease Control light trap (CDC-LT) and the human decoy trap (HDT) are exposure-free alternatives. This study compared the CDC-LT and HDT against HLC for measuring Anopheles biting in rural Tanzania and assessed their suitability as HLC proxies. METHODS: Indoor mosquito surveys using HLC and CDC-LT and outdoor surveys using HLC and HDT were conducted in 2017 and in 2019 in Ulanga, Tanzania in 19 villages, with one trap/house/night. Species composition, sporozoite rates and density/trap/night were compared. Aggregating the data by village and month, the Bland–Altman approach was used to assess agreement between trap types. RESULTS: Overall, 66,807 Anopheles funestus and 14,606 Anopheles arabiensis adult females were caught with 6,013 CDC-LT, 339 indoor-HLC, 136 HDT and 195 outdoor-HLC collections. Indoors, CDC-LT caught fewer An. arabiensis (Adjusted rate ratio [Adj.RR] = 0.35, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.27–0.46, p < 0.001) and An. funestus (Adj.RR = 0.63, 95%CI: 0.51–0.79, p < 0.001) than HLC per trap/night. Outdoors, HDT caught fewer An. arabiensis (Adj.RR = 0.04, 95%CI: 0.01–0.14, p < 0.001) and An. funestus (Adj.RR = 0.10, 95%CI: 0.07–0.15, p < 0.001) than HLC. The bias and variability in number of mosquitoes caught by the different traps were dependent on mosquito densities. The relative efficacies of both CDC-LT and HDT in comparison to HLC declined with increased mosquito abundance. The variability in the ratios was substantial for low HLC counts and decreased as mosquito abundance increased. The numbers of sporozoite positive mosquitoes were low for all traps. CONCLUSIONS: CDC-LT can be suitable for comparing mosquito populations between study arms or over time if accuracy in the absolute biting rate, compared to HLC, is not required. CDC-LT is useful for estimating sporozoite rates because large numbers of traps can be deployed to collect adequate mosquito samples. The present design of the HDT is not amenable for use in large-scale entomological surveys. Use of HLC remains important for estimating human exposure to mosquitoes as part of estimating the entomological inoculation rate (EIR). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12936-022-04192-9. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9188237 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-91882372022-06-12 The Centres for Disease Control light trap (CDC-LT) and the human decoy trap (HDT) compared to the human landing catch (HLC) for measuring Anopheles biting in rural Tanzania Namango, Isaac Haggai Marshall, Carly Saddler, Adam Ross, Amanda Kaftan, David Tenywa, Frank Makungwa, Noely Odufuwa, Olukayode G. Ligema, Godfrey Ngonyani, Hassan Matanila, Isaya Bharmal, Jameel Moore, Jason Moore, Sarah J. Hetzel, Manuel W. Malar J Research BACKGROUND: Vector mosquito biting intensity is an important measure to understand malaria transmission. Human landing catch (HLC) is an effective but labour-intensive, expensive, and potentially hazardous entomological surveillance tool. The Centres for Disease Control light trap (CDC-LT) and the human decoy trap (HDT) are exposure-free alternatives. This study compared the CDC-LT and HDT against HLC for measuring Anopheles biting in rural Tanzania and assessed their suitability as HLC proxies. METHODS: Indoor mosquito surveys using HLC and CDC-LT and outdoor surveys using HLC and HDT were conducted in 2017 and in 2019 in Ulanga, Tanzania in 19 villages, with one trap/house/night. Species composition, sporozoite rates and density/trap/night were compared. Aggregating the data by village and month, the Bland–Altman approach was used to assess agreement between trap types. RESULTS: Overall, 66,807 Anopheles funestus and 14,606 Anopheles arabiensis adult females were caught with 6,013 CDC-LT, 339 indoor-HLC, 136 HDT and 195 outdoor-HLC collections. Indoors, CDC-LT caught fewer An. arabiensis (Adjusted rate ratio [Adj.RR] = 0.35, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.27–0.46, p < 0.001) and An. funestus (Adj.RR = 0.63, 95%CI: 0.51–0.79, p < 0.001) than HLC per trap/night. Outdoors, HDT caught fewer An. arabiensis (Adj.RR = 0.04, 95%CI: 0.01–0.14, p < 0.001) and An. funestus (Adj.RR = 0.10, 95%CI: 0.07–0.15, p < 0.001) than HLC. The bias and variability in number of mosquitoes caught by the different traps were dependent on mosquito densities. The relative efficacies of both CDC-LT and HDT in comparison to HLC declined with increased mosquito abundance. The variability in the ratios was substantial for low HLC counts and decreased as mosquito abundance increased. The numbers of sporozoite positive mosquitoes were low for all traps. CONCLUSIONS: CDC-LT can be suitable for comparing mosquito populations between study arms or over time if accuracy in the absolute biting rate, compared to HLC, is not required. CDC-LT is useful for estimating sporozoite rates because large numbers of traps can be deployed to collect adequate mosquito samples. The present design of the HDT is not amenable for use in large-scale entomological surveys. Use of HLC remains important for estimating human exposure to mosquitoes as part of estimating the entomological inoculation rate (EIR). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12936-022-04192-9. BioMed Central 2022-06-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9188237/ /pubmed/35690745 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-022-04192-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Namango, Isaac Haggai Marshall, Carly Saddler, Adam Ross, Amanda Kaftan, David Tenywa, Frank Makungwa, Noely Odufuwa, Olukayode G. Ligema, Godfrey Ngonyani, Hassan Matanila, Isaya Bharmal, Jameel Moore, Jason Moore, Sarah J. Hetzel, Manuel W. The Centres for Disease Control light trap (CDC-LT) and the human decoy trap (HDT) compared to the human landing catch (HLC) for measuring Anopheles biting in rural Tanzania |
title | The Centres for Disease Control light trap (CDC-LT) and the human decoy trap (HDT) compared to the human landing catch (HLC) for measuring Anopheles biting in rural Tanzania |
title_full | The Centres for Disease Control light trap (CDC-LT) and the human decoy trap (HDT) compared to the human landing catch (HLC) for measuring Anopheles biting in rural Tanzania |
title_fullStr | The Centres for Disease Control light trap (CDC-LT) and the human decoy trap (HDT) compared to the human landing catch (HLC) for measuring Anopheles biting in rural Tanzania |
title_full_unstemmed | The Centres for Disease Control light trap (CDC-LT) and the human decoy trap (HDT) compared to the human landing catch (HLC) for measuring Anopheles biting in rural Tanzania |
title_short | The Centres for Disease Control light trap (CDC-LT) and the human decoy trap (HDT) compared to the human landing catch (HLC) for measuring Anopheles biting in rural Tanzania |
title_sort | centres for disease control light trap (cdc-lt) and the human decoy trap (hdt) compared to the human landing catch (hlc) for measuring anopheles biting in rural tanzania |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9188237/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35690745 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-022-04192-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT namangoisaachaggai thecentresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT marshallcarly thecentresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT saddleradam thecentresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT rossamanda thecentresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT kaftandavid thecentresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT tenywafrank thecentresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT makungwanoely thecentresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT odufuwaolukayodeg thecentresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT ligemagodfrey thecentresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT ngonyanihassan thecentresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT matanilaisaya thecentresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT bharmaljameel thecentresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT moorejason thecentresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT mooresarahj thecentresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT hetzelmanuelw thecentresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT namangoisaachaggai centresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT marshallcarly centresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT saddleradam centresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT rossamanda centresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT kaftandavid centresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT tenywafrank centresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT makungwanoely centresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT odufuwaolukayodeg centresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT ligemagodfrey centresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT ngonyanihassan centresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT matanilaisaya centresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT bharmaljameel centresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT moorejason centresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT mooresarahj centresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania AT hetzelmanuelw centresfordiseasecontrollighttrapcdcltandthehumandecoytraphdtcomparedtothehumanlandingcatchhlcformeasuringanophelesbitinginruraltanzania |