Parasites and Vectors (2013) 6 (91) - Evaluation of alternative ...

Chadwick H. Sikaala, Gerry F. Killeen, Javan Chanda, Dingani Chinula, John M. Miller, Tanya L. Russell and Aklilu Seyoum (2013)
Evaluation of alternative mosquito sampling methods for malaria vectors in Lowland South - East Zambia
Parasites and Vectors 6 (91)
Abstract:
Background
Sampling malaria vectors and measuring their biting density is of paramount importance for entomological surveys of malaria transmission. Human landing catch (HLC) has been traditionally regarded as a gold standard method for surveying human exposure to mosquito bites. However, due to the risk of human participant exposure to mosquito-borne parasites and viruses, a variety of alternative, exposure-free trapping methods were compared in lowland, south-east Zambia.
Methods
Centres for Disease Control and Prevention miniature light trap (CDC-LT), Ifakara Tent Trap model C (ITT-C), resting boxes (RB) and window exit traps (WET) were all compared with HLC using a 3 × 3 Latin Squares design replicated in 4 blocks of 3 houses with long lasting insecticidal nets, half of which were also sprayed with a residual deltamethrin formulation, which was repeated for 10 rounds of 3 nights of rotation each during both the dry and wet seasons.
Results
The mean catches of HLC indoor, HLC outdoor, CDC-LT, ITT-C, WET, RB indoor and RB outdoor, were 1.687, 1.004, 3.267, 0.088, 0.004, 0.000 and 0.008 for Anopheles quadriannulatus Theobald respectively, and 7.287, 6.784, 10.958, 5.875, 0.296, 0.158 and 0.458, for An. funestus Giles, respectively. Indoor CDC-LT was more efficient in sampling An. quadriannulatus and An. funestus than HLC indoor (Relative rate [95% Confidence Interval] = 1.873 [1.653, 2.122] and 1.532 [1.441, 1.628], respectively, P < 0.001 for both). ITT-C was the only other alternative which had comparable sensitivity (RR = 0.821 [0.765, 0.881], P < 0.001), relative to HLC indoor other than CDC-LT for sampling An. funestus.
Conclusions
While the two most sensitive exposure-free techniques primarily capture host-seeking mosquitoes, both have substantial disadvantages for routine community-based surveillance applications: the CDC-LT requires regular recharging of batteries while the bulkiness of ITT-C makes it difficult to move between sampling locations. RB placed indoors or outdoors and WET had consistently poor sensitivity so it may be useful to evaluate additional alternative methods, such as pyrethrum spray catches and back packer aspirators, for catching resting mosquitoes.
(The abstract is excluded from the Creative Commons licence and has been copied with permission by the publisher.)
Full text of article
Database assignments for author(s): Tanya L. Russell

Research topic(s) for pests/diseases/weeds:
surveys/sampling/distribution

---

Pest and/or beneficial records:

Beneficial	Pest/Disease/Weed	Crop/Product	Country	Quarant.
	Anopheles gambiae		Zambia
	Anopheles arabiensis		Zambia
	Anopheles quadriannulatus		Zambia
	Anopheles funestus		Zambia
	Anopheles coustani		Zambia
	Anopheles vaneedeni		Zambia
	Anopheles pretoriensis		Zambia
	Anopheles rivulorum		Zambia
	Anopheles squamosus		Zambia
	Anopheles parensis		Zambia
	Anopheles rufipes		Zambia