Impact of different mosquito collection methods on indicators of Anopheles malaria vectors in Uganda
Abstract Background Methods used to sample mosquitoes are important to consider when estimating entomologic metrics. Human landing catches (HLCs) are considered the gold standard for collecting malaria vectors. However, HLCs are labour intensive, can expose collectors to transmission risk, and are d...
Published in: | Malaria Journal |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
Language: | English |
Published: |
BMC
2022
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-022-04413-1 https://doaj.org/article/8dfcd41034014739babf5f3176024077 |
id |
ftdoajarticles:oai:doaj.org/article:8dfcd41034014739babf5f3176024077 |
---|---|
record_format |
openpolar |
spelling |
ftdoajarticles:oai:doaj.org/article:8dfcd41034014739babf5f3176024077 2023-05-15T15:16:02+02:00 Impact of different mosquito collection methods on indicators of Anopheles malaria vectors in Uganda Henry Ddumba Mawejje Jackson R. Asiimwe Patrick Kyagamba Moses R. Kamya Philip J. Rosenthal Jo Lines Grant Dorsey Sarah G. Staedke 2022-12-01T00:00:00Z https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-022-04413-1 https://doaj.org/article/8dfcd41034014739babf5f3176024077 EN eng BMC https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-022-04413-1 https://doaj.org/toc/1475-2875 doi:10.1186/s12936-022-04413-1 1475-2875 https://doaj.org/article/8dfcd41034014739babf5f3176024077 Malaria Journal, Vol 21, Iss 1, Pp 1-12 (2022) Anopheles Human landing catches CDC light trap Prokopack aspirators Pit trap Arctic medicine. Tropical medicine RC955-962 Infectious and parasitic diseases RC109-216 article 2022 ftdoajarticles https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-022-04413-1 2022-12-30T19:28:17Z Abstract Background Methods used to sample mosquitoes are important to consider when estimating entomologic metrics. Human landing catches (HLCs) are considered the gold standard for collecting malaria vectors. However, HLCs are labour intensive, can expose collectors to transmission risk, and are difficult to implement at scale. This study compared alternative methods to HLCs for collecting Anopheles mosquitoes in eastern Uganda. Methods Between June and November 2021, mosquitoes were collected from randomly selected households in three parishes in Tororo and Busia districts. Mosquitoes were collected indoors and outdoors using HLCs in 16 households every 4 weeks. Additional collections were done indoors with prokopack aspirators, and outdoors with pit traps, in these 16 households every 2 weeks. CDC light trap collections were done indoors in 80 households every 4 weeks. Female Anopheles mosquitoes were identified morphologically and Anopheles gambiae sensu lato were speciated using PCR. Plasmodium falciparum sporozoite testing was done with ELISA. Results Overall, 4,891 female Anopheles were collected, including 3,318 indoors and 1,573 outdoors. Compared to indoor HLCs, vector density (mosquitoes per unit collection) was lower using CDC light traps (4.24 vs 2.96, density ratio [DR] 0.70, 95% CIs 0.63–0.77, p < 0.001) and prokopacks (4.24 vs 1.82, DR 0.43, 95% CIs 0.37–0.49, p < 0.001). Sporozoite rates were similar between indoor methods, although precision was limited. Compared to outdoor HLCs, vector density was higher using pit trap collections (3.53 vs 6.43, DR 1.82, 95% CIs 1.61–2.05, p < 0.001), while the sporozoite rate was lower (0.018 vs 0.004, rate ratio [RR] 0.23, 95% CIs 0.07–0.75, p = 0.008). Prokopacks collected a higher proportion of Anopheles funestus (75.0%) than indoor HLCs (25.8%), while pit traps collected a higher proportion of Anopheles arabiensis (84.3%) than outdoor HLCs (36.9%). Conclusion In this setting, the density and species of mosquitoes collected with alternative ... Article in Journal/Newspaper Arctic Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles Arctic Malaria Journal 21 1 |
institution |
Open Polar |
collection |
Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles |
op_collection_id |
ftdoajarticles |
language |
English |
topic |
Anopheles Human landing catches CDC light trap Prokopack aspirators Pit trap Arctic medicine. Tropical medicine RC955-962 Infectious and parasitic diseases RC109-216 |
spellingShingle |
Anopheles Human landing catches CDC light trap Prokopack aspirators Pit trap Arctic medicine. Tropical medicine RC955-962 Infectious and parasitic diseases RC109-216 Henry Ddumba Mawejje Jackson R. Asiimwe Patrick Kyagamba Moses R. Kamya Philip J. Rosenthal Jo Lines Grant Dorsey Sarah G. Staedke Impact of different mosquito collection methods on indicators of Anopheles malaria vectors in Uganda |
topic_facet |
Anopheles Human landing catches CDC light trap Prokopack aspirators Pit trap Arctic medicine. Tropical medicine RC955-962 Infectious and parasitic diseases RC109-216 |
description |
Abstract Background Methods used to sample mosquitoes are important to consider when estimating entomologic metrics. Human landing catches (HLCs) are considered the gold standard for collecting malaria vectors. However, HLCs are labour intensive, can expose collectors to transmission risk, and are difficult to implement at scale. This study compared alternative methods to HLCs for collecting Anopheles mosquitoes in eastern Uganda. Methods Between June and November 2021, mosquitoes were collected from randomly selected households in three parishes in Tororo and Busia districts. Mosquitoes were collected indoors and outdoors using HLCs in 16 households every 4 weeks. Additional collections were done indoors with prokopack aspirators, and outdoors with pit traps, in these 16 households every 2 weeks. CDC light trap collections were done indoors in 80 households every 4 weeks. Female Anopheles mosquitoes were identified morphologically and Anopheles gambiae sensu lato were speciated using PCR. Plasmodium falciparum sporozoite testing was done with ELISA. Results Overall, 4,891 female Anopheles were collected, including 3,318 indoors and 1,573 outdoors. Compared to indoor HLCs, vector density (mosquitoes per unit collection) was lower using CDC light traps (4.24 vs 2.96, density ratio [DR] 0.70, 95% CIs 0.63–0.77, p < 0.001) and prokopacks (4.24 vs 1.82, DR 0.43, 95% CIs 0.37–0.49, p < 0.001). Sporozoite rates were similar between indoor methods, although precision was limited. Compared to outdoor HLCs, vector density was higher using pit trap collections (3.53 vs 6.43, DR 1.82, 95% CIs 1.61–2.05, p < 0.001), while the sporozoite rate was lower (0.018 vs 0.004, rate ratio [RR] 0.23, 95% CIs 0.07–0.75, p = 0.008). Prokopacks collected a higher proportion of Anopheles funestus (75.0%) than indoor HLCs (25.8%), while pit traps collected a higher proportion of Anopheles arabiensis (84.3%) than outdoor HLCs (36.9%). Conclusion In this setting, the density and species of mosquitoes collected with alternative ... |
format |
Article in Journal/Newspaper |
author |
Henry Ddumba Mawejje Jackson R. Asiimwe Patrick Kyagamba Moses R. Kamya Philip J. Rosenthal Jo Lines Grant Dorsey Sarah G. Staedke |
author_facet |
Henry Ddumba Mawejje Jackson R. Asiimwe Patrick Kyagamba Moses R. Kamya Philip J. Rosenthal Jo Lines Grant Dorsey Sarah G. Staedke |
author_sort |
Henry Ddumba Mawejje |
title |
Impact of different mosquito collection methods on indicators of Anopheles malaria vectors in Uganda |
title_short |
Impact of different mosquito collection methods on indicators of Anopheles malaria vectors in Uganda |
title_full |
Impact of different mosquito collection methods on indicators of Anopheles malaria vectors in Uganda |
title_fullStr |
Impact of different mosquito collection methods on indicators of Anopheles malaria vectors in Uganda |
title_full_unstemmed |
Impact of different mosquito collection methods on indicators of Anopheles malaria vectors in Uganda |
title_sort |
impact of different mosquito collection methods on indicators of anopheles malaria vectors in uganda |
publisher |
BMC |
publishDate |
2022 |
url |
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-022-04413-1 https://doaj.org/article/8dfcd41034014739babf5f3176024077 |
geographic |
Arctic |
geographic_facet |
Arctic |
genre |
Arctic |
genre_facet |
Arctic |
op_source |
Malaria Journal, Vol 21, Iss 1, Pp 1-12 (2022) |
op_relation |
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-022-04413-1 https://doaj.org/toc/1475-2875 doi:10.1186/s12936-022-04413-1 1475-2875 https://doaj.org/article/8dfcd41034014739babf5f3176024077 |
op_doi |
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-022-04413-1 |
container_title |
Malaria Journal |
container_volume |
21 |
container_issue |
1 |
_version_ |
1766346352417046528 |