Suppr超能文献

在肯尼亚西部水稻灌溉区,用于采集阿拉伯按蚊、嗜人按蚊和库蚊种类的姆比塔诱捕器、疾控中心灯光诱捕器和人饵诱捕法的比较性能

Comparative performance of the Mbita trap, CDC light trap and the human landing catch in the sampling of Anopheles arabiensis, An. funestus and culicine species in a rice irrigation in western Kenya.

作者信息

Mathenge Evan M, Misiani Gedion O, Oulo David O, Irungu Lucy W, Ndegwa Paul N, Smith Tom A, Killeen Gerry F, Knols Bart G J

机构信息

International centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology, Mbita Point Research and Training Centre, Mbita Point, Kenya.

出版信息

Malar J. 2005 Jan 25;4:7. doi: 10.1186/1475-2875-4-7.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Mosquitoes sampling is an important component in malaria control. However, most of the methods used have several shortcomings and hence there is a need to develop and calibrate new methods. The Mbita trap for capturing host-seeking mosquitoes was recently developed and successfully tested in Kenya. However, the Mbita trap is less effective at catching outdoor-biting Anopheles funestus and Anopheles arabiensis in Madagascar and, thus, there is need to further evaluate this trap in diverse epidemiological settings. This study reports a field evaluation of the Mbita trap in a rice irrigation scheme in Kenya

METHODS

The mosquito sampling efficiency of the Mbita trap was compared to that of the CDC light trap and the human landing catch in western Kenya. Data was analysed by Bayesian regression of linear and non-linear models.

RESULTS

The Mbita trap caught about 17%, 60%, and 20% of the number of An. arabiensis, An. funestus, and culicine species caught in the human landing collections respectively. There was consistency in sampling proportionality between the Mbita trap and the human landing catch for both An. arabiensis and the culicine species. For An. funestus, the Mbita trap portrayed some density-dependent sampling efficiency that suggested lowered sampling efficiency of human landing catch at low densities. The CDC light trap caught about 60%, 120%, and 552% of the number of An. arabiensis, An. funestus, and culicine species caught in the human landing collections respectively. There was consistency in the sampling proportionality between the CDC light trap and the human landing catch for both An. arabiensis and An. funestus, whereas for the culicines, there was no simple relationship between the two methods.

CONCLUSIONS

The Mbita trap is less sensitive than either the human landing catch or the CDC light trap. However, for a given investment of time and money, it is likely to catch more mosquitoes over a longer (and hence more representative) period. This trap can therefore be recommended for use by community members for passive mosquito surveillance. Nonetheless, there is still a need to develop new sampling methods for some epidemiological settings. The human landing catch should be maintained as the standard reference method for use in calibrating new methods for sampling the human biting population of mosquitoes.

摘要

背景

蚊虫采样是疟疾防控的重要组成部分。然而,大多数现用方法存在若干缺点,因此有必要开发和校准新方法。用于捕获宿主寻找型蚊虫的姆比塔诱捕器最近已研发出来并在肯尼亚成功进行了测试。然而,姆比塔诱捕器在马达加斯加捕获室外叮咬的恶性疟蚊和阿拉伯按蚊的效果较差,因此,有必要在不同的流行病学环境中进一步评估该诱捕器。本研究报告了在肯尼亚一个水稻灌溉区对姆比塔诱捕器进行的现场评估。

方法

在肯尼亚西部,将姆比塔诱捕器的蚊虫采样效率与疾控中心灯光诱捕器及人饵诱捕法进行了比较。通过线性和非线性模型的贝叶斯回归对数据进行了分析。

结果

姆比塔诱捕器捕获的阿拉伯按蚊数量约为人饵诱捕法捕获数量的17%,捕获的恶性疟蚊数量约为人饵诱捕法捕获数量的60%,捕获的库蚊种类数量约为人饵诱捕法捕获数量的20%。对于阿拉伯按蚊和库蚊种类,姆比塔诱捕器与人饵诱捕法在采样比例上具有一致性。对于恶性疟蚊,姆比塔诱捕器呈现出一定的密度依赖性采样效率,这表明在低密度时人饵诱捕法的采样效率较低。疾控中心灯光诱捕器捕获的阿拉伯按蚊数量约为人饵诱捕法捕获数量的60%,捕获的恶性疟蚊数量约为人饵诱捕法捕获数量的120%,捕获的库蚊种类数量约为人饵诱捕法捕获数量的552%。对于阿拉伯按蚊和恶性疟蚊,疾控中心灯光诱捕器与人饵诱捕法在采样比例上具有一致性,而对于库蚊,两种方法之间没有简单的关系。

结论

姆比塔诱捕器不如人饵诱捕法或疾控中心灯光诱捕器灵敏。然而,在投入相同的时间和资金的情况下,它可能在更长(因而更具代表性)的时间段内捕获更多蚊虫。因此,可推荐社区成员使用这种诱捕器进行被动蚊虫监测。尽管如此,对于某些流行病学环境,仍有必要开发新的采样方法。人饵诱捕法应继续作为校准新的蚊虫人咬采样方法的标准参考方法。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/df9b/548676/467291966711/1475-2875-4-7-1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验