Instituto Leônidas e Maria Deane/ILMD/FIOCRUZ, Laboratório de Ecologia de Doenças Transmissíveis na Amazônia, 476 Rua Teresina, Adrianópolis, Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil.
Programa de Pós-graduação Stricto sensu em Biologia Parasitária do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz (IOC/Fiocruz), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2019 Apr 1;13(4):e0007234. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0007234. eCollection 2019 Apr.
Standard human landing catches (sHLCs) have historically been a key component of Onchocerca volvulus transmission monitoring, but expose health-workers to potentially hazardous vector bites. Novel human-bait-free trapping methods have been developed, but do not always work where they are needed and may not generate O. volvulus surveillance data that is directly comparable with historic data.
Simuliid sHLCs and mineral-oil protected HLCs (mopHLCs) were performed in a rural village of Amazonas state, Brazil. A four-hour direct comparisons of sHLCs and mopHLCs was carried-out using six vector collectors, each of whom used one leg for a sHLC and one for a mopHLC. Two-person collection teams then exclusively performed either mopHLCs or sHLCs for a further set of 12 four-hour collections. Following the completion of all collections, simuliid-bite mark estimates were made from legs used exclusively in sHLCs and legs used exclusively in mopHLCs.
All of the 1669 captured simuliids were identified as the O. volvulus vector Simulium oyapockense. Overall, mopHLC simuliids captured per hour (S/H) rates were lower than those obtained with sHLC trapping (15.5 S/H versus 20 S/H). Direct comparisons of simuliid capture rates found that vector-collectors captured simuliids significantly more efficiently ([Formula: see text]: 20.5 S/H) with mopHLC trapping than with sHLC trapping ([Formula: see text]: 16.4 S/H): P-value = 0.002. MopHLCs performed in isolation were, however, observed to capture vectors less efficiently ([Formula: see text]: 13.4 S/H) than sHLCs performed under similar conditions ([Formula: see text]: 19.98 S/H). All six vector collectors had significantly higher simuliid capture per counted bite mark (SC/CBM) rates using mopHLCs than they were observe to have using sHLCs ([Formula: see text]: 21 SC/CBM versus [Formula: see text]: 1 SC/CBM; p-value = 0.03125).
Vector collectors captured significantly more simuliids per counted bite mark with mopHLCs than with sHLCs. Further investigations into the utility of mopHLCs for onchocerciasis xenomonitoring and beyond are merited.
标准的人体着陆捕获（sHLC）一直是旋盘丝虫传播监测的一个关键组成部分，但使卫生工作者面临潜在的危险媒介叮咬。已经开发出新型的无人体诱饵捕捉方法，但在需要的地方并不总是有效，并且可能无法生成与历史数据直接可比的旋盘丝虫监测数据。
在巴西亚马逊州的一个农村村庄进行了模拟 sHLC 和矿物油保护的 HLC（mopHLC）。使用六名向量收集器进行了长达四个小时的 sHLC 和 mopHLC 的直接比较，每个收集器使用一条腿进行 sHLC，另一条腿进行 mopHLC。然后，两个人的收集小组专门进行 mopHLC 或 sHLC 的另外 12 个四小时的采集。在完成所有采集后，根据仅在 sHLC 中使用的腿和仅在 mopHLC 中使用的腿，对模拟叮咬标记进行了估计。
所有 1669 只捕获的模拟均被鉴定为旋盘丝虫的媒介 Simulium oyapockense。总体而言，mopHLC 每小时捕获的模拟量（S/H）率低于 sHLC 捕获的模拟量（15.5 S/H 对 20 S/H）。对模拟捕获率的直接比较发现，与 sHLC 捕获相比，向量收集器使用 mopHLC 捕获模拟的效率更高（[公式：见正文]：20.5 S/H）：P 值= 0.002。然而，单独进行的 mopHLC 被观察到的效率低于类似条件下进行的 sHLC（[公式：见正文]：13.4 S/H）：P 值= 0.001。所有六名向量收集器使用 mopHLC 的模拟每计数叮咬标记（SC/CBM）率都明显高于使用 sHLC 观察到的模拟每计数叮咬标记（[公式：见正文]：21 SC/CBM 对 [公式：见正文]：1 SC/CBM；p 值= 0.03125）。
向量收集器使用 mopHLC 捕获的模拟计数标记每计数标记（SC/CBM）率明显高于 sHLC。值得进一步研究 mopHLC 在旋盘丝虫异监测中的应用及其它方面的应用。
