Eck Institute for Global Health, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana, 46556, USA.
Department of Parasitology, Faculty of Medicine, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, 90245, Indonesia.
Parasit Vectors. 2020 Jun 29;13(1):329. doi: 10.1186/s13071-020-04205-z.
Indonesia has high mosquito diversity, with circulating malaria and arboviruses. Human landing catches (HLC) are ethically questionable where arboviral transmission occurs. The host decoy trap (HDT) is an exposure-free alternative outdoor sampling device. To determine HDT efficacy for local culicids, and to characterize local mosquito fauna, the trapping efficacy of the HDT was compared to that of HLCs in one peri-urban (Lakkang) and one rural (Pucak) village in Sulawesi, Indonesia.
In Lakkang the outdoor HLCs collected significantly more Anopheles per night (n = 22 ± 9) than the HDT (n = 3 ± 1), while the HDT collected a significantly greater nightly average of Culex mosquitoes (n = 110 ± 42), than the outdoor HLC (n = 15.1 ± 6.0). In Pucak, there was no significant difference in Anopheles collected between trap types; however, the HDT collected significantly more Culex mosquitoes than the outdoor HLC nightly average (n = 53 ± 11 vs 14 ± 3). Significantly higher proportions of blood-fed mosquitoes were found in outdoor HLC (n = 15 ± 2%) compared to HDT (n = 2 ± 0%). More blood-fed culicines were collected with outdoor HLC compared to the HDT, while Anopheles blood-fed proportions did not differ. For the HDT, 52.6%, 36.8% and 10.5% of identified blood meals were on cow, human, and dog, respectively. Identified blood meals for outdoor HLCs were 91.9% human, 6.3% cow, and 0.9% each dog and cat. Mosquitoes from Pucak were tested for arboviruses, with one Culex pool and one Armigeres pool positive for flavivirus, and one Anopheles pool positive for alphavirus.
The HDT collected the highest abundance of culicine specimens. Outdoor HLCs collected the highest abundance of Anopheles specimens. Although the HDT can attract a range of different Asian mosquito genera and species, it remains to be optimized for Anopheles in Asia. The high proportion of human blood meals in mosquitoes collected by outdoor HLCs raises concerns on the potential exposure risk to collectors using this methodology and highlights the importance of continuing to optimize a host-mimic trap such as the HDT.
印度尼西亚拥有丰富的蚊子多样性,存在疟疾和虫媒病毒的传播。在虫媒病毒传播的情况下,人体诱捕(HLC)在伦理上存在争议。宿主诱捕器(HDT)是一种无接触的户外采样设备。为了确定 HDT 对当地库蚊的有效性,并描述当地蚊子的区系,在印度尼西亚苏拉威西的一个城郊(Lakkang)和一个农村(Pucak)村庄,对 HDT 的诱捕效果与 HLC 进行了比较。
在 Lakkang,夜间户外 HLC 采集的按蚊数量明显多于 HDT(n=22±9),而 HDT 夜间采集的库蚊数量明显多于户外 HLC(n=110±42),n=15.1±6.0。在 Pucak,两种诱捕器收集的按蚊数量没有显著差异;然而,HDT 夜间采集的库蚊数量明显多于户外 HLC 的平均数量(n=53±11 与 14±3)。户外 HLC 采集的血食蚊子比例明显高于 HDT(n=15±2%)。与 HDT 相比,户外 HLC 采集的吸血库蚊比例更高,而按蚊血食比例没有差异。对于 HDT,鉴定的血食中 52.6%、36.8%和 10.5%分别来自牛、人、狗。户外 HLC 鉴定的血食中 91.9%为人,6.3%为牛,0.9%为狗和猫。从 Pucak 采集的蚊子检测到虫媒病毒,1 个库蚊池和 1 个伊蚊池对黄病毒呈阳性,1 个按蚊池对甲病毒呈阳性。
HDT 采集的库蚊标本数量最多。户外 HLC 采集的按蚊标本数量最多。尽管 HDT 可以吸引亚洲不同的蚊子属和种,但仍需针对亚洲的按蚊进行优化。户外 HLC 采集的蚊子中人类血液食物的比例很高,这引起了人们对使用这种方法的采集者潜在暴露风险的关注,并强调了继续优化宿主模拟诱捕器(如 HDT)的重要性。