Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21682875›Full record

ArticleParasites & vectors2011

Evaluation of two methods of estimating larval habitat productivity in western Kenya highlands.

Eliningaya J Kweka, Guofa Zhou, Ming-Chieh Lee, Thomas M Gilbreath, Franklin Mosha, Stephen Munga, Andrew K Githeko, Guiyun Yan

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Parasites & vectors, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Laboratory and semi-field evaluation of the efficacy ofCurrent research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Eliningaya J KwekaCentre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, P O Box 1578, Kisumu 40100, Kenya. pat.kweka@gmail.com
Guofa Zhou
Ming-Chieh Lee
Thomas M Gilbreath
Franklin Mosha
Stephen Munga
Andrew K Githeko
Guiyun Yan

Funding

Ecology of African Highland MalariaR01AI050243 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI YAN, GUIYUN · 2001 to 2018
$8.8M
Research Training in Mosquito Genomics and Bioinformat*D43TW001505 · FIC · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI Guiyun Yan · 2000 to 2026
$6.0M
FIC NIH HHS D43 TW001505FIC NIH HHS D43 TW01505NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI-50243
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMalaria vector intervention and control programs require reliable and accurate information about vector abundance and their seasonal distribution. The availability of reliable information on the spatial and temporal productivity of larval vector habitats can improve targeting of larval control interventions and our understanding of local malaria transmission and epidemics. The main objective of this study was to evaluate two methods of estimating larval habitat productivity in the western Kenyan highlands, the aerial sampler and the emergence trap.

methodsThe study was conducted during the dry and rainy seasons in 2008, 2009 and 2010. Aerial samplers and emergence traps were set up for sixty days in each season in three habitat types: drainage ditches, natural swamps, and abandoned goldmines. Aerial samplers and emergence traps were set up in eleven places in each habitat type. The success of each in estimating habitat productivity was assessed according to method, habitat type, and season. The effect of other factors including algae cover, grass cover, habitat depth and width, and habitat water volume on species productivity was analysed using stepwise logistic regression

resultsHabitat productivity estimates obtained by the two sampling methods differed significantly for all species except for An. implexus. For for An. gambiae s.l. and An. funestus, aerial samplers performed better, 21.5 and 14.6 folds, than emergence trap respectively, while the emergence trap was shown to be more efficient for culicine species. Seasonality had a significant influence on the productivity of all species monitored. Dry season was most productive season. Overall, drainage ditches had significantly higher productivity in all seasons compared to other habitat types. Algae cover, debris, chlorophyll-a, and habitat depth and size had significant influence with respect to species.

conclusionThese findings suggest that the aerial sampler is the better of the two methods for estimating the productivity of An. gambiae s.l. and An. funestus in the western Kenya highlands and possibly other malaria endemic parts of Africa. This method has proven to be a useful tool for monitoring malaria vector populations and for control program design, and provides useful means for determining the most suitable sites for targeted interventions.

Indexed as

EcosystemAnimalsCulicidaeEntomologyFemaleKenyaLarva

Identifiers

PMID21682875
PMCPMC3138440

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.