ArticlePloS one2017
Semi-field assessment of the BG-Malaria trap for monitoring the African malaria vector, Anopheles arabiensis.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Field comparison of BG-Pro configurations with CDC light traps and evaluation of the BG-Counter 2 trap for automated mosquito surveillance in urban and rural Thailand.Parasites & vectors · 2026Article
- Article
- Methods of sampling malaria vectors and their reliability in estimating entomological indices in Africa.Journal of medical entomology · 2024Review
- Visual and thermal stimuli modulate mosquito-host contact with implications for improving malaria vector control tools.iScience · 2024Article
- The MTego trap: a potential tool for monitoring malaria and arbovirus vectors.Parasites & vectors · 2023Article
- The Shockwè trap: a human-baited exposure-free device for surveillance and behaviour studies of anthropophilic vectors.Wellcome open research · 2023Article
- Unlocking the potential of Tregs: innovations in CAR technology.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2023Review
- A statistical calibration tool for methods used to sample outdoor-biting mosquitoes.Parasites & vectors · 2022Article
- Comparative efficacy of BG-Sentinel 2 and CDC-like mosquito traps for monitoring potential malaria vectors in Europe.Parasites & vectors · 2022Article
- Mosquito Attractants.Journal of chemical ecology · 2021Review
- Evaluating putative repellent 'push' and attractive 'pull' components for manipulating the odour orientation of host-seeking malaria vectors in the peri-domestic space.Parasites & vectors · 2021Article
- The need for new vector control approaches targeting outdoor biting Anopheline malaria vector communities.Parasites & vectors · 2020Review
- An assessment of adult mosquito collection techniques for studying species abundance and diversity in Maferinyah, Guinea.Parasites & vectors · 2020Article
- Evaluation of an ultraviolet LED trap for catching Anopheles and Culex mosquitoes in south-eastern Tanzania.Parasites & vectors · 2019Article
- Article
- Videographic analysis of flight behaviours of host-seeking Anopheles arabiensis towards BG-Malaria trap.PloS one · 2019Article
- Field evaluation of the BG-Malaria trap for monitoring malaria vectors in rural Tanzanian villages.PloS one · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Odour-baited technologies are increasingly considered for effective monitoring of mosquito populations and for the evaluation of vector control interventions. The BG-Malaria trap (BGM), which is an upside-down variant of the widely used BG-Sentinel trap (BGS), has been demonstrated to be effective to sample the Brazilian malaria vector, Anopheles darlingi. We evaluated the BGM as an improved method for sampling the African malaria vectors, Anopheles arabiensis. Experiments were conducted inside a large semi-field cage to compare trapping efficiencies of BGM and BGS traps, both baited with the synthetic attractant, Ifakara blend, supplemented with CO2. We then compared BGMs baited with either of four synthetic mosquito lures, Ifakara blend, Mbita blend, BG-lure or CO2, and an unbaited BGM. Lastly, we compared BGMs baited with the Ifakara blend dispensed via either nylon strips, BG cartridges (attractant-infused microcapsules encased in cylindrical plastic cartridge) or BG sachets (attractant-infused microcapsules encased in plastic sachets). All tests were conducted between 6P.M. and 7A.M., with 200-600 laboratory-reared An. arabiensis released nightly in the test chamber. The median number of An. arabiensis caught by the BGM per night was 83, IQR:(73.5-97.75), demonstrating clear superiority over BGS (median catch = 32.5 (25.25-37.5)). Compared to unbaited controls, BGMs baited with Mbita blend caught most mosquitoes (45 (29.5-70.25)), followed by BGMs baited with CO2 (42.5 (27.5-64)), Ifakara blend (31 (9.25-41.25)) and BG lure (16 (4-22)). BGM caught 51 (29.5-72.25) mosquitoes/night, when the attractants were dispensed using BG-Cartridges, compared to BG-Sachet (29.5 (24.75-40.5)), and nylon strips (27 (19.25-38.25)), in all cases being significantly superior to unbaited controls (p < 000.1). The findings demonstrate potential of the BGM as a sampling tool for African malaria vectors over the standard BGS trap. Its efficacy can be optimized by selecting appropriate odour baits and odour-dispensing systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.