ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2018
Standardising visual control devices for Tsetse: East and Central African Savannah species Glossina swynnertoni, Glossina morsitans centralis and Glossina pallidipes.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A novel vehicle-mounted sticky trap; an effective sampling tool for savannah tsetse flies Glossina morsitans morsitans Westwood and Glossina morsitans centralis Machado.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2021Article
- Antennal Enriched Odorant Binding Proteins Are Required for Odor Communication inBiomolecules · 2021Article
- Tsetse blood-meal sources, endosymbionts and trypanosome-associations in the Maasai Mara National Reserve, a wildlife-human-livestock interface.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study focused on the savannah tsetse species Glossina swynnertoni and G. morsitans centralis, both efficient vectors of human and animal trypanosomiasis in, respectively, East and Central Africa. The aim was to develop long-lasting, practical and cost-effective visually attractive devices that induce the strongest landing responses in these two species for use as insecticide-impregnated tools in population suppression. METHODS AND
findingsTrials were conducted in different seasons and years in Tanzania (G. swynnertoni) and in Angola and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC, G. m. centralis) to measure the performance of traps (pyramidal and epsilon) and targets of different sizes, shapes and colours, with and without chemical baits, at different population densities and under different environmental conditions. Adhesive film was used to catch flies landing on devices at the remote locations to compare tsetse-landing efficiencies. Landing rates by G. m. centralis in both Angola and the DRC were highest on blue-black 1 m2 oblong and 0.5 m2 square and oblong targets but were not significantly different from landings on the pyramidal trap. Landings by G. swynnertoni on 0.5 m2 blue-black oblong targets were likewise not significantly lower than on equivalent 1 m2 square targets. The length of target horizontal edge was closely correlated with landing rate. Blue-black 0.5 m2 targets performed better than equivalents in all-blue for both G. swynnertoni and G. m. centralis, although not consistently. Baiting with chemicals increased the proportion of G. m. centralis entering pyramidal traps.
conclusionsThis study confirms earlier findings on G. swynnertoni that smaller visual targets, down to 0.5 m2, would be as efficient as using 1 m2 targets for population management of this species. This is also the case for G. m. centralis. An insecticide-impregnated pyramidal trap would also constitute an effective control device for G. m. centralis.
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.