ArticleMalaria journal2019
Mosquito electrocuting traps for directly measuring biting rates and host-preferences of Anopheles arabiensis and Anopheles funestus outdoors.
Article in Malaria journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Which trap is best? Alternatives to outdoor human landing catches for malaria vector surveillance: a meta-analysis.Malaria journal · 2022Pooled it
- Nationally representative programmatic surveillance of mosquito and human behaviours that influence human exposure to malaria transmission and the impact of vector control across Tanzania.Malaria journal · 2026Article
- Efficacy ofInsects · 2024Article
- Methods of sampling malaria vectors and their reliability in estimating entomological indices in Africa.Journal of medical entomology · 2024Review
- Rapid assessment of the blood-feeding histories of wild-caught malaria mosquitoes using mid-infrared spectroscopy and machine learning.Malaria journal · 2024Article
- Comparison of different trapping methods to collect malaria vectors indoors and outdoors in western Kenya.Malaria journal · 2024Article
- Updates on traditional methods for combating malaria and emergingFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Review
- Article
- Article
- Effect of non-human hosts on the human biting rate of primary and secondary malaria vectors in Tanzania.Malaria journal · 2023Article
- CDC light traps underestimate the protective efficacy of an indoor spatial repellent against bites from wild Anopheles arabiensis mosquitoes in Tanzania.Malaria journal · 2023Article
- Distance from human dwellings differentially affects the efficacy of a synthetic cattle urine odour lure to trap malaria vectors.Malaria journal · 2023Article
- Seasonal variation in abundance and blood meal sources of primary and secondary malaria vectors within Kilombero Valley, Southern Tanzania.Parasites & vectors · 2022Article
- Comparative evaluation of different versions of exposure-free mosquito electrocuting traps and barrier screen trap for monitoring outdoor densities and biting time phenotypes by malaria and filariasis vectors in Tanzania.Parasites & vectors · 2022Article
- A statistical calibration tool for methods used to sample outdoor-biting mosquitoes.Parasites & vectors · 2022Article
- Using ecological observations to improve malaria control in areas where Anopheles funestus is the dominant vector.Malaria journal · 2022Review
- The ability ofWellcome open research · 2022Article
- Comparison of four outdoor mosquito trapping methods as potential replacements for human landing catches in western Kenya.Parasites & vectors · 2021Article
- Key Characteristics of Residual Malaria Transmission in Two Districts in South-Eastern Tanzania-Implications for Improved Control.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2021Review
- Reduced human-biting preferences of the African malaria vectors Anopheles arabiensis and Anopheles gambiae in an urban context: controlled, competitive host-preference experiments in Tanzania.Malaria journal · 2020Article
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
Abstract
backgroundMosquito biting rates and host preferences are crucial determinants of human exposure to vector-borne diseases and the impact of vector control measures. The human landing catch (HLC) is a gold standard method for measuring human exposure to bites, but presents risks to participants by requiring some exposure to mosquito vectors. Mosquito electrocuting traps (METs) represent an exposure-free alternative to HLCs for measuring human exposure to malaria vectors. However, original MET prototypes were too small for measuring whole-body biting rates on humans or large animals like cattle. Here a much larger MET capable of encompassing humans or cattle was designed, and its performance was evaluated relative to both the original small MET and HLC and for quantifying malaria vector host preferences.
methodsHuman landing catch, small human-baited METs (MET-SH), and large METs baited with either a human (MET-LH) or calves (MET-LC) were simultaneously used to capture wild malaria vectors outdoors in rural southern Tanzania. The four capture methods were compared in a Latin-square design over 20 nights. Malaria vector host preferences were estimated through comparison of the number of mosquitoes caught by large METs baited with either humans or cattle.
resultsThe MET-LH caught more than twice as many Anopheles arabiensis than either the MET-SH or HLC. It also caught higher number of Anopheles funestus sensu lato (s.l.) compared to the MET-SH or HLC. Similar numbers of An. funestus sensu stricto (s.s.) were caught in MET-LH and MET-SH collections. Catches of An. arabiensis with human or cattle-baited large METs were similar, indicating no clear preference for either host. In contrast, An. funestus s.s. exhibited a strong, but incomplete preference for humans.
conclusionsMETs are a sensitive, practical tool for assessing mosquito biting rates and host preferences, and represent a safer alternative to the HLC. Additionally these findings suggest the HLC underestimate whole-body human exposure. MET collections indicated the An. funestus s.s. population in this setting had a higher than expected attack rate on cattle, potentially making eliminating of this species more difficult with human-targetted control measures. Supplementary vector control tools targetted at livestock may be required to effectively tackle this species.
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.