ArticleParasites & vectors2020
A standardised method of marking male mosquitoes with fluorescent dust.
Article in Parasites & vectors, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring marking methods for the predatory hoverfly Sphaerophoria rueppellii (Diptera: Syrphidae).Insect science · 2026Article
- Effects of chilling, fluorescent dust marking, and X-ray irradiation on the quality of male Anopheles arabiensis for sterile insect technique applications.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Spatial Dynamics and Sterilization Range of IncompatibleTropical medicine and infectious disease · 2026Article
- Dispersal and survival of gamma-irradiatedOpen veterinary journal · 2025Article
- Comparison of the standard and boosted sterile insect techniques for the suppression of Aedes albopictus populations under semi-field conditions.Parasite (Paris, France) · 2025Article
- Rhodamine-B for the mark, release, and recapture experiments in gamma-irradiated maleVeterinary world · 2024Article
- Article
- Effectiveness of a New Self-Marking Technique inInsects · 2022Article
- Quality Control Methods forInsects · 2022Article
- A Mark-Release-Recapture Study to Estimate Field Performance of Imported Radio-Sterilized MaleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
- Sterile Insect Technique: Successful Suppression of anInsects · 2021Article
- Estimates of the population size and dispersal range of Anopheles arabiensis in Northern KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa: implications for a planned pilot programme to release sterile male mosquitoes.Parasites & vectors · 2021Article
- Review
- Sterile Insect Technique (SIT) againstInsects · 2021Review
- Differentiation of Multiple Fluorescent Powders, Powder Transfer, and Effect on Mating inInsects · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrior to a major release campaign of sterile insects, including the sterile insect technique, male mosquitoes must be marked and released (small scale) to determine key parameters including wild population abundance, dispersal and survival. Marking insects has been routinely carried out for over 100 years; however, there is no gold standard regarding the marking of specific disease-transmitting mosquitoes including Anopheles arabiensis, Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus. The research presented offers a novel dusting technique and optimal dust colour and quantities, suitable for small-scale releases, such as mark-release-recapture studies.
methodsWe sought to establish a suitable dust colour and quantity for batches of 100 male An. arabiensis, that was visible both by eye and under UV light, long-lasting and did not negatively impact longevity. A set of lower dust weights were selected to conduct longevity experiments with both Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus to underpin the optimal dust weight. A further study assessed the potential of marked male An. arabiensis to transfer their mark to undusted males and females.
resultsThe longevity of male An. arabiensis marked with various dust colours was not significantly reduced when compared to unmarked controls. Furthermore, the chosen dust quantity (5 mg) did not negatively impact longevity (P = 0.717) and provided a long-lasting mark. Dust transfer was found to occur from marked An. arabiensis males to unmarked males and females when left in close proximity. However, this was only noticeable when examining individuals under a stereomicroscope and thus deemed negligible. Overall, male Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus displayed a greater sensitivity to dusting. Only the lowest dust weight (0.5 mg) did not significantly reduce longevity (P = 0.888) in Ae. aegypti, whilst the lowest two dust weights (0.5 and 0.75 mg) had no significant impact on longevity (P = 0.951 and 0.166, respectively) in Ae. albopictus.
conclusionWe have devised a fast, inexpensive and simple marking method and provided recommended dust quantities for several major species of disease-causing mosquitoes. The novel technique provides an evenly distributed, long-lasting mark which is non-detrimental. Our results will be useful for future MRR studies, prior to a major release campaign.
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.