Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36163071›Full record

ArticleParasites & vectors2022

Adapting field-mosquito collection techniques in a perspective of near-infrared spectroscopy implementation.

Bernard Mouonniba Somé, Dari F Da, Ruth McCabe, Nicaise Denis C Djègbè, Lawata Inès Géraldine Paré, Kadidia Wermé, Karine Mouline, Thierry Lefèvre, Anicet Georges Ouédraogo, Thomas S Churcher and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Parasites & vectors, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

11 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Bernard Mouonniba Somé *Institut de Recherche en Sciences de La Santé, Direction Régionale, 399 avenue de la liberté, 01 BP 545, Bobo-Dioulasso 01, Burkina Faso. bernardsilome40@gmail.com.
Dari F Da *Institut de Recherche en Sciences de La Santé, Direction Régionale, 399 avenue de la liberté, 01 BP 545, Bobo-Dioulasso 01, Burkina Faso. dafrenick@yahoo.fr.
Ruth McCabeMRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, London, W2 1PG, UK.
Nicaise Denis C DjègbèInstitut de Recherche en Sciences de La Santé, Direction Régionale, 399 avenue de la liberté, 01 BP 545, Bobo-Dioulasso 01, Burkina Faso.
Lawata Inès Géraldine ParéInstitut de Recherche en Sciences de La Santé, Direction Régionale, 399 avenue de la liberté, 01 BP 545, Bobo-Dioulasso 01, Burkina Faso.
Kadidia WerméInstitut de Recherche en Sciences de La Santé, Direction Régionale, 399 avenue de la liberté, 01 BP 545, Bobo-Dioulasso 01, Burkina Faso.
Karine MoulineMaladies Infectieuses et Vecteurs: Ecologie, Génétique, Evolution et Contrôle (MIVEGEC), IRD, CNRS, Montpellier University, Montpellier, France.
Thierry LefèvreMaladies Infectieuses et Vecteurs: Ecologie, Génétique, Evolution et Contrôle (MIVEGEC), IRD, CNRS, Montpellier University, Montpellier, France.
Anicet Georges OuédraogoUniversité Nazi Boni, Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso.
Thomas S ChurcherMRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, London, W2 1PG, UK.
Roch Kounbobr DabiréInstitut de Recherche en Sciences de La Santé, Direction Régionale, 399 avenue de la liberté, 01 BP 545, Bobo-Dioulasso 01, Burkina Faso.
Institut de Recherche en Sciences de la Santé · BFHealth Protection Research Unit in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections at University of Liverpool · GBImperial College London · GBInstitut de Recherche pour le Développement · FRNazi Boni University · BFUniversité de Montpellier · FR

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/P01111X/1Medical Research Council MR/R015600/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNear-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) has the potential to be a useful tool for assessing key entomological parameters of malaria-transmitting mosquitoes, including age, infectious status and species identity. However, before NIRS can be reliably used in the field at scale, methods for killing mosquitoes and conserving samples prior to NIRS scanning need to be further optimized. Historically, mosquitoes used in studies have been killed with chloroform, although this approach is not without health hazards and should not be used in human dwellings. For the application of NIRS scanning it is also unclear which mosquito preservation method to use. The aim of the study reported here was to investigate the use of pyrethrum spray, a commercially available insecticide spray in Burkina Faso, for killing mosquitoes

methodsLaboratory-reared Anopheles gambiae and Anopheles coluzzii were killed using either a pyrethrum insecticide spray routinely used in studies involving indoor mosquito collections (Kaltox Paalga®; Saphyto, Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso) or chloroform ("gold standard"). Preservative methods were also investigated to determine their impact on NIRS accuracy in predicting the species of laboratory-reared Anopheles and wild-caught mosquito species. After analysis of fresh samples, mosquitoes were stored in 80% ethanol or in silica gel for 2 weeks and re-analyzed by NIRS. In addition, experimentally infected An. coluzzii and wild-caught An. gambiae sensu lato (s.l.) were scanned as fresh samples to determine whether they contained sporozoites, then stored in the preservatives mentioned above for 2 weeks before being re-analyzed.

resultsThe difference in the accuracy of NIRS to differentiate between laboratory-reared An. gambiae mosquitoes and An. coluzzii mosquitoes killed with either insecticide (90%) or chloroform (92%) was not substantial. NIRS had an accuracy of 90% in determining mosquito species for mosquitoes killed with chloroform and preserved in ethanol or silica gel. The accuracy was the same when the pyrethrum spray was used to kill mosquitoes followed by preservation in silica gel, but was lower when ethanol was used as a preservative (80%). Regarding infection status, NIRS was able to differentiate between infected and uninfected mosquitoes, with a slightly lower accuracy for both laboratory and wild-caught mosquitoes preserved in silica gel or ethanol.

conclusionsThe results show that NIRS can be used to classify An. gambiae s.l. species killed by pyrethrum spray with no loss of accuracy. This insecticide may have practical advantages over chloroform for the killing of mosquitoes in NIRS analysis.

Indexed as

AnophelesInsecticidesPyrethrinsAnimalsChloroformEthanolHumansInsecticide ResistanceMosquito VectorsSilica GelSpectroscopy, Near-InfraredChloroformEthanolInsecticidesPyrethrinsSilica GelAnophelesChloroformNear-infrared spectroscopyPlasmodium falciparumPyrethrum spray

Identifiers

PMID36163071
PMCPMC9513905
OpenAlexW4297217939

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.