Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36446923›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Natural sugar feeding rates of Anopheles mosquitoes collected by different methods in western Kenya.

Seline Omondi, Jackline Kosgei, Silas Agumba, Brian Polo, Nick Yalla, Vincent Moshi, Bernard Abong'o, Maurice Ombok, Daniel P McDermott, Julian Entwistle and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
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

14 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Seline OmondiEntomology Section, Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, P.O. Box 1578-40100, Kisumu, Kenya.
Jackline KosgeiEntomology Section, Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, P.O. Box 1578-40100, Kisumu, Kenya.
Silas AgumbaEntomology Section, Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, P.O. Box 1578-40100, Kisumu, Kenya.
Brian PoloEntomology Section, Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, P.O. Box 1578-40100, Kisumu, Kenya.
Nick YallaEntomology Section, Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, P.O. Box 1578-40100, Kisumu, Kenya.
Vincent MoshiEntomology Section, Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, P.O. Box 1578-40100, Kisumu, Kenya.
Bernard Abong'oEntomology Section, Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, P.O. Box 1578-40100, Kisumu, Kenya.
Maurice OmbokEntomology Section, Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, P.O. Box 1578-40100, Kisumu, Kenya.
Daniel P McDermottVector Group, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK.
Julian EntwistleConsultant to Innovative Vector Control Consortium, Liverpool, UK.
Aaron M SamuelsCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Kisumu, Kenya.
Feiko O Ter KuileDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK.
John E GimnigDivision of Parasitic Diseases and Malaria, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Eric OchomoEntomology Section, Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, P.O. Box 1578-40100, Kisumu, Kenya. ericochomo@yahoo.com.
Kenya Medical Research Institute · KELiverpool School of Tropical Medicine · GBCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · USDivision of Parasitic Diseases and Malaria · USInnovative Vector Control Consortium · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Attractive targeted sugar baits (ATSBs) are a potential vector control tool that exploits the sugar-feeding behaviour of mosquitoes. We evaluated the sugar-feeding behaviour of Anopheles mosquitoes as part of baseline studies for cluster randomised controlled trials of ATSBs. Mosquitoes were collected indoors and outdoors from two villages in western Kenya using prokopack aspirations, malaise tent traps and ultraviolet (UV) light traps. Individual mosquitoes were subjected to the cold anthrone test to assess the presence of sugar. Overall, 15.7% of collected mosquitoes had fed on natural sugar sources. By species and sex, the proportion sugar-fed was 41.3% and 27.7% in male and female Anopheles funestus, 27.2% and 12.8% in male and female An. arabiensis, and 9.7% and 8.3% in male and female An. coustani, respectively. Sugar-feeding was higher in unfed than blood-fed mosquitoes and higher in male than gravid mosquitoes. Anopheles mosquitoes obtained sugar meals from natural sources during all physiological stages, whether they rest indoors or outdoors. These findings offer a potential avenue to exploit for the control of mosquitoes, particularly with the advent of ATSBs, which have been shown to reduce mosquito densities in other regions.

Indexed as

AnophelesAnimalsFeeding BehaviorFemaleKenyaMaleMosquito VectorsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSugarsSugars

Identifiers

PMID36446923
PMCPMC9709062
OpenAlexW4310595020

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.