Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37624854›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2023

Evaluation of "Caserotek" a low cost and effective artificial blood-feeding device for mosquitoes.

Helvio Astete, Verónica Briesemeister, Cesar Campos, Angel Puertas, Thomas W Scott, Víctor López-Sifuentes, Ryan Larson, Michael Fisher, Gissella M Vásquez, Karin Escobedo-Vargas and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

11 authors.

Helvio AsteteU.S. Naval Medical Research Unit No. 6, Peru.
Verónica BriesemeisterDepartment of Entomology, University of California, Davis, United States of America.
Cesar CamposDepartment of Entomology, University of California, Davis, United States of America.
Angel PuertasU.S. Naval Medical Research Unit No. 6, Peru.
Thomas W ScottDepartment of Entomology, University of California, Davis, United States of America.
Víctor López-SifuentesU.S. Naval Medical Research Unit No. 6, Peru.
Ryan LarsonU.S. Naval Medical Research Unit No. 6, Peru.
Michael FisherU.S. Naval Medical Research Unit No. 6, Peru.
Gissella M VásquezU.S. Naval Medical Research Unit No. 6, Peru.
Karin Escobedo-VargasU.S. Naval Medical Research Unit No. 6, Peru.
Amy C MorrisonDepartment of Pathology, Microbiology, and Immunology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-6224-5984

Funding

SARS-CoV-2 genomic variant surveillance in human and non-human primate populations in PeruU01AI151814 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI BARKER, CHRISTOPHER M, COFFEY, LARK L · 2020 to 2024
$8.9M
Surveillance Core (B)P01AI098670 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI SCOTT, THOMAS WALLACE · 2014 to 2018
$7.9M
NIAID NIH HHS P01 AI098670NIAID NIH HHS U01 AI151814
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Entomological research studies on mosquito vector biology, vector competence, insecticide resistance, dispersal, and survival (using mark-release-recapture techniques) often rely on laboratory-reared mosquito colonies to produce large numbers of consistently reared, aged, and sized mosquitoes. We developed a low-cost blood feeding apparatus that supports temperatures consistent with warm blooded animals, using commonly available materials found in low resource environments. We compare our system ("Caserotek") to Hemotek and glass/membrane feeding methods. Two experiments were conducted with Aedes aegypti (Linnaeus 1762) and one with Anopheles darlingi (Root 1926) (Diptera: Culicidae); 3 replicates were conducted for each experiment. Aedes aegypti female mosquitoes were provided chicken blood once per week for 30 min (Experiment #1) for 14 days or 1 hour (Experiment #2) for 21 days. Anopheles darlingi were fed once for 1 hour (Experiment #3). Blood-feeding rates, survival rates, and egg production were calculated across replicates. Caserotek had a significantly higher 30-min engorgement rate (91.1%) than Hemotek (47.7%), and the glass feeder (29.3%) whereas for 1-hour feeding, Hemotek had a significantly lower engorgement rate than either of the other two devices (78% versus 91%). Thirty-day survival was similar among the feeding devices, ranging from 86% to 99%. Mean egg production was highest for the Caserotek feeder (32 eggs per female) compared to the glass feeder and Hemotek device (21-22 eggs per female). Our new artificial feeding system had significantly higher blood feeding rates than for more expensive artificial systems and was equivalent to other fitness parameters. Caserotek only requires the ability to boil water to maintain blood temperatures using a Styrofoam liner. It can be easily scaled up to large production facilities and used under austere conditions.

Indexed as

AedesAnophelesBlood SubstitutesAnimalsBody TemperatureChickensFemaleBlood Substitutes

Identifiers

PMID37624854
PMCPMC10484425

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.