ArticleJournal of medical entomology2024
Comparative assessment of a novel fan box trap for collecting Anopheles farauti and culicine mosquitoes alive in tropical north Queensland, Australia.
Article in Journal of medical entomology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Estimating the dispersal of the malaria vector Anopheles farauti through a natural ecosystem in north Queensland, Australia using mark release and recapture experiments.Journal of medical entomology · 2026Article
- The toolbox for mosquito vector research.Parasites & vectors · 2025Review
- Review
- Comparative assessment of a novel fan box trap for collecting Anopheles farauti and culicine mosquitoes alive in tropical north Queensland, Australia.Journal of medical entomology · 2024Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
During preliminary mosquito surveys at Cowley Beach Training Area in north Queensland, Australia, it was found that the utility of the standard encephalitis virus surveillance (EVS) trap for collecting the malaria vector Anopheles farauti (Laveran) adults was compromised by the harsh tropical conditions. With the aim of increasing the survival rate of mosquitoes, we designed a downdraft fan box trap (FBT) that incorporated a screened fan at the bottom of the trap, so mosquitoes did not have to pass through a fan. The FBT was tested against the EVS and Centers for Disease Control (CDC) light traps, where mosquitoes do pass through a fan, and a nonpowered passive box trap (PBT). We conducted 4 trials to compare the quantity and survival of An. farauti and culicine mosquitoes were collected in these traps. Although not significant, the FBT collected more An. farauti than the EVS trap and PBT and significantly less An. farauti than the CDC light trap. However, the FBT improved on the CDC light trap in terms of the survival of An. farauti adults collected, with a significantly higher percentage alive in the FBT (74.6%) than in the CDC light trap (27.5%). Thus, although the FBT did not collect as many anophelines as the CDC, it proved to be superior to current trap systems for collecting large numbers of live and relatively undamaged mosquitoes. Therefore, it is recommended that FBTs be used for collecting An. farauti adults in northern Australia, especially when high survival and sample quality are important.
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.