RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Campaigns for the continued reduction and eventual elimination of malaria may benefit from new and innovative vector control tools. One novel approach being considered uses a push-pull strategy, whereby spatial repellents are used in combination with outdoor baited traps. The desired effect is the behavioural manipulation of mosquito populations to elicit movement of vectors away from people and into traps. METHODS: Here, a prototype push-pull intervention was evaluated using an experimental hut methodology to test proof-of-principle for the strategy against two natural vector populations, Anopheles albimanus and Anopheles vestitipennis, in Belize, Central America. A Latin square study design was used to compare mosquito entry into experimental huts and outdoor traps across four different experimental conditions: 1) control, with no interventions; 2) pull, utilizing only outdoor traps; 3) push, utilizing only an indoor spatial repellent; and 4) push-pull, utilizing both interventions simultaneously. RESULTS: For An. vestitipennis, the combined use of an indoor repellent and outdoor baited traps reduced average nightly mosquito hut entry by 39% (95% CI: [0.37-0.41]) as compared to control and simultaneously increased the nightly average densities of An. vestitipennis captured in outdoor baited traps by 48% (95% CI: [0.22-0.74]), compared to when no repellent was used. Against An. albimanus, the combined push-pull treatment similarly reduced hut entry, by 54% (95% CI: [0.40-0.68]) as compared to control; however, the presence of a repellent indoors did not affect overall outdoor trap catch densities for this species. Against both anopheline species, the combined intervention did not further reduce mosquito hut entry compared to the use of repellent alone. CONCLUSIONS: The prototype intervention evaluated here clearly demonstrated that push-pull strategies have potential to reduce human-vector interactions inside homes by reducing mosquito entry, and highlighted the possibility for the strategy to simultaneously decrease human-vector interactions outside of homes by increasing baited trap collections. However, the variation in effect on different vectors demonstrates the need to characterize the underlying behavioral ecology of target mosquitoes in order to drive local optimization of the intervention.
Assuntos
Anopheles , Repelentes de Insetos , Insetos Vetores , Malária/prevenção & controle , Controle de Mosquitos/métodos , Animais , Belize , Feminino , Humanos , Malária/transmissãoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Campaigns for the continued reduction and eventual elimination of malaria may benefit from new and innovative vector control tools. One novel approach being considered uses a push-pull strategy, whereby spatial repellents are used in combination with outdoor baited traps. The desired effect is the behavioural manipulation of mosquito populations to elicit movement of vectors away from people and into traps. METHODS: Here, a prototype push-pull intervention was evaluated using an experimental hut methodology to test proof-of-principle for the strategy against two natural vector populations, Anopheles albimanus and Anopheles vestitipennis in Belize, Central America. A Latin square study design was used to compare mosquito entry into experimental huts and outdoor traps across four different experimental conditions: 1) control, with no interventions; 2) pull, utilizing only outdoor traps; 3) push, utilizing only an indoor spatial repellent; and 4) push-pull, utilizing both interventions simultaneously. RESULTS: For An. vestitipennis, the combined use of an indoor repellent and outdoor baited traps reduced average nightly mosquito hut entry by 39% (95% CI: [0.37 0.41]) as compared to control and simultaneously increased the nightly average densities of An. vestitipennis captured in outdoor baited traps by 48% (95% CI: [0.22 0.74]), compared to when no repellent was used. Against An. albimanus, the combined push-pull treatment similarly reduced hut entry, by 54% (95% CI: [0.40 0.68]) as compared to control; however, the presence of a repellent indoors did not affect overall outdoor trap catch densities for this species. Against both anopheline species, the combined intervention did not further reduce mosquito hut entry compared to the use of repellent alone. CONCLUSIONS: The prototype intervention evaluated here clearly demonstrated that push-pull strategies have potential to reduce human-vector interactions inside homes by reducing mosquito entry, and highlighted the possibility for the strategy to simultaneously decrease human-vector interactions outside of homes by increasing baited trap collections. However, the variation in effect on different vectors demonstrates the need to characterize the underlying behavioral ecology of target mosquitoes in order to drive local optimization of the intervention (AU)
Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Experimentação Animal/estatística & dados numéricos , Malária/prevenção & controle , Controle de Mosquitos/métodos , Controle de Vetores de Doenças , Belize/epidemiologiaRESUMO
To achieve maximum success from any vector control intervention, it is critical to identify the most efficacious tools available. The principal aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of 2 commercially available adult mosquito traps for capturing Anopheles albimanus and An. vestitipennis, 2 important malaria vectors in northern Belize, Central America. Additionally, the impact of outdoor baited traps on mosquito entry into experimental huts was assessed. When operated outside of human-occupied experimental huts, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) miniature light trap, baited with human foot odors, captured significantly greater numbers of female An. albimanus per night (5.1 ± 1.9) than the Biogents Sentinel™ trap baited with BG-Lure™ (1.0 ± 0.2). The 2 trap types captured equivalent numbers of female An. vestitipennis per night, 134.3 ± 45.6 in the CDC trap and 129.6 ± 25.4 in the Sentinel trap. When compared to a matched control hut using no intervention, the use of baited CDC light traps outside an experimental hut did not impact the entry of An. vestitipennis into window interception traps, 17.1 ± 1.3 females per hour in experimental huts vs. 17.2 ± 1.4 females per hour in control huts. However, the use of outdoor baited CDC traps did significantly decrease the entry of An. albimanus into window interception traps from 3.5 ± 0.5 females per hour to 1.9 ± 0.2 females per hour. These results support existing knowledge that the underlying ecological and behavioral tendencies of different Anopheles species can influence trap efficacy. Furthermore, these findings will be used to guide trap selection for future push-pull experiments to be conducted at the study site.
Assuntos
Anopheles , Controle de Mosquitos/métodos , Mosquitos Vetores , Animais , Belize , Feminino , Malária/transmissão , Odorantes/análise , Especificidade da EspécieRESUMO
The first record of Aedes albopictus in northern Belize was made in Orange Walk Town, Orange Walk District, on November 3, 2011. Aedes spp. larvae were collected during a routine Ministry of Health mosquito survey and reared to adults. Upon emergence, a mixed population of Aedes aegypti (35) and Ae. albopictus (11) was observed (aegypti:albopictus = 3:1). Subsequent larval and adult surveys in Orange Walk and Corozal District, also in northern Belize, have confirmed the presence of Ae. albopictus, thereby indicating the range expansion and establishment of this nuisance biter and potential disease vector in Belize.
Assuntos
Aedes , Animais , Belize , Humanos , Insetos VetoresRESUMO
To achieve maximum success from any vector control intervention, it is critical to identify the most efficacious tools available. The principal aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of 2 commercially available adult mosquito traps for capturing Anopheles albimanus and An. vestitipennis, 2 important malaria vectors in northern Belize, Central America. Additionally, the impact of outdoor baited traps on mosquito entry into experimental huts was assessed. When operated outside of human-occupied experimental huts, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) miniature light trap, baited with human foot odors, captured significantly greater numbers of female An. albimanus per night (5.1 6 1.9) than the Biogents SentinelTM trap baited with BG-LureTM (1.0 6 0.2). The 2 trap types captured equivalent numbers of female An. vestitipennis per night, 134.3 6 45.6 in the CDC trap and 129.6 6 25.4 in the Sentinel trap. When compared to a matched control hut using no intervention, the use of baited CDC light traps outside an experimental hut did not impact the entry of An. vestitipennis into window interception traps, 17.1 6 1.3 females per hour in experimental huts vs. 17.2 6 1.4 females per hour in control huts. However, the use of outdoor baited CDC traps did significantly decrease the entry of An. albimanus into window interception traps from 3.5 6 0.5 females per hour to 1.9 6 0.2 females per hour. These results support existing knowledge that the underlying ecological and behavioral tendencies of different Anopheles species can influence trap efficacy. Furthermore, these findings will be used to guide trap selection for future push pull experiments to be conducted at the study site...(AU)