Comparative evaluation of the Ifakara tent trap-B, the standardized resting boxes and the human landing catch for sampling malaria vectors and other mosquitoes in urban Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
BACKGROUND
Frequent, sensitive and accurate sampling of Anopheles mosquitoes is a prerequisite for effective management of malaria vector control programmes. The most reliable existing means to measure mosquito density is the human landing catch (HLC). However, the HLC technique raises major ethical concerns because of the necessity to expose humans to vectors of malaria and a variety of other pathogens. Furthermore, it is a very arduous undertaking that requires intense supervision, which is severely limiting in terms of affordability and sustainability.


METHODS
A community-based, mosquito sampling protocol, using the Ifakara tent trap-B (ITT-B) and standardized resting boxes (SRB), was developed and evaluated in terms of the number and sample composition of mosquitoes caught by each, compared to rigorously controlled HLC. Mosquitoes were collected once and three times every week by the HLC and the alternative methods, respectively, in the same time and location.


RESULTS
Overall, the three traps caught 44,848 mosquitoes. The ITT-B, HLC and SRB caught 168, 143 and 46 Anopheles gambiae s.l. as well as 26,315, 13,258 and 4,791 Culex species respectively. The ITT-B was three- and five-times cheaper than the HLC per mosquito caught for An. gambiae and Cx. Species, respectively. Significant correlations between the numbers caught by HLC and ITT-B were observed for both An. gambiae s.l. (P < 0.001) and Cx. species (P = 0.003). Correlation between the catches with HLC and SRB were observed for Cx. species (P < 0.001) but not An. gambiae s.l. (P = 0.195), presumably because of the low density of the latter. Neither ITT-B nor SRB exhibited any obvious density dependence for sampling the two species.


CONCLUSIONS
SRBs exhibited poor sensitivity for both mosquito taxa and are not recommended in this setting. However, this protocol is affordable and effective for routine use of the ITT-B under programmatic conditions. Nevertheless, it is recommended that the trap and the protocol be evaluated further at full programmatic scales to establish effectiveness under fully representative conditions of routine practice.
Sikulu
Maggy
M
Department of Zoology, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya. maggysikulu@yahoo.com
Govella
Nicodem J
NJ
Ogoma
Sheila B
SB
Mpangile
John
J
Kambi
Said H
SH
Kannady
Khadija
K
Chaki
Prosper C
PC
Mukabana
Wolfgang R
WR
Killeen
Gerry F
GF
D000818:Animals; D000852:Anopheles / Q000145:classification*; D003465:Culex / Q000145:classification*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D009032:Mosquito Control / Q000295:instrumentation*; D011156:Population Density; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D013636:Tanzania
Malar J. 2005 Jan 14;4:4
15649333
Malar J. 2006 Feb 03;5:9
16457724
J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 1993 Sep;9(3):260-3
8245934
Malar J. 2008 Jan 25;7:20
18218148
PLoS One. 2009;4(3):e5107
19333402
J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 2008 Jun;24(2):228-35
18666530
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1993 Oct;49(4):520-9
8214283
PLoS Biol. 2007 Mar;5(3):e42
17311470
BMC Public Health. 2006 Jun 15;6:154
16776829
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1999 Jul;61(1):109-13
10432066
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2004 Aug;71(2 Suppl):224-31
15331841
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2004 Aug;71(2 Suppl):103-17
15331826
Malar J. 2007 Sep 19;6:126
17880679
Bull Entomol Res. 2002 Feb;92(1):71-6
12020364
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2007 Jan;76(1):42-7
17255227
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1984 Sep;33(5):783-8
6385740
Malar J. 2009 Jul 14;8:157
19602253
Tanzan Health Res Bull. 2005 Sep;7(3):117-24
16941936