Dataset Information

Eave Screening and Push-Pull Tactics to Reduce House Entry by Vectors of Malaria.

ABSTRACT: Long-lasting insecticidal nets and indoor residual spraying have contributed to a decline in malaria over the last decade, but progress is threatened by the development of physiological and behavioral resistance of mosquitoes against insecticides. Acknowledging the need for alternative vector control tools, we quantified the effects of eave screening in combination with a push-pull system based on the simultaneous use of a repellent (push) and attractant-baited traps (pull). Field experiments in western Kenya showed that eave screening, whether used in combination with an attractant-baited trap or not, was highly effective in reducing house entry by malaria mosquitoes. The magnitude of the effect varied for different mosquito species and between two experiments, but the reduction in house entry was always considerable (between 61% and 99%). The use of outdoor, attractant-baited traps alone did not have a significant impact on mosquito house entry but the high number of mosquitoes trapped outdoors indicates that attractant-baited traps could be used for removal trapping, which would enhance outdoor as well as indoor protection against mosquito bites. As eave screening was effective by itself, addition of a repellent was of limited value. Nevertheless, repellents may play a role in reducing outdoor malaria transmission in the peridomestic area.

SUBMITTER: Menger DJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4824231 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Eave Screening and Push-Pull Tactics to Reduce House Entry by Vectors of Malaria.

Menger David J DJ Omusula Philemon P Wouters Karlijn K Oketch Charles C Carreira Ana S AS Durka Maxime M Derycke Jean-Luc JL Loy Dorothy E DE Hahn Beatrice H BH Mukabana Wolfgang R WR Mweresa Collins K CK van Loon Joop J A JJ Takken Willem W Hiscox Alexandra A

The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene 20160201 4

Long-lasting insecticidal nets and indoor residual spraying have contributed to a decline in malaria over the last decade, but progress is threatened by the development of physiological and behavioral resistance of mosquitoes against insecticides. Acknowledging the need for alternative vector control tools, we quantified the effects of eave screening in combination with a push-pull system based on the simultaneous use of a repellent (push) and attractant-baited traps (pull). Field experiments in ...[more]

PMID: 26834195

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Eave ribbons treated with spatial repellents effectively prevent human exposure to outdoor-biting and indoor-biting malaria mosquitoes, and could constitute a scalable and low-cost supplement to current interventions, such as insecticide-treated nets (ITNs). This study measured protection afforded by transfluthrin-treated eave ribbons to users (personal and communal protection) and non-users (only communal protection), and whether introducing mosquito traps as additional intervention influenced these benefits. METHODS:Five experimental huts were constructed inside a 110 m long, screened tunnel, in which 1000 Anopheles arabiensis were released nightly. Eave ribbons treated with 0.25 g/m2 transfluthrin were fitted to 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 huts, achieving 0, 20, 40, 60, 80 and 100% coverage, respectively. Volunteers sat near each hut and collected mosquitoes attempting to bite them from 6 to 10 p.m. (outdoor-biting), then went indoors to sleep under untreated bed nets, beside which CDC-light traps collected mosquitoes from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. (indoor-biting). Caged mosquitoes kept inside the huts were monitored for 24 h-mortality. Separately, eave ribbons, UV-LED mosquito traps (Mosclean) or both the ribbons and traps were fitted, each time leaving the central hut unfitted to represent non-user households and assess communal protection. Biting risk was measured concurrently in all huts, before and after introducing interventions. RESULTS:Transfluthrin-treated eave ribbons provided 83% and 62% protection indoors and outdoors respectively to users, plus 57% and 48% protection indoors and outdoors to the non-user. Protection for users remained constant, but protection for non-users increased with eave ribbons coverage, peaking once 80% of huts were fitted. Mortality of mosquitoes caged inside huts with eave ribbons was 100%. The UV-LED traps increased indoor exposure to users and non-users, but marginally reduced outdoor-biting. Combining the traps and eave ribbons did not improve user protection relative to eave ribbons alone. CONCLUSION:Transfluthrin-treated eave ribbons protect both users and non-users against malaria mosquitoes indoors and outdoors. The mosquito-killing property of transfluthrin can magnify the communal benefits by limiting unwanted diversion to non-users, but should be validated in field trials against pyrethroid-resistant vectors. Benefits of the UV-LED traps as an intervention alone or alongside eave ribbons were however undetectable in this study. These findings extend the evidence that transfluthrin-treated eave ribbons could complement ITNs.

Dataset Information

Eave Screening and Push-Pull Tactics to Reduce House Entry by Vectors of Malaria.

Publications

Eave Screening and Push-Pull Tactics to Reduce House Entry by Vectors of Malaria.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets