The Centres for Disease Control Light Trap (CDC LT) and The Human Decoy Trap (HDT) Compared to The Human Landing Catch (HLC) for Measuring Anopheles Biting in Rural Tanzania
[post]
Isaac Haggai Namango, Carly Marshall, Adam Saddler, Amanda Ross, David Kaftan, Frank Tenywa, Noely Makungwa, Olukayode Odufuwa, Godfrey Ligema, Hassan Ngonyani, Isaya Matanila, Jameel Bharmal
(+3 others)
2021
unpublished
BackgroundThe intensity of vector mosquito biting is an important measure for malaria epidemiology and control. The human landing catch (HLC) is an effective entomological surveillance tool, but is labour-intensive, expensive and raises safety issues. The Centres for Disease Control light trap (CDC LT) and the human decoy trap (HDT) are less costly and exposure-free alternatives. This study compared the CDC LT and HDT against the HLC for measuring Anopheles (An.) biting in rural Tanzania and
more »
... essed their suitability as HLC proxies.MethodsIndoor mosquito surveys using HLC and CDC LT and outdoor surveys using HLC and HDT were conducted in 2017 and in 2019 in Ulanga, Tanzania in 19 villages, with one trap per house per night. Species composition, sporozoite rates and the numbers of mosquitoes caught by different trap types were compared. Aggregating the data by village and month, the Bland-Altman approach was used to assess agreement. ResultsOverall, 66,807 Anopheles funestus and 14,606 An. arabiensis adult females were caught from 6,013 CDC LT, 339 indoor HLC, 136 HDT and 195 outdoor HLC collections. Overall, the CDC LT caught fewer malaria vectors than indoor HLC: An. arabiensis (Adjusted rate ratio (Adj.RR) =0.35 (95% confidence interval (CI):0.27-0.46)) and An. funestus (Adj.RR=0.63(95%CI:0.51-0.79)). HDT caught fewer malaria vectors than outdoor HLC: An. arabiensis (Adj.RR=0.04(95%CI:0.01-0.14)) and An. funestus (Adj.RR=0.10(95%CI:0.07-0.15)). The bias and variability of the ratios of geometric mean mosquitoes caught by CDC LT and HDT relative to HLC collections for the same village-month were dependent on mosquito densities. The relative efficacies of both CDC LT and HDT declined with mosquito abundance. The variability in the ratios was substantial for low HLC counts and decreased as mosquito abundance increased. CDCLT caught a higher proportion of infected An. arabiensis and An. funestus than HLC, and HDT caught no infected mosquitoes.ConclusionsIf caution is taken in appreciation of its limitations, the CDC LT is suitable for use in routine entomological surveys and may be preferable for measuring sporozoite rates for Afrotropical mosquitoes. Use of HLC is useful to estimate human exposure to mosquitoes for estimating Entomological Inoculation Rate (EIR). The present design of the HDT is not amenable for use to conduct large-scale entomological surveys.
doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1169022/v1
fatcat:l3b5n4evbvb27cph3kxbxm5rwy