首页> 外文OA文献 >The human-baited double net trap : an alternative to human landing catches for collecting outdoor biting mosquitoes in Lao PDR.
【2h】

The human-baited double net trap : an alternative to human landing catches for collecting outdoor biting mosquitoes in Lao PDR.

机译:人工诱捕的双网诱捕器:替代人类着陆诱捕器,用于收集老挝人民民主共和国的户外叮咬蚊子。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Estimating the exposure of individuals to mosquito-borne diseases is a key measure used to evaluate the success of vector control operations. The gold standard is to use human landing catches where mosquitoes are collected off the exposed limbs of human collectors. This is however an unsatisfactory method since it potentially exposes individuals to a range of mosquito-borne diseases. In this study several sampling methods were compared to find a method that is representative of the human-biting rate outdoors, but which does not expose collectors to mosquito-borne infections. The sampling efficiency of four odour-baited traps were compared outdoors in rural Lao PDR; the human-baited double net (HDN) trap, CDC light trap, BG sentinel trap and Suna trap. Subsequently the HDN, the best performing trap, was compared directly with human landing catches (HLC), the ‘gold standard’, for estimating human-biting rates. HDNs collected 11–44 times more mosquitoes than the other traps, with the exception of the HLC. The HDN collected similar numbers of Anopheles (Rate Ratio, RR = 1.16, 95% Confidence Intervals, 95% CI = 0.61–2.20) and Culex mosquitoes (RR = 1.26, 95% CI = 0.74–2.17) as HLC, but under-estimated the numbers of Aedes albopictus (RR = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.27–0.77). Simpson’s index of diversity was 0.845 (95% CI 0.836–0.854) for the HDN trap and 0.778 (95% CI 0.769–0.787) for HLC, indicating that the HDN collected a greater diversity of mosquito species than HLC. Both HLC and HDN can distinguish between low and high biting rates and are crude ways to measure human-biting rate. The HDN is a simple and cheap method to estimate the human-biting rate outdoors without exposing collectors to mosquito bites.
机译:估计个体受到蚊媒疾病的暴露是用于评估病媒控制操作成功与否的关键措施。黄金标准是使用人类着陆渔获物,从收集者裸露的四肢中收集蚊子。然而,这是一种不能令人满意的方法,因为它可能使个体暴露于多种蚊媒疾病中。在这项研究中,对几种采样方法进行了比较,以找到一种可以代表室外人咬率的方法,但是该方法不会使收集者遭受蚊子传播的感染。在老挝农村地区比较了四个带气味诱捕器的采样效率;人为诱饵的双网(HDN)陷阱,CDC光陷阱,BG前哨陷阱和Suna陷阱。随后,将性能最佳的陷阱HDN与“黄金标准”人工着陆捕获(HLC)直接进行比较,以估计人工咬入率。 HDN收集到的蚊子比其他陷阱多11到44倍,但HLC除外。 HDN收集了与HLC类似数量的按蚊(比率,RR = 1.16,95%置信区间,95%CI = 0.61-2.20)和库蚊(RR)1.26,95%CI = 0.74-2.17),但低于-估计白纹伊蚊的数量(RR = 0.45,95%CI = 0.27–0.77)。 HDN陷阱的辛普森多样性指数为0.845(95%CI 0.836–0.854),HLC的辛普森多样性指数为0.778(95%CI 0.769–0.787),这表明HDN收集的蚊子物种多样性高于HLC。 HLC和HDN都能区分低咬率和高咬率,并且是测量人咬率的粗略方法。 HDN是一种简单而便宜的方法,可在不使收集者受到蚊虫叮咬的情况下估算户外的人咬率。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号