Capture-recapture studies with mosquitoes of the group of Anopheles punctulatus Dönitz (Diptera: Culicidae) from Papua New Guinea

Abstract

Five capture-recapture experiments with three species of the group of Anopheles punctulatus Donitz were undertaken in four villages in Madang Province, Papua New Guinea. Females were collected in landing catches, blood-fed, marked with fluorescent powder according to time and location of capture, and released. Recaptures took place for 4-13 nights after release. A proportion of the recaptured mosquitoes was dissected for evidence of recent oviposition and gonotrophic age determination. Two models were developed to test a number of the assumptions that underlie the analysis of capturerecapture data from mosquitoes. Species abundance and numbers collected varied within and between villages, but marked mosquitoes dispersed at random within the mosquito population. No heterogeneity was found between indoor and outdoor biters of any of the three species. Survival rates were similar in all species. Significant differences were found in the duration of the oviposition cycle between species and village. This was 2-7-3-7 days for A. punctulatus, 2-4-3-2 days for A. koliensis Owen and 2-1-3-0 days for A. farauti Laveran. No differences were found in the duration of the oviposition cycle of nulliparous and parous females of A. farauti. Thus temporary pool breeders had a longer cycle than permanent pool breeders. This tended to be due to a delay in returning to feed rather than a delay in oviposition. It is concluded that differences between local environments exert a greater influence on the duration of the oviposition cycle than do species specific differences.

The availability of potential hosts as a determinant of feeding behaviours and malaria transmission by African mosquito populations

“…However, other important determinants of EIR such as emergence rate, feeding cycle length and survival per feeding cycle also depend on the availability of hosts (Charlwood, 1986;Charlwood et al, 1986;Charlwood & Graves, 1987;Burkot et al, 1989;Graves et al, 1990;Service, 1991). Some studies have indicated that increasing livestock numbers from low to moderate densities may increase malaria transmission by increasing the emergence rate of mosquitoes (Focks et al, 1988;Sota & Mogi, 1989).…”

“…The emergence rate, feeding cycle length, survival and bloodmeal host choice of malaria vectors are all influenced by the availability of exposed bloodmeal hosts to the vector (GarrettJones, 1964;Charlwood, 1986;Charlwood et al, 1986;Burkot et al, 1989;Service, 1991;Minakawa et al, 1999). Because the entomological inoculation rate (EIR) of malaria is proportional to the square of the proportion of bloodmeals taken from humans (Q h ), it is very sensitive to changes in vector host choice (Koella, 1991;Killeen et al, 2000b).…”

Dry season refugia of malaria-transmitting mosquitoes in a dry savannah zone of east Africa.

“…A capture-recapture experiment was undertaken in Area #5 in December 1991. Mosquitoes from indoor resting collections were counted, dusted with fluorescent powder 18 and released in the house closest to the breeding site. For the next eight days, 14 of Survival rate estimation.…”

The potential impact of integrated malaria transmission control on entomologic inoculation rate in highly endemic areas.

“…1 Briefly, Kankiya 33 and Kaduna 34,35 are in the dry Savannah region of Nigeria; Namawala is near the flood plain of the Kilombero River in Tanzania [36][37][38] and Butelgut is in the forested foothills of Madang Province in Papua New Guinea. [39][40][41] For simplicity, our model estimates EIR for the predominant vector species at each site, which are Anopheles arabiensis at Kankiya, Anopheles gambiae sensu lato, at Kaduna and Namawala, and Anopheles punctulatus at Butelgut. 1 In order to calculate the impact of the combined effects of the intervention on the human biting rate (H bt ) it is calculated from the proposed reductions in vector emergence rate (E) and mean number of human bites per lifetime (b h ) similar to equation 12 in the original model for calculating EIR: 1…”