Field evaluation of two commercial mosquito traps baited with different attractants and colored lights for malaria vector surveillance in Thailand

Ponlawat, Alongkot; Khongtak, Patcharee; Jaichapor, Boonsong; Pongsiri, Arissara; Evans, Brian P.

doi:10.1186/s13071-017-2315-1

Cited by 15 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…better than green(490-570nm) and red(620-780nm) light, which is completely opposite to the results of previous studies [25] . In the study of Emmanuel P. Mwanga, the effect of UV (364nm) LED mosquito trap is equal to or better than CDC incandescent lamp, and the indoor effect is better than outdoor [26] .…”

contrasting

confidence: 99%

Laboratory and Field Performance of Five Cheap Commercial Light Traps for Capturing Mosquitoes In China

Huang

Song²,

Qian

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundMosquito light traps for household use are popular because they are small, cheap, user friendly, and environmentally friendly. At present, there are many variations and specifications of mosquito traps intended for household use on the market. Their labels claim they are powerful, but research and evaluation of their claims is lacking.MethodsThis article tested the key parameters, the laboratory capture rates, and the field capture rate of 5 popular mosquito traps intended for household use. ResultsThe study found that in the laboratory experiment, the capture rate of the mosquito traps selected was between 34.7%-65.0%. The analysis showed that the fan speed, and design of the air guide of the traps are important factors that affect the mosquito catch rate. Field tests in the greenhouse found that the 5 mosquito traps had high catch rates for Culex quinquefasciatus. The average percentage of Cx. quinquefasciatus, Aedes albopictus, Anopheles sinensis, and other flying insects captured every night was 51.76%, 25.29%, 14.12%, and 8.82%, respectively. There was no significant difference in the capture rate of Ae. Albopictus and An. sinensis by the 5 mosquito traps in the greenhouse, but a significant difference in the catch rate of Cx. Quinquefasciatu. ConclusionsThe ultraviolet wavelength (395-400nm) involved in the selected mosquito traps is not the main reason that affects the mosquito catching effect, but the fan speed and the air guide may be the reason for the difference in the catching effect among the five mosquito traps. Therefore, the mosquito traps intended for household use can be improved by adjusting the fan speed and optimizing the air guide.

show abstract

contrasting

confidence: 99%

Laboratory and Field Performance of Five Cheap Commercial Light Traps for Capturing Mosquitoes In China

Huang

Song²,

Qian

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The fact that collections were done only indoor did not allowed comparison with outdoor mosquito densities. During the present study CDC light traps were used these traps are considered to be less efficient as compare to CDC UV traps and human landing catches [11,56]. Also CDC light traps are known to be less efficient for collecting Anophelines compare to Culex this could have underestimated the density of Anophelines entering houses each night [57,58].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Influence of house characteristics on mosquito distribution and malaria transmission in the city of Yaoundé, Cameroon

Ngadjeu

Doumbe-Belisse

Talipouo

et al. 2020

Malar J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Improving house structure is known to limit contact between humans and mosquitoes and reduce malaria transmission risk. In the present study, the influence of house characteristics on mosquito distribution and malaria transmission risk was assessed in the city of Yaoundé. Methods:The study was conducted from March 2017 to June 2018 in 32 districts of the city of Yaoundé. Mosquito collections were performed indoor in 10 to 15 houses per district using CDC light traps. A total of 467 houses, selected randomly were used. A pretested questionnaire was submitted to participants of the study to collect information on the household: the number of people per house, education level, type of walls, presence of ceilings and eaves, number of windows, usage of long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs), number of bedroom and number of window. Mosquitoes collected were identified morphologically. Anophelines were tested by ELISA to detect infection by Plasmodium parasites. General Estimating Equations adjusting for repeated measures in the same house fitting negative binomial analysis were used to assess the influence of house characteristics on mosquito distribution. Results:A total of 168,039 mosquitoes were collected; Culex spp emerged as the predominant species (96.48%), followed by Anopheles gambiae sensu lato (s.l.) (2.49%). Out of the 1033 An. gambiae s.l. identified by PCR, 90.03% were Anopheles coluzzii and the remaining were An. gambiae sensu stricto (s.s.) (9.97%). The high number of people per household, the presence of screens on window and the possession of LLINs were all associated with fewer mosquitoes collected indoors, whilst opened eaves, the high number of windows, the presence of holes in walls and living close to breeding sites were associated with high densities of mosquitoes indoor. Out of 3557 Anophelines tested using ELISA CSP, 80 were found infected by Plasmodium falciparum parasites. The proportion of mosquitoes infected did not vary significantly according to house characteristics. Conclusion:The study indicated that several house characteristics such as, the presence of holes on walls, opened eaves, unscreened window and living close to breeding sites, favored mosquito presence in houses. Promoting frequent use of LLINs and house improvement measures, such as the use of screen on windows, closing eaves, cleaning the nearby environment, should be integrated in strategies to improve malaria control in the city of Yaoundé.

show abstract

“…Today, the CDC (or similar design) light trap baited with CO 2 (or other semiochemicals) and the BG trap (Biogents AG, Regensburg, Germany) baited with BG-lure with a combination of olfactory attractants are available (Silver 2008, Li et al 2016. Although other studies have used CDC-style light traps to capture mosqui-toes in Thailand (Ponlawat et al 2017), no study has evaluated the attractive efficacy of LED illumination compared with fluorescent UV light. Additionally, collection of outdoor active mosquitoes is limited in terms of effectiveness of trapping devices.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Comparisons of LED lights with ultraviolet (UV) fluorescent lights in trap systems have shown that LED light traps displayed greater trapping efficacy for mosquitoes (Kim et al 2017). Conversely, traps equipped with UV-LEDs and colored LEDs were less performing than that of incandescent bulbs for collecting anophelines (Ponlawat et al 2017). However, no study on the use of LED lights for collecting urban nocturnally active mosquitoes has been studied in Thailand.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transmitted Light as Attractant with Mechanical Traps for Collecting Nocturnal Mosquitoes in Urban Bangkok, Thailand

Saeung

Jhaiaun

Bangs

et al. 2021

Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mosquito surveillance is the cornerstone for determining abundance, species diversity, pathogen infection rates, and temporal and spatial distribution of different life stages in an area. Various methods are available for assessing adult mosquito populations, including mechanical trap devices using different forms of attractant cues (chemical and visual) to lure mosquitoes to the trap. So-called “light traps” use various electromagnetic wavelengths to produce a variety of visible spectral colors to attract adult mosquitoes. However, this type of trapping technology has not been widely used in Thailand. This study compared the efficacy of 4 light-emitting diodes (LEDs) (blue, green, yellow, and red) and 2 fluorescent (ultraviolet [UV] and white) lights for collecting mosquitoes in urban Bangkok. Using a Latin square experimental design, 6 light traps equipped with different lights were rotated between 6 trap site locations within the Kasetsart University (KU) campus. Each location received 6 replicate collections (6 consecutive trap-nights represented 1 replicate) over 36 collection nights for a total of 216 trap-nights. Traps were operated simultaneously (1800 to 0600 h), with captured mosquitoes removed at 3-h intervals. In total, 2,387 mosquitoes consisting of 11 species across 5 genera (Aedes, Anopheles, Armigeres, Culex, and Mansonia) were captured. Collectively, Culex species represented the predominant group sampled (2,252; 94.4%). The UV light source captured 1,544 (64.7%) of the total mosquitoes collected, followed by white 389 (16.3%), with the 4 LED sources collecting between 6.8% (blue) and 1.9% (yellow). Traps equipped with UV light were clearly the most effective for capturing nocturnally active mosquito species on the KU campus.

show abstract

Field evaluation of two commercial mosquito traps baited with different attractants and colored lights for malaria vector surveillance in Thailand

Cited by 15 publications

References 25 publications

Laboratory and Field Performance of Five Cheap Commercial Light Traps for Capturing Mosquitoes In China

Laboratory and Field Performance of Five Cheap Commercial Light Traps for Capturing Mosquitoes In China

Influence of house characteristics on mosquito distribution and malaria transmission in the city of Yaoundé, Cameroon

Transmitted Light as Attractant with Mechanical Traps for Collecting Nocturnal Mosquitoes in Urban Bangkok, Thailand

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About