Comparison of Different Sampling Methods to Catch Lymphatic Filariasis Vectors in a Sudan Savannah Area of Mali

比较不同采样方法在马里苏丹稀树草原地区捕获淋巴丝虫病媒介生物

阅读:1

Abstract

There is a need for better tools to monitor the transmission of lymphatic filariasis and malaria in areas undergoing interventions to interrupt transmission. Therefore, mosquito collection methods other than human landing catch (HLC) are needed. This study aimed to compare the Ifakara tent trap type C (ITTC) and the Biogents sentinel trap (BGST) to the HLC in areas with different vector densities. Mosquitoes were collected in two villages in Mali from July to December in 2011 and 2012. The three methods were implemented at each site with one ITTC, one BGST, and one HLC unit that consisted of one room with two collectors-one indoor and the other outdoor. The Anopheles collected in 2011 were individually dissected, whereas those from 2012 were screened in pools using reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) to determine the maximum infection prevalence likelihood (MIPL) for Wuchereria bancrofti and Plasmodium falciparum. The dissection of the females also allowed to assess the parity rates, as well its results. Over the 2 years, the HLC method collected 1,019 Anopheles, yields that were 34- and 1.5-fold higher than those with the BGST and ITTC, respectively. None of the dissected Anopheles were infected. The RT-PCR results showed comparable MIPL between HLC and ITTC for W. bancrofti with one infected pool from each trap's yield (respectively 0.03% [0.0009-0.2%] and 0.04% [0.001-0.2%]). For P. falciparum, no infected pool was recovered from BGST. The ITTC is a good alternative to HLC for xenomonitoring of program activities.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。