Staff Publications

Staff Publications

  • external user (warningwarning)
  • Log in as
  • language uk
  • About

    'Staff publications' is the digital repository of Wageningen University & Research

    'Staff publications' contains references to publications authored by Wageningen University staff from 1976 onward.

    Publications authored by the staff of the Research Institutes are available from 1995 onwards.

    Full text documents are added when available. The database is updated daily and currently holds about 240,000 items, of which 72,000 in open access.

    We have a manual that explains all the features 

Record number 494098
Title The Human-Baited Double Net Trap: An Alternative to Human Landing Catches for Collecting Outdoor Biting Mosquitoes in Lao PDR
Author(s) Tangena, J.A.; Thammavong, P.; Hiscox, A.F.; Lindsay, P.T.; Brey, P.T.
Source PLoS ONE 10 (2015)9. - ISSN 1932-6203 - 13 p.
Department(s) Laboratory of Entomology
Publication type Refereed Article in a scientific journal
Publication year 2015
Abstract 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.
There are no comments yet. You can post the first one!
Post a comment
Please log in to use this service. Login as Wageningen University & Research user or guest user in upper right hand corner of this page.