Are herders protected by their herds? An experimental analysis of zooprophylaxis against the malaria vector Anopheles arabiensis

被引:27
|
作者
Tirados, Inaki [1 ]
Gibson, Gabriella [1 ]
Young, Stephen [1 ]
Torr, Stephen J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Greenwich Medway, NRI, Chatham, Kent, England
来源
MALARIA JOURNAL | 2011年 / 10卷
关键词
FEEDING-BEHAVIOR; CATTLE; INSECTICIDE; TSETSE; MOSQUITOS; RESPONSES; ETHIOPIA;
D O I
10.1186/1475-2875-10-68
中图分类号
R51 [传染病];
学科分类号
100401 ;
摘要
Background: The number of Anopheles arabiensis (Diptera: Culicidae) and Anopheles pharoensis caught by human and cattle baits was investigated experimentally in the Arba Minch district of southern Ethiopia to determine if attraction to humans, indoors or outdoors, was affected by the presence or absence of cattle. Methods: Field studies were made of the effect of a surrounding ring (10 m radius) of 20 cattle on the numbers of mosquitoes collected by human-baited sampling methods (i) inside or (ii) outside a hut. Results: The numbers of An. arabiensis caught outdoors by a human landing catch (HLC) with or without a ring of cattle were not significantly different (2 x 2 Latin square comparisons: means = 24.8 and 37.2 mosquitoes/night, respectively; n = 12, P > 0.22, Tukey HSD), whereas, the numbers of An. pharoensis caught were significantly reduced (44%) by a ring of cattle (4.9 vs. 8.7; n = 12, P < 0.05). The catch of An. arabiensis in human-baited traps (HBT) was 25 times greater than in cattle-baited traps (CBT) (34.0 vs. 1.3, n = 24; P < 0.001) whereas, for An. pharoensis there was no significant difference. Furthermore, HBT and CBT catches were unaffected by a ring of cattle (4 x 4 Latin square comparison) for either An. arabiensis (n = 48; P > 0.999) or An. pharoensis (n = 48, P > 0.870). The HLC catches indoors vs. outdoors were not significantly different for either An. arabiensis or An. pharoensis (n = 12, P > 0.969), but for An. arabiensis only, the indoor catch was reduced significantly by 49% when the hut was surrounded by cattle (Tukey HSD, n = 12, P > 0.01). Conclusions: Outdoors, a preponderance of cattle (20: 1, cattle: humans) does not provide any material zooprophylactic effect against biting by An. arabiensis. For a human indoors, the presence of cattle outdoors nearly halved the catch. Unfortunately, this level of reduction would not have an appreciable impact on malaria incidence in an area with typically > 1 infective bite/person/night. For An. pharoensis, cattle significantly reduced the human catch indoors and outdoors, but still only by about half. These results suggest that even for traditional pastoralist communities of East Africa, the presence of large numbers of cattle does not confer effective zooprophylaxis against malaria transmitted by An. arabiensis or An. pharoensis.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Diversity, Differentiation, and Linkage Disequilibrium: Prospects for Association Mapping in the Malaria Vector Anopheles arabiensis
    Marsden, Clare Diana
    Lee, Yoosook
    Kreppel, Katharina
    Weakley, Allison
    Cornel, Anthony
    Ferguson, Heather M.
    Eskin, Eleazar
    Lanzaro, Gregory C.
    G3-GENES GENOMES GENETICS, 2014, 4 (01): : 121 - 131
  • [32] Thermal limits of wild and laboratory strains of two African malaria vector species, Anopheles arabiensis and Anopheles funestus
    Candice L Lyons
    Maureen Coetzee
    John S Terblanche
    Steven L Chown
    Malaria Journal, 11
  • [33] Thermal limits of wild and laboratory strains of two African malaria vector species, Anopheles arabiensis and Anopheles funestus
    Lyons, Candice L.
    Coetzee, Maureen
    Terblanche, John S.
    Chown, Steven L.
    MALARIA JOURNAL, 2012, 11
  • [34] Pyrethroid resistance in the major malaria vector Anopheles arabiensis from Gwave, a malaria-endemic area in Zimbabwe
    Givemore Munhenga
    Hieronymo T Masendu
    Basil D Brooke
    Richard H Hunt
    Lizette K Koekemoer
    Malaria Journal, 7
  • [35] Modelled habitat suitability of a malaria causing vector (Anopheles arabiensis) relates well with human malaria incidences in Zimbabwe
    Gwitira, Isaiah
    Murwira, Amon
    Zengeya, Fadzai M.
    Masocha, Mhosisi
    Mutambu, Susan
    APPLIED GEOGRAPHY, 2015, 60 : 130 - 138
  • [36] Semi-field assessment of the BG-Malaria trap for monitoring the African malaria vector, Anopheles arabiensis
    Batista, Elis P. A.
    Ngowo, Halfan S.
    Opiyo, Mercy
    Shubis, Gasper K.
    Meza, Felician C.
    Okumu, Fredros O.
    Eiras, Alvaro E.
    PLOS ONE, 2017, 12 (10):
  • [37] Pyrethroid resistance in the major malaria vector Anopheles arabiensis from Gwave, a malaria-endemic area in Zimbabwe
    Munhenga, Givemore
    Masendu, Hieronymo T.
    Brooke, Basil D.
    Hunt, Richard H.
    Koekemoer, Lizette K.
    MALARIA JOURNAL, 2008, 7 (1)
  • [38] Evaluation of larvicidal activities of Parthenium hysterophorus L. against Anopheles arabiensis (Diptera: Culicidae), the major malaria vector in Ethiopia
    Tarekegn, Mihretu
    Wolde-hawariat, Yitbarek
    Dugassa, Sisay
    Tekie, Habte
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TROPICAL INSECT SCIENCE, 2021, 41 (02) : 1461 - 1469
  • [39] Evaluation of larvicidal activities of Parthenium hysterophorus L. against Anopheles arabiensis (Diptera: Culicidae), the major malaria vector in Ethiopia
    Mihretu Tarekegn
    Yitbarek Wolde-hawariat
    Sisay Dugassa
    Habte Tekie
    International Journal of Tropical Insect Science, 2021, 41 : 1461 - 1469
  • [40] Impacts of Agricultural Practices on Insecticide Resistance in the Malaria Vector Anopheles arabiensis in Khartoum State, Sudan
    Abuelmaali, Sara A.
    Elaagip, Arwa H.
    Basheer, Mohammed A.
    Frah, Ehab A.
    Ahmed, Fayez T. A.
    Elhaj, Hassabelrasoul F. A.
    Seidahmed, Osama M. E.
    Weetman, David
    Hamid, Muzamil Mahdi Abdel
    PLOS ONE, 2013, 8 (11):