Preferred resting surfaces of dominant malaria vectors inside different house types in rural south-eastern Tanzania

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Msugupakulya, Betwel J.
dc.contributor.author Kaindoa, Emmanuel W.
dc.contributor.author Ngowo, Halfan
dc.contributor.author Kihonda, Japhet M.
dc.contributor.author Kahamba, Najat F.
dc.contributor.author Msaky, Dickson S.
dc.contributor.author Matoke-Muhia, Damaris
dc.contributor.author Tungu, Patrick K.
dc.contributor.author Okumu, Fredros O.
dc.date.accessioned 2020-12-21T11:12:50Z
dc.date.available 2020-12-21T11:12:50Z
dc.date.issued 2020-01-15
dc.identifier.uri https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-020-3108-0
dc.identifier.uri https://dspace.nm-aist.ac.tz/handle/20.500.12479/1068
dc.description This research article published by Springer Nature, 2020 en_US
dc.description.abstract Background: Malaria control in Africa relies extensively on indoor residual spraying (IRS) and insecticide-treated nets (ITNs). IRS typically targets mosquitoes resting on walls, and in few cases, roofs and ceilings, using contact insecticides. Unfortunately, little attention is paid to where malaria vectors actually rest indoors, and how such knowledge could be used to improve IRS. This study investigated preferred resting surfaces of two major malaria vectors, Anopheles funestus and Anopheles arabiensis, inside four common house types in rural south-eastern Tanzania. Methods: The assessment was done inside 80 houses including: 20 with thatched roofs and mud walls, 20 with thatched roofs and un-plastered brick walls, 20 with metal roofs and un-plastered brick walls, and 20 with metal roofs and plastered brick walls, across four villages. In each house, resting mosquitoes were sampled in mornings (6 a.m.–8 a.m.), evenings (6 p.m.–8 p.m.) and at night (11 p.m.–12.00 a.m.) using Prokopack aspirators from multiple surfaces (walls, undersides of roofs, foors, furniture, utensils, clothing, curtains and bed nets). Results: Overall, only 26% of An. funestus and 18% of An. arabiensis were found on walls. In grass-thatched houses, 33–55% of An. funestus and 43–50% of An. arabiensis rested under roofs, while in metal-roofed houses, only 16–20% of An. funestus and 8–30% of An. arabiensis rested under roofs. Considering all data together, approximately 40% of mosquitoes rested on surfaces not typically targeted by IRS, i.e. foors, furniture, utensils, clothing and bed nets. These proportions were particularly high in metal-roofed houses (47–53% of An. funestus; 60–66% of An. arabiensis). Conclusion: While IRS typically uses contact insecticides to target adult mosquitoes on walls, and occasionally roofs and ceilings, signifcant proportions of vectors rest on surfaces not usually sprayed. This gap exceeds one-third of malaria mosquitoes in grass-thatched houses, and can reach two-thirds in metal-roofed houses. Where feld opera‑ tions exclude roofs during IRS, the gaps can be much greater. In conclusion, there is need for locally-obtained data on mosquito resting behaviours and how these infuence the overall impact and costs of IRS. This study also emphasizes the need for alternative approaches, e.g. house screening, which broadly tackle mosquitoes beyond areas reachable by IRS and ITNs. en_US
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher Springer Nature en_US
dc.subject Indoor residual spraying en_US
dc.subject Contact insecticides en_US
dc.subject House screening en_US
dc.subject Malaria vectors en_US
dc.subject An. funestus en_US
dc.subject An. arabiensis en_US
dc.subject Indoor resting behaviours en_US
dc.title Preferred resting surfaces of dominant malaria vectors inside different house types in rural south-eastern Tanzania en_US
dc.type Article en_US

Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search Our NM-AIST IR


My NM-AIST IR Account