BackgroundTo accelerate efforts towards control and possibly elimination of mosquito-borne diseases such as malaria and lymphatic filariasis, optimally located outdoor interventions could be used to complement existing intradomicilliary vector control methods such as house spraying with insecticides and insecticidal bednets.MethodsWe describe a new odor-baited station for trapping, contaminating and killing disease-transmitting mosquitoes. This device, named the 'Ifakara Odor-baited Station' (Ifakara OBS), is a 4 m3 hut-shaped canvas box with seven openings, two of which may be fitted with interception traps to catch exiting mosquitoes. It is baited with synthetic human odors and may be augmented with contaminants including toxic insecticides or biological agents.ResultsIn field trials where panels of fabric were soaked in 1% pirimiphos-methyl solution and suspended inside the Ifakara OBS, at least 73.6% of Anopheles arabiensis, 78.7% of Culex and 60% of Mansonia mosquitoes sampled while exiting the OBS, died within 24 hours. When used simply as a trap and evaluated against two existing outdoor traps, Ifakara Tent trap and Mosquito Magnet-X®, the OBS proved more efficacious than the Ifakara Tent trap in catching all mosquito species found (P < 0.001). Compared to the Mosquito Magnet-X®, it was equally efficacious in catching An. arabiensis (P = 0.969), but was less efficacious against Culex (P < 0.001) or Mansonia species (P < 0.001).ConclusionThe Ifakara OBS is efficacious against disease-carrying mosquitoes including the malaria vector, An. arabiensis and Culicine vectors of filarial worms and arboviruses. It can be used simultaneously as a trap and as a contamination or killing station, meaning most mosquitoes which escape trapping would leave when already contaminated and die shortly afterwards. This technique has potential to complement current vector control methods, by targeting mosquitoes in places other than human dwellings, but its effectiveness in the field will require cheap, long-lasting and easy-to-use mosquito lures.

BackgroundMosquitoes that bite people outdoors can sustain malaria transmission even where effective indoor interventions such as bednets or indoor residual spraying are already widely used. Outdoor tools may therefore complement current indoor measures and improve control. We developed and evaluated a prototype mosquito control device, the ‘Mosquito Landing Box’ (MLB), which is baited with human odours and treated with mosquitocidal agents. The findings are used to explore technical options and challenges relevant to luring and killing outdoor-biting malaria vectors in endemic settings.MethodsField experiments were conducted in Tanzania to assess if wild host-seeking mosquitoes 1) visited the MLBs, 2) stayed long or left shortly after arrival at the device, 3) visited the devices at times when humans were also outdoors, and 4) could be killed by contaminants applied on the devices. Odours suctioned from volunteer-occupied tents were also evaluated as a potential low-cost bait, by comparing baited and unbaited MLBs.ResultsThere were significantly more Anopheles arabiensis, An. funestus, Culex and Mansonia mosquitoes visiting baited MLB than unbaited controls (P≤0.028). Increasing sampling frequency from every 120 min to 60 and 30 min led to an increase in vector catches of up to 3.6 fold (P≤0.002), indicating that many mosquitoes visited the device but left shortly afterwards. Outdoor host-seeking activity of malaria vectors peaked between 7:30 and 10:30pm, and between 4:30 and 6:00am, matching durations when locals were also outdoors. Maximum mortality of mosquitoes visiting MLBs sprayed or painted with formulations of candidate mosquitocidal agent (pirimiphos-methyl) was 51%. Odours from volunteer occupied tents attracted significantly more mosquitoes to MLBs than controls (P<0.001).ConclusionWhile odour-baited devices such as the MLBs clearly have potential against outdoor-biting mosquitoes in communities where LLINs are used, candidate contaminants must be those that are effective at ultra-low doses even after short contact periods, since important vector species such as An. arabiensis make only brief visits to such devices. Natural human odours suctioned from occupied dwellings could constitute affordable sources of attractants to supplement odour baits for the devices. The killing agents used should be environmentally safe, long lasting, and have different modes of action (other than pyrethroids as used on LLINs), to curb the risk of physiological insecticide resistance.

Fungal biopesticides have the potential to significantly reduce densities of malaria vectors as well as associated malaria transmission. In previous field trials, entomopathogenic fungus was delivered from within human dwellings, where its efficacy was limited by low infection rates of target mosquitoes, high costs of spraying fungus inside houses, and potential public health concerns associated with introducing fungal conidia inside houses. Here we have demonstrated that Metarhizium anisopliae IP 46, delivered within an extra-domiciliary odor-baited station (OBS), can infect and slowly-kill a high proportion of the wild adult malaria vector, Anopheles arabiensis which entered and exited the OBS. This study, carried out in rural Tanzania, showed that by using a concentration of 3.9 × 1010 conidia/m2, more than 95% of mosquitoes that flew in and out of the OBS died within 14 days post-exposure. At least 86% infection of mosquito cadavers was recorded with a significant reduction in the probability of daily survival of exposed An. arabiensis in both treatments tested: low quantity of conidia (eave baffles plus one cotton panel; HR = 2.65, P < 0.0001) and high quantity of conidia (eave baffles plus two cotton panels; HR = 2.32, P < 0.0001). We conclude that high infection rates of entomopathogenic fungi on wild malaria vectors and possibly significant disruption of malaria transmission can be achieved if the fungus is delivered using optimally located outdoor odor-baited stations.

BackgroundBio-efficacy and residual activity of insecticides used for indoor residual spraying (IRS) and long-lasting insecticide nets (LLINs) were assessed against laboratory-reared and wild populations of the malaria vector, Anopheles arabiensis in south eastern Tanzania. Implications of the findings are examined in the context of potential synergies and redundancies where IRS and LLINs are combined.MethodsBioassays were conducted monthly for six months on three LLIN types (Olyset® PermaNet 2.0®,and Icon Life®) and three IRS treatments (2 g/m2 pirimiphos-methyl, 2 g/m2 DDT and 0.03 g/m2 lambda-cyhalothrin, sprayed on mud walls and palm ceilings of experimental huts). Tests used susceptible laboratory-reared An. arabiensis exposed in cones (nets and IRS) or wire balls (nets only). Susceptibility of wild populations was assessed using WHO diagnostic concentrations and PCR for knock-down resistance (kdr) genes.ResultsIRS treatments killed ≥ 85% of mosquitoes exposed on palm ceilings and ≥ 90% of those exposed on mud walls, but up to 50% of this toxicity decayed within 1–3 months, except for DDT. By 6th month, only 7.5%, 42.5% and 30.0% of mosquitoes died when exposed to ceilings sprayed with pirimiphos-methyl, DDT or lambda-cyhalothrin respectively, while 12.5%, 36.0% and 27.5% died after exposure to mud walls sprayed with the same insecticides. In wire-ball assays, mortality decreased from 98.1% in 1st month to 92.6% in 6th month in tests on PermaNet 2.0®, from 100% to 61.1% on Icon Life® and from 93.2% to 33.3% on Olyset® nets. In cone bioassays, mortality reduced from 92.8% in 1st month to 83.3% in 6th month on PermaNet 2.0®, from 96.9% to 43.80% on Icon Life® and from 85.6% to 14.6% on Olyset®. Wild An. arabiensis were 100% susceptible to DDT, 95.8% to deltamethrin, 90.2% to lambda cyhalothrin and 95.2% susceptible to permethrin. No kdr gene mutations were detected.ConclusionsIn bioassays where sufficient contact with treated surfaces is assured, LLINs and IRS kill high proportions of susceptible An. arabiensis mosquitoes, though these efficacies decay gradually for LLINs and rapidly for IRS. It is, therefore, important to always add intact nets in sprayed houses, guaranteeing protection even after the IRS decays, and to ensure accurate timing, quality control and regular re-spraying in IRS programmes. By contrast, adding IRS in houses with intact LLINs is unlikely to improve protection relative to LLINs alone, since there is no guarantee that unfed vectors would rest long enough on the sprayed surfaces, and because of the rapid IRS decay. However, there is need to clarify these effects using data from observations of free flying mosquitoes in huts. Physiological susceptibility of An. arabiensis in the area remains 100% against DDT, but is slightly reduced against pyrethroids, necessitating caution over possible spread of resistance. The loss of LLIN toxicity, particularly Olyset® nets suggests that protection offered by these nets against An. arabiensis may be primarily due to physical bite prevention rather ...

BackgroundThe extensive use of indoor residual spraying (IRS) and insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) in Africa has contributed to a significant reduction in malaria transmission. Even so, residual malaria transmission persists in many regions, partly driven by mosquitoes that bite people outdoors. In areas where Anopheles gambiae s.s. is a dominant vector, most interventions target the reduction of indoor transmission. The increased use of ITNs/LLINs and IRS has led to the decline of this species. As a result, less dominant vectors such as Anopheles funestus and Anopheles arabiensis, both also originally indoor vectors but are increasingly biting outdoors, contribute more to residual malaria transmission. The study reports the investigated community perceptions on malaria and their implications of this for ongoing outdoor malaria transmission and malaria control efforts.MethodsThis was a qualitative study conducted in two rural villages and two peri-urban areas located in Kilombero Valley in south-eastern Tanzania. 40 semi-structured in-depth interviews and 8 focus group discussions were conducted with men and women who had children under the age of five. The Interviews and discussions focused on (1) community knowledge of malaria transmission, and (2) the role of such knowledge on outdoor malaria transmission as a contributing factor to residual malaria transmission.ResultsThe use of bed nets for malaria prevention has been stressed in a number of campaigns and malaria prevention programmes. Most people interviewed believe that there is outdoor malaria transmission since they use interventions while indoors, but they are unaware of changing mosquito host-seeking behaviour. Participants pointed out that they were frequently bitten by mosquitoes during the evening when outdoors, compared to when they were indoors. Most participants stay outdoors in the early evening to undertake domestic tasks that cannot be conducted indoors. House structure, poor ventilation and warm weather conditions were reported to be the main reasons for staying outdoors during the evening. Participants reported wearing long sleeved clothes, fanning and slapping themselves, using repellents, and burning cow dung and neem tree leaves to chase away mosquitoes.ConclusionsCommunity understanding of multiple prevention strategies is crucial given changes in mosquito host seeking behaviour and the increased incidence of outdoor biting. The current low use of outdoor control measures is attributed largely to limited awareness of outdoor transmission. Improved community understanding of outdoor malaria transmission is critical: efforts to reduce or eliminate malaria transmission will not be successful if the control of outdoor transmission is not emphasized.