TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparative efficacy of existing surveillance tools for Aedes aegypti in Western Kenya
AU - Yalwala, Sancto
AU - Clark, Jeffrey
AU - Oullo, David
AU - Ngonga, Daniel
AU - Abuom, David
AU - Wanja, Elizabeth
AU - Bast, Joshua
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 The Society for Vector Ecology.
PY - 2015/12/1
Y1 - 2015/12/1
N2 - All traditional surveillance techniques for Aedes aegypti have been developed for the cosmopolitan domestic subspecies Ae. aegypti aegypti, and not the sylvatic subspecies, Ae. aegypti formosus. The predominant form in Western Kenya is Ae. aegypti formosus that is rarely associated with human habitations but is linked to transmission of sylvatic dengue virus strains. We compared five surveillance methods for their effectiveness in sampling Ae. aegypti formosus with the goal of determining a sustainable surveillance strategy in Kenya. The methods included larval and pupal surveys, oviposition trapping, BG-Sentinel trapping, resting boxes, and backpack aspirations. Larval and pupal surveys collected the highest number of Ae. aegypti formosus (51.3%), followed by oviposition traps (45.7%), BG-Sentinel traps (3.0%), and zero collected with either backpack aspiration or resting box collections. No Ae. aegypti formosus larvae or pupae were found indoors. The results indicate that oviposition traps and outdoor larval and pupal surveys were better surveillance methods for Ae. aegypti formosus in Western Kenya.
AB - All traditional surveillance techniques for Aedes aegypti have been developed for the cosmopolitan domestic subspecies Ae. aegypti aegypti, and not the sylvatic subspecies, Ae. aegypti formosus. The predominant form in Western Kenya is Ae. aegypti formosus that is rarely associated with human habitations but is linked to transmission of sylvatic dengue virus strains. We compared five surveillance methods for their effectiveness in sampling Ae. aegypti formosus with the goal of determining a sustainable surveillance strategy in Kenya. The methods included larval and pupal surveys, oviposition trapping, BG-Sentinel trapping, resting boxes, and backpack aspirations. Larval and pupal surveys collected the highest number of Ae. aegypti formosus (51.3%), followed by oviposition traps (45.7%), BG-Sentinel traps (3.0%), and zero collected with either backpack aspiration or resting box collections. No Ae. aegypti formosus larvae or pupae were found indoors. The results indicate that oviposition traps and outdoor larval and pupal surveys were better surveillance methods for Ae. aegypti formosus in Western Kenya.
KW - Aedes aegypti
KW - Kenya
KW - Mosquito surveillance tools
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84947900821&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/jvec.12168
DO - 10.1111/jvec.12168
M3 - Article
C2 - 26611965
AN - SCOPUS:84947900821
SN - 1081-1710
VL - 40
SP - 301
EP - 307
JO - Journal of Vector Ecology
JF - Journal of Vector Ecology
IS - 2
ER -