Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T21:42:18.375Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Studies on the Attractiveness of human Populations to Anophelines

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

C. R. Ribbands
C. R. Ribbands
Affiliation:
Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Many female Anophelines wander into huts at random, possibly for shelter, and afterwards feed upon any suitable inhabitants.

This random wandering can be eliminated by pyrethrum spraying, and the acute discrimination of those Anophelines which enter primarily for food can then be demonstrated.

In sprayed huts there was a close relation between the number of men sleeping and the number of Anophelines attracted. The proportions attracted by 3 men and by 1 man were, for A. melas, 2·72; 1: A. gambiae, 2·38; 1: A. funestus, 2·28; 1. Discrimination was reduced at one period by the masking odour of cut and withering bush.

There were marked fluctuations in the attractiveness of individuals to Anophelines. On several occasions one or other of the men used as bait suddenly became much more attractive than his fellows, and remained so for several days.

The removal of a village increased by only 25–50 per cent. the proportion of mosquitos caught in two huts which were allowed to remain on the village site. This result indicates that most of the mosquitos which had infested the village had been attracted from a distance by the scent, and had not merely arrived in the vicinity of the village by chance.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 40 , Issue 2 , August 1949 , pp. 227 - 238
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1949

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bristowe, W. S. (1946). Man's reaction to mosquito bites.—Nature, 158, p. 750.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Meillon, B. (1935). Studies on insects of medical importance in South Africa. Part II.—Publ. S. Afr. Inst. med. Res., no. 35, pp. 323–364.Google Scholar
Haddow, A. J. (1942). The mosquito fauna and climate of native huts at Kisumu, Kenya.—Bull. ent. Res., 33, pp. 91–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mellanby, K. (1946). Man's reaction to mosquito bites.—Nature, 158, p. 554.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Montgomery, W. M. (1932). Sulphur as a prophylactic in malaria.—S. Afr. med. J., 6, pp. 770–772.Google Scholar
Ribbands, C. R. (1944a). The influence of rainfall, tides and periodic fluctuations on a population of Anopheles melas, Theo.—Bull. ent. Res., 35, pp. 271–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ribbands, C. R. (1944b). Camp-siting in malarious districts of West Africa.—J. R. Army Med. Cps, 82, pp. 157–164.Google Scholar
Ribbands, C. R. (1946a). Moonlight and house-haunting habits of female Anophelines in West Africa.—Bull. ent. Res., 36, pp. 395–417.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ribbands, C. R. (1946b). Effects of bush clearance on flighting of West African Anophelines.—Bull. ent. Res., 37, pp. 33–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ribbands, C. R. (1946c). Repellency of pyrethrum and lethane sprays to mosquitos.—Bull. ent. Res., 37, pp. 163–172.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ribbands, C. R. (1946d). Man's reaction to mosquito bites.—Nature, 158, pp. 912–913.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomson, R. C. M. (1947). The effects of house spraying with pyrethrum and with DDT on Anopheles gambiae and A. melas in West Africa.—Bull. ent. Res., 36, pp. 449–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar