Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T17:43:27.693Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The attraction of mosquitos by human or animal baits in relation to the transmission of disease

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

J. A. Reid
J. A. Reid
Affiliation:
Institute for Medical Research, Kuala Lumpur, Malaya
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Experiments were made at three different sites in Malaya between 1952 and 1957 to compare the numbers of mosquitos attracted to man, calf or goat under the same conditions. The baits being compared (either two men and one calf or two men and two goats) were exposed simultaneously in two net traps placed about 50 yd. apart. This procedure is referred to as comparative trapping.

The total number of mosquitos caught with each bait showed calf to be much the most attractive, followed by goats and then men. However, there were three species, the dark-winged form of Anopheles barbirostris Wulp, Aëdes albo-pictus (Skuse) and Culex pipiens fatigans Wied. that were attracted in larger numbers to man than to calf, and six species attracted in larger numbers to man than to goat.

To compare the host preferences of the different species as between man and calf, the numbers of each caught with man and with calf have been expressed as a ratio (the man: calf attraction ratio). For most species the ratios from the different sites were much the same, showing that the method produced repeatable results. The data from the three sites were therefore combined.

On the combined data the ratios range from 3·4:1 in favour of man for the dark-winged form of Anopheles barbirostris to 1:82 in favour of calf for A. vagus Dön.

As might be expected, the ratios show that the vectors of malaria, filariasis and virus diseases are among the more anthropophilous species.

Attraction ratios have been calculated from suitable data published by various authors for ten different species in five countries. The ratios obtained place the Anophelines in an order that agrees well with their status as vectors of malaria.

It appears that if the results of comparative trapping are expressed as attraction ratios, this offers a method of comparing the host preferences of mosquitos of the same or different species, at different times and places in a country, or even in different countries.

Type
Research Paper
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 52 , Issue 1 , April 1961 , pp. 43 - 62
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1961

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

Bates, M. (1949). The natural history of mosquitos.—379 pp. New York, Macmillan.Google Scholar
Buckley, J. J. C. (1960). On Brugia gen. nov. for Wuchereria spp. of the ‘malayi’ group, i.e., W. malayi (Brug, 1927), W. pahangi Buckley and Edeson, 1956, and W. patei Buckley, Nelson and Heisch, 1958.—Ann. trop. Med. Parasit. 54 pp. 75–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colless, D. H. (1957). Notes on the culicine mosquitoes of Singapore. II. The Culex vishnui group (Diptera, Culicidae), with descriptions of two new species.—Ann. trop. Med. Parasit. 51 pp. 87–101.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Colless, D. H. (1959a). Notes on the Culicine mosquitoes of Singapore. VI. Observations on catches made with baited and unbaited trap-nets.—Ann. trop. Med. Parasit. 53 pp. 251–258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Colless, D. H. (1959b). Notes on the Culicine mosquitoes of Singapore. VII. Host preferences in relation to the transmission of disease.—Ann. trop. Med. Parasit. 53 pp. 259–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colless, D. H. (1960). Some species of Culex (Lophoceraomyia) from New Guinea and adjacent islands, with descriptions of four new species and notes on the male of Culex fraudatrix Theobald (Diptera: Culicidae).—Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W. 84 pp. 382–390.Google Scholar
Danaraj, T. J., Schacher, J. F. & Colless, D. H. (1958). Filariasis in Singapore.—Med. J. Malaya 12 pp. 605–612.Google ScholarPubMed
Davidson, G. (1955). Further studies of the basic factors concerned in the transmission of malaria.—Trans. R. Soc. trop. Med. Hyg. 49 pp. 339–350.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Field, J. W., Niven, J. C. & Hodgkin, E. P. (1937). The prevention of malaria in the field by the use of quinine and atebrin.—Bull. Hlth Org. L. o. N. 6 pp. 236–290.Google Scholar
Garnham, P. C. C. (1938). Epidemiology of Anopheles funestus malaria with special reference to tergal plate varieties and maxillary indices.—Acta Conv. ter. trop. Malar. Morb. 2 pp. 161–177.Google Scholar
Gater, B. A. R. (1935). Aids to the identification of anopheline imagines in Malaya.—242 pp. Singapore, Malar. adv. Bd. F.M.S.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
Hale, J. H., Lim, K. A. & Colless, D. H. (1957). Investigation of domestic pigs as a potential reservoir of Japanese B encephalitis virus on Singapore island.—Ann. trop. Med. Parasit. 51 pp. 374–379.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hodgkin, E. P. (1950). The Anopheles umbrosus group (Diptera: Culicidae). Part II. Biology and transmission of malaria.—Trans. R. ent. Soc. Lond. 101 pp. 319–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgkin, E. P. (1956). The transmission of malaria in Malaya.—Stud. Inst. med. Res. Malaya no. 27, 98 pp.Google Scholar
Macdonald, W. W. & Traub, R. (1960). Malaysian parasites XXXVII. An introduction to the ecology of the mosquitoes of the lowland Dipterocarp forest of Selangor, Malaya.—Stud. Inst. med. Res. Malaya no. 29 pp. 79–109.Google Scholar
Magoon, E. H. (1935). A portable stable trap for capturing mosquitos.—Bull. ent. Res. 26 pp. 363–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newson, H. D. & Blakeslee, T. E. (1957). Observations of a laboratory colony of the mosquito Culex tritaeniorhynchus Giles.—Mosq. News 17 pp. 308–311.Google Scholar
Pond, W. L., Russ, S. B., Lancaster, W. E., Audy, J. R. & Smadel, J. E. (1954). Japanese ncephalitis in Malaya. II. Distribution of neutralizing antibodies in man and animals.—Amer. J. Hyg. 59 pp. 17–25.Google Scholar
Reid, J. A. (1947). A preliminary note on Malayan forms of Anopheles barbirostris.—Med. J. Malaya 2 pp. 125–127.Google Scholar
Reid, J. A. (1955). Division of Entomology.—Rep. Inst. med. Res. Malaya 1954 pp. 77–82.Google Scholar
Reid, J. A. (1958). Division of Entomology.—Rep. Inst. med. Res. Malaya 1957 pp. 72–83.Google Scholar
Reid, J. A. & Wharton, R. H. (1956). Trials of residual insecticides in window-trap huts against Malayan mosquitos.—Bull. ent. Res. 47 pp. 433–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sasa, M. & Sabin, A. B. (1950). Ecological studies on the mosquitoes of Okayama in relation to the epidemiology of Japanese B encephalitis.—Amer. J. Hyg. 51 pp. 21–35.Google Scholar
Sasse, B. E. & Hackett, L. W. (1950). Note on the host preferences of Anopheles pseudopunctipennis.—J. nat. Malar. Soc. 9 pp. 181–182.Google ScholarPubMed
Senior White, R. A. (1952). Studies on the bionomics of Anopheles aquasalis Curry, 1932. Part III.—Indian J. Malar. 6 pp. 29–72.Google ScholarPubMed
Smith, A. (1955). On the transmission of bancroftial filariasis on Ukara Island, Tanganyika. IV. Host-preferences of mosquitos and the incrimination of Anopheles gambiae Giles and A. funestus Giles as vectors of bancroftial filariasis.—Bull. ent. Res. 46 pp. 505–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, A. & Draper, C. C. (1959). Malaria in the Taveta area of Kenya and Tanganyika. Part I. Epidemiology.—E. Afr. med. J. 36 pp. 99–113.Google Scholar
Stone, A., Knight, K. L. & Starcke, H. (1959). A synoptic catalog of the mosquitoes of the world.—Thomas Say Foundation 6 358 pp. Washington, D.C., Ent. Soc. Amer.Google Scholar
Traub, R. (1957). United States Army Medical Research Unit (Malaya).—Rep. Inst. med. Res. Malaya 1956 pp. 100–109.Google Scholar
Wharton, R. H. (1951a). The habits of adult mosquitoes in Malaya. I. Observations on anophelines in window-trap huts and at cattle-sheds.—Ann. trop. Med. Parasit. 45 pp. 141–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wharton, R. H. (1951b). The habits of adult mosquitoes in Malaya. II. Observations on culicines in window-trap huts and at cattle-sheds.—Ann. trap. Med. Parasit. 45 pp. 155–160.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wharton, R. H. (1953). The habits of adult mosquitoes in Malaya. III. Feeding preferences of anophelines.—Ann. trop. Med. Parasit. 47 pp. 272–284.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wharton, R. H. (1960). Studies on filariasis in Malaya: field and laboratory investigations of the vectors of a rural strain of Wuchereria bancrofti.—Ann. trop. Med. Parasit. 54 pp. 78–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Zulueta, J. (1952). Observations on mosquito density in an endemic malarious area in eastern Colombia.—Amer. J. trop. Med. Hyg. 1 pp. 314–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar