Evaluation of Candidate Traps as Tools for Conducting Surveillance for<i>Anopheles</i>Mosquitoes in a Malaria-Endemic Area in Western Thailand

Abstract

The effectiveness of five mosquito traps at sampling anopheline mosquitoes was compared with landing/biting (L/B) collections in western Thailand. Traps evaluated included a CDC style light trap (CDC LT) with dry ice, the American Biophysics Corporation (ABC) standard light trap (ABC LT) with dry ice and octenol, the ABC counterflow geometry (CFG) trap with dry ice and octenol, the ABC mosquito magnet (MM) trap with octenol, and the Nicosia and Reinhardt Company Mosquito Attractor Device (N&R trap). Mosquito numbers captured in landing-biting collections were 5.2, 7.0, 7.3, 31.1, and 168.8 times greater than those collected in the ABC LT, MM, CDC LT, CFG, and N&R traps, respectively, for Anopheles minimus Theobald, the predominant malaria vector in the region. Similar results were obtained for the secondary malaria vectors Anopheles maculatus Theobald and Anopheles sawadwongporni Rattanarithikul & Green. Only Anopheles kochi Doenitz was collected in significantly greater numbers in the CDC LT, ABC LT, and MM traps compared with L/B collections. Although none of the traps were as effective as L/B collections, the ABC LT, MM, and CDC LT were the best alternatives to human bait for the collection of anopheline malaria vectors in Thailand.