Limits...
Efficacy of neem chippings for mosquito larval control under field conditions.

Imbahale SS, Mukabana WR - BMC Ecol. (2015)

Bottom Line: Within treated habitats, early instar anopheline mosquitoes were recovered more from habitats provided with neem and fish compared to Bti treated habitats.All treated habitats recorded higher numbers of early instar larvae than late instars or pupae, indicating that gravid female mosquitoes still oviposited within treated habitats.Neem chippings are a good tool for mosquito larval source management under field conditions.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology, P.O. Box 30772 GPO, Nairobi, Kenya. sueimbahale@yahoo.com.

ABSTRACT

Background: An in depth understanding of mosquito breeding biology and factors regulating population sizes is fundamental for vector population control. This paper presents results from a survey of mosquito breeding habitats and the efficacy of neem chippings as a potential larvicide that can be integrated in mosquito control on Nyabondo Plateau in western Kenya.

Results: Six main mosquito habitat types namely artificial ponds, abandoned fish ponds, active fish ponds, open drains, temporary pools and swamps were found in Nyabondo. Early anopheline instars were mainly recovered from temporary pools, artificial ponds and abandoned fish ponds. The mosquitoes collected were Anopheles gambiae sensu lato (35%), An. coustani (46%) and Culex spp (19%). Both early and late instar larvae of anopheline and culicine mosquitoes were more abundant in the controls than in the Bti and neem treated habitats. Within treated habitats, early instar anopheline mosquitoes were recovered more from habitats provided with neem and fish compared to Bti treated habitats. All treated habitats recorded higher numbers of early instar larvae than late instars or pupae, indicating that gravid female mosquitoes still oviposited within treated habitats.

Conclusions: Neem chippings are a good tool for mosquito larval source management under field conditions. However, more research needs to be done to quantify the contribution of this tool to the overall mosquito borne disease transmission.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Mean numbers of early and late culicine mosquito larvae in untreated habitats (empty bar) or in habitats treated with the commercial biolarvicideBacillus thuringiensis israeliensis(gray bar), the edible fishOreochromis niloticus(hatched bar) and chippings of the neem treeAzadiracta indica(black bar).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4355977&req=5

Fig3: Mean numbers of early and late culicine mosquito larvae in untreated habitats (empty bar) or in habitats treated with the commercial biolarvicideBacillus thuringiensis israeliensis(gray bar), the edible fishOreochromis niloticus(hatched bar) and chippings of the neem treeAzadiracta indica(black bar).

Mentions: Early culicine larvae were likely to be present in control rather than Bti (OR 0.466; C.I. 0.419 – 0.518; P = 0.001) and neem (OR 0.422; C.I. 0.342 – 0.521; P = 0.001) treated habitats (Figure 3). There were significantly higher numbers of early culicine instars in habitats treated with fish than those treated with Bti (mean difference = 0.96 ± 0.085; P = 0.001) and neem (mean difference = 1.06 ± 0.099; P = 0.001). No significant differences in numbers of early culicine instars were observed in habitats treated with neem and Bti (P > 0.874). Late culicine larvae were likely to be present in control rather than Bti (OR 0.305; C.I. 0.268 – 0.348; P = 0.001) and neem (OR 0.279; C.I. 0.210 – 0.370; P = 0.001) treated habitats (Figure 3). Similar to early instars, significantly higher numbers of late culicine instars were in habitats treated with fish than those treated with Bti (mean difference = 0.53 ± 0.053; P = 0.001) and neem (mean difference = 0.55 ± 0.062; P = 0.001). No significant differences in numbers of late culicine instars were observed between habitats treated with neem and Bti (P > 1.0).Figure 3


Efficacy of neem chippings for mosquito larval control under field conditions.

Imbahale SS, Mukabana WR - BMC Ecol. (2015)

Mean numbers of early and late culicine mosquito larvae in untreated habitats (empty bar) or in habitats treated with the commercial biolarvicideBacillus thuringiensis israeliensis(gray bar), the edible fishOreochromis niloticus(hatched bar) and chippings of the neem treeAzadiracta indica(black bar).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4355977&req=5

Fig3: Mean numbers of early and late culicine mosquito larvae in untreated habitats (empty bar) or in habitats treated with the commercial biolarvicideBacillus thuringiensis israeliensis(gray bar), the edible fishOreochromis niloticus(hatched bar) and chippings of the neem treeAzadiracta indica(black bar).
Mentions: Early culicine larvae were likely to be present in control rather than Bti (OR 0.466; C.I. 0.419 – 0.518; P = 0.001) and neem (OR 0.422; C.I. 0.342 – 0.521; P = 0.001) treated habitats (Figure 3). There were significantly higher numbers of early culicine instars in habitats treated with fish than those treated with Bti (mean difference = 0.96 ± 0.085; P = 0.001) and neem (mean difference = 1.06 ± 0.099; P = 0.001). No significant differences in numbers of early culicine instars were observed in habitats treated with neem and Bti (P > 0.874). Late culicine larvae were likely to be present in control rather than Bti (OR 0.305; C.I. 0.268 – 0.348; P = 0.001) and neem (OR 0.279; C.I. 0.210 – 0.370; P = 0.001) treated habitats (Figure 3). Similar to early instars, significantly higher numbers of late culicine instars were in habitats treated with fish than those treated with Bti (mean difference = 0.53 ± 0.053; P = 0.001) and neem (mean difference = 0.55 ± 0.062; P = 0.001). No significant differences in numbers of late culicine instars were observed between habitats treated with neem and Bti (P > 1.0).Figure 3

Bottom Line: Within treated habitats, early instar anopheline mosquitoes were recovered more from habitats provided with neem and fish compared to Bti treated habitats.All treated habitats recorded higher numbers of early instar larvae than late instars or pupae, indicating that gravid female mosquitoes still oviposited within treated habitats.Neem chippings are a good tool for mosquito larval source management under field conditions.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology, P.O. Box 30772 GPO, Nairobi, Kenya. sueimbahale@yahoo.com.

ABSTRACT

Background: An in depth understanding of mosquito breeding biology and factors regulating population sizes is fundamental for vector population control. This paper presents results from a survey of mosquito breeding habitats and the efficacy of neem chippings as a potential larvicide that can be integrated in mosquito control on Nyabondo Plateau in western Kenya.

Results: Six main mosquito habitat types namely artificial ponds, abandoned fish ponds, active fish ponds, open drains, temporary pools and swamps were found in Nyabondo. Early anopheline instars were mainly recovered from temporary pools, artificial ponds and abandoned fish ponds. The mosquitoes collected were Anopheles gambiae sensu lato (35%), An. coustani (46%) and Culex spp (19%). Both early and late instar larvae of anopheline and culicine mosquitoes were more abundant in the controls than in the Bti and neem treated habitats. Within treated habitats, early instar anopheline mosquitoes were recovered more from habitats provided with neem and fish compared to Bti treated habitats. All treated habitats recorded higher numbers of early instar larvae than late instars or pupae, indicating that gravid female mosquitoes still oviposited within treated habitats.

Conclusions: Neem chippings are a good tool for mosquito larval source management under field conditions. However, more research needs to be done to quantify the contribution of this tool to the overall mosquito borne disease transmission.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus