Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 4, 2025
Visualizing Efficacy of Pesticides Against Disease Vector Mosquitoes in the Field
Published on: March 16, 2019
Insecticide treated eaves screens provide additional marginal protection compared to untreated eave screens under
Bernard Abong'o1,2, Silas Agumba1, Vincent Moshi1
1Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Kisumu, Kenya.
Introduction:
Human habitats remain the main point of human-vector interaction leading to malaria transmission despite the sustained use of insecticide-treated nets and indoor residual spraying. Simple structural modifications involving screening of doors, windows and eaves have great potential for reducing indoor entry of mosquitoes. Moreover, insecticide treatment of the screen material may provide additional benefit in mosquito population reduction.
Materials And Methods:
Four huts, each constructed inside a semi-field structure, were used in the study. Two had untreated eave and door screens and screened air cavities in place of windows (experiment 1) or were similar but with the eave screens treated with Actellic® 300CS insecticide (experiment 2). The other two huts remained unscreened throughout the study. Two hundred, 3-day old adults of F1 generation Anopheles funestus collected by aspiration or F0 reared from An. arabiensis larvae or An. arabiensis (Dongola strain) were released in each semi-field structure at dusk and recaptured the following morning. A single volunteer slept in each hut under an untreated bednet each night of the study. Recaptured mosquitoes were counted and recorded by location, either indoor or outdoor of each hut in the different semi-field structures.
Results:
Based on modelled estimates, significantly fewer, 10% An. arabiensis from Ahero, 11% An. arabiensis Dongola strain and 10% An. funestus from Siaya were observed inside modified huts compared to unmodified ones. Treating of eave screen material with Actellic® 300CS significantly reduced indoor numbers of An. arabiensis from Ahero, to nearly 0%, and An. arabiensis Dongola strain, to 3%, compared to huts with untreated eave screens, while eliminating An. funestus indoors. These modifications cost US$180 /structure and have been observed to last more than 15 years in a different location.
Conclusions:
Eave, door and window screening are effective ways of reducing mosquito entry into houses. Additionally, treatment of eave screen material with an effective insecticide further reduces the Anopheles population in and around the screened huts under semi-field conditions and could greatly complement existing vector control efforts.
