Efficacy of pyrethroid‐treated nets against malaria vectors and nuisance‐biting mosquitoes in Tanzania in areas with long‐term insecticide‐treated net use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To measure pyrethroid susceptibility in populations of malaria vectors and nuisance-biting mosquitoes in Tanzania and to test the biological efficacy of current insecticide formulations used for net treatment. METHODS: Anopheles gambiae Giles s.l., An. funestus Giles s.l. and Culex quinquefasciatus Say were collected during three national surveys and two insecticide-treated net (ITN) studies in Tanzania. Knockdown effect and mortality were measured in standard WHO susceptibility tests and ball-frame bio-efficacy tests. Test results from 1999 to 2004 were compared to determine trends in resistance development. RESULTS: Anopheles gambiae s.l. and An. funestus s.l. were highly susceptible to permethrin (range 87-100%) and deltamethrin (consistently 100%) in WHO tests in 1999 and 2004, while Culex quinquefasciatus susceptibility to these pyrethroids was much lower (range 7-100% and 0-84% respectively). Efficacy of pyrethroid-treated nets was similarly high against An. gambiae s.l. and An. funestus s.l. (range 82-100%) while efficacy against Cx. quinquefasciatus was considerably lower (range 2-100%). There was no indication of development of resistance in populations of An. gambiae s.l. or An. funestus s.l. where ITNs have been extensively used; however, susceptibility of nuisance-biting Cx. quinquefasciatus mosquitoes declined in some areas between 1999 and 2004. CONCLUSION: The sustained pyrethroid susceptibility of malaria vectors in Tanzania is encouraging for successful malaria control with ITNs. Continued monitoring is essential to ensure early resistance detection, particularly in areas with heavy agricultural or public health use of insecticides where resistance is likely to develop. Widespread low susceptibility of nuisance-biting Culex mosquitoes to ITNs raises concern for user acceptance of nets.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".