Skip to main content

Table 2 Association between trap type and mosquito catch during the standardized field evaluation of six sampling devices using a generalised linear mixed effects model

From: Field evaluation of two novel sampling devices for collecting wild oviposition site seeking malaria vector mosquitoes: OviART gravid traps and squares of electrocuting nets

Treatment Modelled weekly mean (95 % CI) Rate ratio (RR) (95 % CI) P-value
An. gambiae (s.l.)d
 Box gravid trap 1.0 (0.3–2.7) 1a
 E-nets 3.1 (1.2–8.0) 3.3 (1.4–7.6)b 0.006
 Sticky water surface 0.9 (0.3–2.5) 0.9 (0.4–2.4)a 0.864
 Floating sticky transparency 0.2 (0.1–0.9) 0.2 (0.1–0.9)c 0.029
Culicines
 Box gravid trap 5.6 (2.3–13.9) 1a
 E-nets 21.2 (8.9–50.6) 3.8 (2.3–6.2)b < 0.001
 Sticky water surface 30.9 (13.0–73.5) 5.5 (3.4–9.0)b < 0.001
 Floating sticky transparency 20.8 (8.7–49.6) 3.7 (2.3–6.1)b < 0.001
 Detergent 4.3 (1.8–10.6) 0.8 (0.4–1.3)a 0.348
 Sticky board 5.0 (2.0–12.4) 0.9 (0.5–1.5)a 0.693
  1. a,b,cMultiple comparisons of treatments were calculated based on the model parameter estimates. Values sharing same letter were not statistically different (P > 0.05)
  2. dDetergent and sticky boards did not collect An. gambiae (s.l.) mosquitoes. Therefore, they were not included in the model