Skip to main content

Table 3 Parity rates of Anopheles vectors of malaria in the three study health districts

From: Role of Anopheles (Cellia) rufipes (Gough, 1910) and other local anophelines in human malaria transmission in the northern savannah of Cameroon: a cross-sectional survey

Health district   An. gambiae (s.l.) An. funestus An. pharoensis An. paludis An. rufipes
Garoua No. dissected (No. parous) 2,119 (765) 449 (177) 276 (68) 69 (18) 80 (25)
Parous rate (%) (95% CI) 36.10 (34.08–38.17) 39.42 (35.01–44.01) 24.64 (19.93–30.05) 26.09 (17.19–37.51) 31.25 (22.15–42.07)
Pitoa No. dissected (No. parous) 3,856 (2,207) 367 (132) 342 (124) 172 (49) 178 (84)
Parous rate (%) (95% CI) 57.24 (55.67–58.79) 35.97 (31.23–41.00) 36.26 (31.34–41.48) 28.49 (22.27–35.65) 47.19 (39.99–54.51)
Mayo Oulo No. dissected (No. parous) 1,184 (387) 136 (52) 60 (19) 12 (3) 925 (328)
Parous rate (%) (95% CI) 32.69 (30.07–35.41) 38.24 (30.50–46.62) 31.67 (21.31–44.23) 25.00 (8.89–53.23) 35.46 (32.44–38.60)
Total No. dissected (No. parous) 7,159 (3,359) 952 (361) 678 (211) 253 (70) 1,183 (437)
Parous rate (%) (95% CI) 46.92 (45.77–48.08) 37.92 (34.89–41.04) 31.12 (27.75–34.70) 27.67 (22.52–33.48) 36.94 (34.24–39.73)
  1. Note: The difference in parity rate between health districts and anopheline species was not significant (χ 2 = 6.62, df = 8, P = 0.58)
  2. Abbreviation: CI confidence interval