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