Skip to main content

Table 2 Collection methods commonly used for mosquito-based arbovirus surveillance

From: Searching for the proverbial needle in a haystack: advances in mosquito-borne arbovirus surveillance

Mosquito behaviour

Collection method

Advantages

Disadvantages

References

Host seeking

Human-landing catchesa

Larger collections than resting or oviposition collections. Collections can be increased by using CO2 or chemical lures

Most traps require batteries or AC power to operate. Depending on environmental conditions, the fan components are prone to malfunction. Require CO2 as the primary attractant

[148]

BG Sentinel

[149]

CDC-light trap

[150]

EVS-trap

[151]

Mosquito Magnetâ„¢

[152]

Animal baited traps

[153,154,155]

Resting

CDC-backpack aspirator

More blood fed mosquitoes collected, ideal for blood meal analysis

Labour intensive and inefficient mosquito capture

[156]

Prokopack

[157]

Resting boxes

[158,159,160]

Oviposition

Sticky ovitraps

Mosquitoes have bloodfed and thus a higher probability of detecting positive mosquitoes. Targets Aedes-borne viruses such as DENV and CHIKV

Smaller collections than other methods, thus all mosquitoes can be easily processed

[161,162,163]

Gravid Aedes trap (GAT)

[66]

CDC-gravid trap

[164]

  1. aAlthough this method has been used for arbovirus studies in the past, it has considerable drawbacks, including the risk of infection to the collector, which is considered unethical even illegal in some countries
  2. Abbreviations: CDC, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; EVS, Encephalitis virus surveillance