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