Efficacy of 3D screens for sustainable mosquito control: a semi-field experimental hut evaluation in northeastern Tanzania

Abstract

Abstract Background A three-dimensional window screen (3D-Screen) has been developed to create a window double-screen trap (3D-WDST), effectively capturing and preventing the escape of mosquitoes. A 2015 laboratory study demonstrated the 3D-Screen's efficacy, capturing 92% of mosquitoes in a double-screen setup during wind tunnel assays. To further evaluate its effectiveness, phase II experimental hut trials were conducted in Muheza, Tanzania. Methods Three experimental hut trials were carried out between 2016 and 2017. Trial I tested two versions of the 3D-WDST in huts with open or closed eaves, with one version using a single 3D-Screen and the other using two 3D-Screens. Trial II examined the 3D-WDST with two 3D-Screens in huts with or without baffles, while Trial III compared handmade and machine-made 3D structures. Mosquito capturing efficacy of the 3D-WDST was measured by comparing the number of mosquitoes collected in the test hut to a control hut with standard exit traps. Results Trial I showed that the 3D-WDST with two 3D-Screens used in huts with open eaves achieved the highest mosquito-capturing efficacy. This treatment captured 33.11% (CI 7.40–58.81) of female anophelines relative to the total collected in this hut (3D-WDST and room collections) and 27.27% (CI 4.23–50.31) of female anophelines relative to the total collected in the control hut (exit traps, room, and verandahs collections). In Trial II, the two 3D-Screens version of the 3D-WDST captured 70.32% (CI 56.87–83.77) and 51.07% (CI 21.72–80.41) of female anophelines in huts with and without baffles, respectively. Compared to the control hut, the capturing efficacy for female anophelines was 138.6% (37.23–239.9) and 42.41% (14.77–70.05) for huts with and without baffles, respectively. Trial III demonstrated similar performance between hand- and machine-made 3D structures. Conclusions The 3D-WDST proved effective in capturing malaria vectors under semi-field experimental hut conditions. Using 3D-Screens on both sides of the window openings was more effective than using a single-sided 3D-Screen. Additionally, both hand- and machine-made 3D structures exhibited equally effective performance, supporting the production of durable cones on an industrial scale for future large-scale studies evaluating the 3D-WDST at the community level. Graphical Abstract

Keywords

• Malaria
• Anopheles
• Mosquito control
• Window double screens
• 3D-Screens
• 3D-WDST