Biology
of the Malaria Vectors in Southern Africa
Breeding
behavior
Both
A. arabiensis
and An. gambiae
breed mostly in small
water collections of
stagnant and muddy seepage
and rainwater with partial
or full sunlight. The
species avoid polluted
water. Vegetation can
be absent or present.
Anopheles funestus
prefers large bodies
of fresh water marshes
with full or partial
sunlight. Larvae occur
among floating or emerging
vegetation. A summary
on the preferred breeding
sites of the three species
is presented in
Table 1.
Feeding
and resting behaviors
The
three species bite indoors
and outdoors similarly
as long as hosts are
available (Table
2). Anopheles
gambiae and An.
funestus are relatively
more anthropophilic
(preferring biting humans
to animals) and endophilic
(rests mostly indoors)
than An. arabiensis.
An. funestus rarely
rests outdoors.
Vectorial
efficiency
Malaria
sprozoite rates are
generally higher in
populations of An.
gambiae, followed
by An. funestus,
than in An. arabienesis
(Table
2). There is also
a consensus the latter
species has a shorter
survival rate than
An. gambiae although
this needs more laboratory
and fieled studies.
These
biological variations
indicate that An.
gambiae and An.
funestus are more
effective vectors with
a capacity to sustain
malaria transmission
at lower vector population
densities than An.
arabiensis.
The
fact that An. gambiae
and An. funestus
are endophilic means that properly applied
residual house spraying can significantly reduce
malaria transmission in areas where the vectors
are important. In fact,
An. funestus is no longer an important
vector after its suppression by residual house
spraying in areas of the sub-region where the
method is a major component of malaria control
programs. The partial exophilic behavior of An.
arabiensis
Back
to top
Table
1.
Summary of breeding
behavior of An. gambiae
s.s, An. arabiensis
and An. funestus and
possible larval control
methods
Types
of breeding sites |
Breeding
site preference |
Possible
larval control methods |
Gambiae |
Arabiensis |
Funestus |
Larviciding |
Source
reduction |
Environmental
management |
Semi-permanent
rain pools |
+++ |
+++ |
+ |
++ |
+++ |
++ |
Temporary
rain pools |
+++ |
+++ |
+ |
++ |
+++ |
--- |
Overflow
water |
+++ |
+++ |
++ |
+ |
+++ |
++ |
Roadside
ditches |
++ |
++ |
+ |
++ |
++ |
+++ |
Clogged
drainage |
++ |
++ |
+ |
++ |
++ |
+++ |
Discarded
containers |
++ |
++ |
--- |
--- |
+++ |
--- |
Discarded
tyres |
++ |
+++ |
--- |
--- |
+++ |
--- |
Hoof
prints |
++ |
++ |
--- |
--- |
+ |
--- |
Small
borrow pits |
+++ |
+++ |
+ |
+++ |
+++ |
--- |
Large
borrow pits |
+++ |
+++ |
+++ |
+++ |
++ |
++ |
Swamps/marshes |
++ |
++ |
+++ |
--- |
+ |
+++ |
Impoundment |
++ |
++ |
+++ |
--- |
--- |
+++ |
Lakeshores |
+ |
+ |
+++ |
++ |
--- |
++ |
Slow
rivers |
++ |
++ |
++ |
++ |
--- |
++ |
Bay
shores |
++ |
++ |
+++ |
++ |
--- |
++ |
Full/partial
sunlight |
+++ |
+++ |
+++ |
NA |
NA |
NA |
Vegetation
present |
++ |
++ |
+++ |
NA |
NA |
NA |
Vegetation
absent |
+++ |
+++ |
+ |
NA |
NA |
NA |
Muddy
water |
+++ |
+++ |
--- |
NA |
NA |
NA |
Polluted
water |
--- |
--- |
--- |
NA |
NA |
NA |
Species
Larval
control method
+++
Breeds most +++ Most
suitable
++
Breeds often ++ More
suitable
+
Breeds some times +
Suitable
---
Rarely ( if at all )
-- Not suitable
NA
Not applicable
might
affect the effectiveness
of residual house spraying
in areas where the species
is an important vector.
However, the low vectorial
efficiency of the species
means it requires a
high population density
to sustain malaria transmission
at a significant level.
This implies that vector
control interventions
that reduce the population
density of An. arabiensis
by at least 50% can
significantly reduce
malaria transmission.
Back
to top
Table
2.
Biological information
related to vectorial
efficiency of the three
important malaria vectors
in Southern Africa
Species |
Resting
sites |
Biting
sites |
Human
Blood Index (HBI)+ |
Sporozoite
infection rate++ |
Out-
doors
|
Indoors |
Out-
doors
|
Indoors |
Out
door
|
In
houses occupied
with: |
Human
only |
Mixed* |
Unspecified |
Arabiensis |
Frequently |
More
Frequently
|
Frequently |
Frequently |
0.08 |
0.84 |
0.42 |
0.72 |
2.79 |
Gambiae
|
Less
frequently |
Most
frequently |
Less
frequently |
More
frequently |
0.04 |
0.89 |
0.81 |
0.88 |
6.33 |
Funestus |
Rarely |
Almost
exclusively |
Less
frequently |
More
frequently |
0.47 |
--- |
--- |
0.98 |
3.85 |
* Occupied
by humans and animals
+
Proportion of female
mosquitoes found fed
on human blood = percentage
Human Blood Index (HBI)
++
Proportion of female
mosquitoes found containing
malaria sporozoites
in their salivary glands
= percentage sporozoite
rate
Back
to top
Selective
Vector Control and Personal
Protection Methods
1.
Any intervention targeted
to reducing vector population
density and survival
that aims as an end
product to reduce malaria
transmission is described
as vector control. Selective
vector control
is the application of
site and time specific
control methods that
are cost-effective when
applied in a particular
environment and time.
2.
Personal
protection methods
mainly protect the individuals
who use them from malaria
infection by reducing
human-vector contact
without necessarily
reducing vector density
or over all malaria
transmission.
In
Southern Africa both
selective vector control
and personal protection
methods are widely used
at different levels
in different countries.
The current implementation
status and population
coverage of vector control
in Southern Africa are
compiled in
Tables 3 and 4,
respectively. However,
most figures in Table
4 are estimated
and extrapolated from
the existing limited
information (data) at
the sub-regional level.
Table
3.
Vector control and personal
protection and their
management in Southern
Africa as of 2000
Country |
Vectors |
Vector
control & personal
protection methods
on use |
Insecticide
resistance |
Sentinel
sites for susceptibility
& bioassay |
VCSC
and/or ITNSC |
National
entomo-logist |
Major |
Minor |
Angola |
gambiae
s.s funestus
|
Melas
Arabeinsis |
RHSa,
Larviciding+
Bednets+
Repellentsb+ |
No
information |
None |
None |
Exist |
Botswana |
arabeinsis |
-- |
RHS+++
Bednets++
Repellentsb++ |
None |
None |
None |
Exist |
Malawi |
gambiae
s.l. funestus
|
-- |
Bednets
++ |
No
information |
None |
None |
None |
Mozambique |
gambiae
s.s
funestus
|
Merus |
RHS
++ |
Funestus
for pyretroids? |
None |
None |
Exist |
Namibia |
arabeinsis |
-- |
RHS+++
Bednets++
|
No
information |
Exist |
Exist |
None |
South
Africa |
arabeinsis |
Merus
Funestus |
RHS+++
Repellentsb+ |
Funestus
for pyretroids |
None |
Exist |
None |
Swaziland |
arabeinsis |
Funestus |
RHS+++
Repellentsb+ |
Non |
None |
None |
None |
Tanzania |
gambiae
s.s. arabiensis
|
Merus |
RHS
(for epidemics)
Bednets+++ |
No
information |
None |
None |
None |
Zambia |
gambiae
s.s. |
Funestus |
Bednets
++ Repellents+
|
No
information |
None |
None |
None |
Zimbabwe |
arabeinsis |
Funestus
Merus
|
RHS+++
Larviciding+
Bednets+
Repellents+
|
An.
arabiensis for deildrin |
Exist |
Exist |
Exist |
a
Limited
in urban areas
? Further confirmation
required
b
Individual use - Information
not available
RHS-Residual
House Spraying bednets
- Both treated and non-treated
ITNSC-
ITN subcommittee CSC-Vector
control Subcommittee
+++
Significat applied
++
Moderately applied
+
Limited application
Back
to top
Current
Priorities in Vector
Control Programs in
Southern Africa
In
order to improve vector
control interventions
and increase their effectiveness
in Southern Africa the
following are the priorities.
- Strengthening
supervision and monitoring
capacity of NMCPs
for RHS and other
vector control methods
at national and district
levels
- Establishing
and strengthening
documentation, reviewing
and reporting systems
- Expanding
the use of ITNs
- Strengthening
vector surveillance
capacity at national
level to ensure implementation
of evidence based
vector control interventions
- Establishing
sentinel sites (for
monitoring and evaluation)
and Vector Control
Sub-committees
Table
4. Estimated
size of population living
in malarious areas and
proportion of the population
targeted to be protected
by Residual House Spraying
(RHS) and own Mosquito
Nets (MN)(insecticide
treated and non-treated)
in Southern Africa as
of 1999.
Country
|
Population
|
Proportion
of population
at risk of malaria
|
%age
|
Number
|
Proportion
(estimated average)
of population
targeted by RHS
& own MN
|
RHS
|
>1
MN/ household
|
%
|
Number
|
Angola
|
11,967,000
|
100
|
11,967,000
|
10
|
1,196,700
|
<1%
|
Botswana
|
1,551,000
|
40
|
620,400
|
74
|
459,096
|
>50%
|
Malawi
|
10,377,000
|
100
|
10,377,000
|
NA
|
NA
|
--
|
Mozambique
|
16,118,000
|
100
|
16,118,000
|
9
|
1,450,620
|
<1%
|
Namibia
|
1,653,000
|
66
|
1,090,980
|
60
|
654,588
|
--
|
South
Africa
|
44,295,000
|
20
|
8,859,000
|
80
|
7,087,283
|
--
|
Swaziland
|
931,000
|
30
|
279,300
|
95
|
265,335
|
NA
|
Tanzania
|
32,189,000
|
90
|
28,970,100
|
NA
|
NA
|
70%
(urban)
7% (rural)
|
Zambia
|
8,690,000
|
100
|
8,690,000
|
NA
|
NA
|
<10%
|
Zimbabwe
|
11,924,000
|
50
|
5,962,000
|
34
|
2,000,000
|
2%
|
Total
|
139,695,000
|
|
92,933,780
|
14.1
|
13,113,622
|
|
--
Information not available
NA
- Not applicable
Back
to top
|