Fig. 4.

Entomological outcomes as predicted by bioassay survival according to East and West African hut designs. A Comparison of the level of pyrethroid resistance as measured using a discriminating dose bioassay and the percentage of mosquitoes which enter a hut and survive 24 h. Solid lines show the fitted relationship for the East (red) and West (blue) African hut design assuming the log-logistic function. Comparable plots showing the logistic function are provided in Supplementary file 1: Fig. S7A. B-C The relationship between EHT survival (24 h post-collection, unless the ITN incorporated the insecticide chlorfenapyr, in which case 72-h survival was used) and the probability of being caught inside a control hut relative to a hut with any type of ITN (where anywhere above the grey dashed-line indicates more mosquitoes were caught in the control hut) (B), mosquitoes successfully feeding and surviving (C), or exiting the hut without feeding (D). The point size in B-D is proportional to the total number of mosquitoes collected in the trial and coloured according to hut design. Solid lines in A-D show the best-fit relationship whilst the lighter shaded area indicates 95% credible intervals for the best-fit curves. E-F The models from A-D were combined to summarise how the average probability that blood-feeding mosquitoes will be killed, exit without feeding, deterred from entering or successfully blood-feed, varies with bioassay survival for either East (E) or West (F) African hut design. Both (E-F) show the log-logistic model, see Supplementary file 1: Figs. S7B–C for models using the logistic function.