Table 2.
Summary of findings of meta-analyses of the effect of riceland mosquito control on Anopheles larval density (the number of larvae and pupae per dip or area sampler), arranged by the type of control, study design and geographical region.
| Study | Country | Predominant vector | Details of intervention (application method, rate, dose, frequency, timing, fish species) | Study design | Plot size (no. of replications*) | Relative percent difference (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Larviciding | ||||||
| Surface agents | ||||||
| Reiter (1980) | Kenya | An. gambiae s.l | Monomolecular surface film (lecithin solution) at rate of 2.47 L/ha | CTS1 | 600 m2 (9) | − 60.0 (− 74.0, − 38.5) |
| Reiter (1980) | Kenya | An. gambiae s.l | Monomolecular surface film (lecithin solution) at rate of 4.94 L/ha | CTS | 600 m2 (15) | − 57.1 (− 76.3, − 22.3) |
| Bukhari et al. (2011) | Kenya | An. gambiae s.l | Monomolecular surface film (Aquatain, silicone-based) at 1 ml/m2 (1st application) and at 2 ml/m2 (2nd application) | CTS | 2000 m2 (6) | − 29.1 (− 79.0, + 138.7) |
| RE model for all studies | − 57.2 (− 69.4, − 40.3) | |||||
| Karanja et al. (1994) | Kenya | An. arabiensis | Monomolecular surface film (Arosurf MSF) at 4 L/ha every 14 days | CITS2 | 100 m2 (4) | − 91.6 (− 99.9, + 486.3) |
| Synthetic organic chemicals | ||||||
| Allen et al. (2008) | USA | An. quadrimaculatus | Lambda-cyhalothrin, aerial application at 5.5 g AI/ha, once (1 ×) prior permanent flooding | CTS | 13–15 ha (2) | − 9.3 (− 40.9, + 39.0) |
| Ravoahangimalala et al. (1994) | Madagascar | An. gambiae s.s | Deltamethrin emulsionable concentrate 25 5 g/ha, 1 × | CTS | 58–110 m2 (2) | − 92.7 (− 95.4, − 88.5) |
| Ravoahangimalala et al. (1994) | Madagascar | An. gambiae s.s | Deltamethrin emulsionable concentrate 25 12.5 g/ha, 1 × | CTS | 43–58 m2 (2) | − 92.9 (− 96.5, − 85.8) |
| Yap and Ho (1977) | Malaysia | Anopheles spp. | Chlorpyrifos (Dursban) at 14 gm/ha, 1 × | CTS | (3) | − 79.0 (− 91.8, − 46.5) |
| Yap and Ho (1977) | Malaysia | Anopheles spp. | Chlorpyrifos (Dursban) at 28 gm/ha, 1 × | CTS | (3) | − 75.2 (− 90.6, − 34.5) |
| Yap and Ho 1977) | Malaysia | Anopheles spp. | Chlorpyrifos (Dursban) at 56 gm/ha, 1 × | CTS | (3) | − 67.8 (− 82.3, − 41.4) |
| Yap and Ho (1977) | Malaysia | Anopheles spp. | Organophosphorus (Dowco-214) at 56 gm/ha, 1 × | CTS | (3) | − 68.0 (− 83.6, − 37.5) |
| Yap et al. (1982) | Malaysia | Anopheles spp. | Temephos (Abate 500E) 60 gm/ha, 1 × | CTS | 69–365 m2 (2) | − 56.3 (− 86.8, + 45.0) |
| Yap et al. (1982) | Malaysia | Anopheles spp. | Temephos (Abate 500E) 100 gm/ha, 1 × | CTS | 69–365 m2 (2) | − 77.0 (− 93.0, − 24.4) |
| Yap et al. (1982) | Malaysia | Anopheles spp. | Temephos (Abate 500E) 200 gm/ha, 1 × | CTS | 69–365 m2 (2) | − 61.2 (− 89.5, + 43.2) |
| Teng et al. (2005) | Taiwan | An. sinensis | Temephos (Abate 1-SG) at 1 ppm, 2 × (20 day interval) | CTS | 119–194 m2 (4) | − 91.2 (− 97.5, − 69.3) |
| RE model for all studies | − 73.1 (− 83.8, − 55.4) | |||||
| Kamel et al. (1972) | Egypt | An. pharoensis | Iodofenphos (NUVANOL N20U), aerial application at 1.5 L/ha, 1 × | CITS | 50–120 ha (2) | − 93.2 (− 98.1, − 76.2) |
| Kamel et al. (1972) | Egypt | An. pharoensis | Iodofenphos (NUVANOL N20U), aerial application at 3 L/ha, 1 × | CITS | 50–120 ha (2) | − 50.2 (− 83.3, + 49.0) |
| RE model for all studies | − 72.3 (− 89.5, − 26.9) | |||||
| Biological larvicides | ||||||
| Allen et al. (2008) | USA | An. quadrimaculatus | Bacillus thuringiensis var. israelensis (Bti), AQUABACxt, aerial application at 108 L/ha on a 61-m swath, 1 × | CTS | 13–15 ha (3) | − 60.8 (− 86.9, + 17.1) |
| Dennett et al. (2001) | USA | An. quadrimaculatus | Bacillus sphaericus (Bs), VectoLex WDG, aerial application at 1.68 kg/ha, 1 × | CTS | 2000 m2 (2) | − 8.6 (− 24.1, + 10.1) |
| Dennett et al. (2001) | USA | An. quadrimaculatus | Bs, VectoLex WDG, aerial application at 0.56 kg/ha, 1 × | CTS | 2000 m2 (2) | − 11.1 (− 24.2, + 4.2) |
| Ravoahangimalala et al. (1994) | Madagascar | An. gambiae s.s | Bti, Teknar HP-D liquid concentrate, at 0.6 L/ha, 1 × | CTS | 58–68 m2 (2) | − 81.1 (− 86.1, − 74.4) |
| Ravoahangimalala et al. (1994) | Madagascar | An. gambiae s.s | Bti, Teknar HP-D liquid concentrate, at 1.25 L/ha, 1 × | CTS | 58–78 m2 (2) | − 87.7 (− 92.7, − 79.5) |
| Ravoahangimalala et al. (1994) | Madagascar | An. gambiae s.s | Bti, Teknar HP-D liquid concentrate, at 12.5 L/ha, 1 × | CTS | 58–87 m2 (2) | − 93.2 (− 96.1, − 88.0) |
| Sundaraj and Reuben (1991) | India | An. subpictus | Bs, Biocide-S 1593 M, at 2.2 kg/ha, 1 × after transplantation | CTS | 440 m2 (3) | − 74.9 (− 90.5, − 33.5) |
| Sundaraj and Reuben (1991) | India | An. subpictus | Bs, Biocide-S 1593 M, at 4.3 kg/ha, 1 × after transplantation | CTS | 440 m2 (3) | − 75.8 (− 92.4, − 22.7) |
| Kramer et al. (1988) | USA | An. freeborni | Bti, Vectobac (200 ITU/mg), at 6 kg/ha, 2 × (when mosquito densities were high) | CTS | 1000 m2 (3) | − 56.1 (− 81.3, + 2.8) |
| Teng et al. (2005) | Taiwan | An. sinensis | Bti, Vectobac G, at 1 g/m2, 2 × (20 day interval) | CTS | 119–194 m2 (4) | − 83.8 (− 94.9, − 48.6) |
| Teng et al. (2005) | Taiwan | An. sinensis | Lagenidium giganteum T, 1.5 ppm and 30 oz/acre, 2 × (20 day interval) | CTS | 119–194 m2 (4) | − 38.5 (− 80.7, + 95.7) |
| Teng et al. (2005) | Taiwan | An. sinensis | Lagenidium giganteum A, 1.5 ppm and 30 oz/acre, 2 × (20 day interval) | CTS | 119–194 m2 (4) | + 1.3 (− 69.0, + 231.3) |
| Balaraman et al. 1983) | India | An. subpictus | Bti serotype H-14 (VCRC B-17), with dose 27 × 105 spores/mL, 3 × | CTS | 1000 m2 (5) | − 75.8 (− 87.0, − 55.0) |
| McLaughlin et al. (1982) | USA | An. crucians | Bti, H-14 (Abbott 6108b 300 T.U./mg), at 6.0 kg/ha, 3 × | CTS | 30 m2 (3) | − 42.3 (− 58.1, − 20.4) |
| McLaughlin et al. (1982) | USA | An. crucians | Bti, H-14 (Abbott 6108b 300 T.U./mg), at 3.0 kg/ha, 3 × | CTS | 30 m2 (3) | − 60.8 (− 66.2, − 54.5) |
| McLaughlin et al. (1982) | USA | An. crucians | Bti, H-14 (Abbott 6108b 300 T.U./mg), at 1.5 kg/ha, 3 × | CTS | 30 m2 (3) | − 42.3 (− 58.5, − 19.7) |
| McLaughlin et al. (1982) | USA | An. crucians | Bti, H-14 (Biochem-Bactimos 666 1800 T.U./mg), at 1.0 kg/ha, 3 × | CTS | 30 m2 (3) | − 30.0 (− 48.8, − 4.3) |
| McLaughlin et al. (1982) | USA | An. crucians | Bti, H-14 (Biochem-Bactimos 666 1800 T.U./mg), at 0.5 kg/ha, 3 × | CTS | 30 m2 (3) | − 29.1 (− 41.4, − 14.2) |
| McLaughlin et al. (1982) | USA | An. crucians | Bti, H-14 (Biochem-Bactimos 666 1800 T.U./mg), at 0.25 kg/ha, 3 × | CTS | 30 m2 (3) | − 23.2 (− 38.4, − 4.4) |
| RE model for all studies | − 60.0 (− 71.8, − 43.1) | |||||
| Bolay & Trpis (1989) | Liberia | An. gambiae s.l | Bti, Teknar HP-D, at 0.1 g/m2 | CITS | 150 m2 (3) | − 75.8 (− 96.0, + 46.3) |
| Yu et al. (1993) | S. Korea | An. sinensis | Bti, H-14 (Bactis-P), at 0.1 kg/ha | CITS | 1000 m2 (6) | − 67.6 (− 97.0, + 251.1) |
| RE model for all studies | − 76.3 (− 95.4, + 21.9) | |||||
| Larviciding and biological control | ||||||
| Bacterial larvicide and fish | ||||||
| Kramer et al. (1988) | USA | An. freeborni | Bti, Vectobac (200 ITU/mg), at 6 kg/ha + Gambusia affinis at 1.1 kg/ha | CTS | 1000 m2 (3) | − 31.0 (− 68.3, + 50.3) |
| Kramer et al. (1988) | USA | An. freeborni | Bti, Vectobac (200 ITU/mg), at 6 kg/ha + G. affinis at 3.4 kg/ha | CTS | 1000 m2 (3) | − 82.8 (− 91.9, − 63.4) |
| RE model for all studies | − 65.7 (− 91.2, + 34.2) | |||||
| Bolay & Trpis (1989) | Liberia | An. gambiae s.l | Bti, Teknar HP-D, at 0.1 g/m2 + Tilpania nilotica (300) | CITS | 150 m2 (3) | − 88.1 (− 96.1, − 63.9) |
| Yu & Lee (1989) | S. Korea | An. sinensis | Bti, H-14, at 1 kg/ha + Aplocheilus latipes at 2/m2 | CITS | 150 m2 (2) | − 67.0 (− 79.8, − 46.2) |
| RE model for all studies | − 88.0 (− 95.0, − 71.3) | |||||
| Biological control | ||||||
| Fish | ||||||
| Kramer et al. (1988) | USA | An. freeborni | G. affinis at 1.1 kg/ha | CTS | 1000 m2 (3) | − 77.7 (− 88.2, − 56.1) |
| Kramer et al. (1988) | USA | An. freeborni | G. affinis at 3.4 kg/ha | CTS | 1000 m2 (3) | − 88.6 (− 94.2, − 77.9) |
| Victor et al. (1994) | India | An. subpictus | 3 indigenous carps (Catla catla, labeo rohita, cirrhinus mrigala) + 3 exotic carps (Cyprinus carpio, Hypopthalmithys molitri, Ctenopharyngodon idella) stocked at rate of 10,000/ha | CTS | 400 m2 (3) | − 51.6 (− 76.2, − 1.6) |
| Yu et al. (1981) | S. Korea | An. sinensis | Aphycypris chinensis (presence) | CTS | 2000 m2 (2) | − 92.2 (− 97.3, − 77.2) |
| RE model for all studies | − 81.5 (− 91.4, − 60.2) | |||||
| Bolay & Trpis (1989) | Liberia | An. gambiae s.l | Tilapia nilotica (n = 300) | CITS | 150 m2 (3) | − 87.8 (− 96.0, − 62.4) |
| Kim et al. (2002) | S. Korea | An. sinensis | Tilapia mossambicus at 2 fish/10 m2 | CITS | 300–600 m2 (2–4) | − 41.8 (− 57.1, − 20.9) |
| Kim et al. (2002) | S. Korea | An. sinensis | A. chinensis at 2 fish/10m2 | CITS | 300–600 m2 (2–4) | − 62.4 (− 76.0, − 41.2) |
| Kim et al. (2002) | S. Korea | An. sinensis | T. mossambicus at 2 fish/10m2 + A. chinensis at 1/m2 | CITS | 300–600 m2 (2–4) | − 55.1 (− 72.6, − 26.3) |
| Yu & Lee (1989) | S. Korea | An. sinensis | A. latipes at 2 fish/m2 + T. mossambicus at 2/m2 | CITS | 150 m2 (2) | − 73.4 (− 80.5, − 63.6) |
| RE model for all studies | − 87.1 (− 93.9, − 72.7) | |||||
| Copepod | ||||||
| Marten et al. (2000) | USA | An. Quadrimaculatus | Mesocyclops ruttneri (n = 500) | CTS | 100 m2 (2) | − 40.5 (− 82.8, + 105.6) |
| Azolla | ||||||
| Rajendran & Reuben (1991) | India | An. subpictus | Azolla microphylla introduced at rate 100 g/m2 on 5th DAT3 | CTS | 40 m2 (2) | − 48.7 (− 96.8, + 720.4) |
| Rajendran & Reuben (1991) | India | An. subpictus | Azolla microphylla introduced at rate 200 g/m2 on 5th DAT | CTS | 40 m2 (2) | + 45.6 (− 89.0, + 1826.3) |
| RE model for all studies | -10.3 (-86.4, + 493.3) | |||||
| Neem | ||||||
| Rao et al. (1995) | India | An. subpictus | Neem (Nimin) at 0.063 kg ai/ha | CTS | 400 m2 (3) | − 29.4 (− 84.3, + 217.8) |
| Rao et al. (1995) | India | An. subpictus | Neem (Nimin)-coated urea at 0.063 kg ai/ha + 62.5 kg urea/ha | CTS | 400 m2 (3) | − 34.0 (− 74.4, + 70.4) |
| Rao et al. (1995) | India | An. subpictus | Neem-coated urea (Neemrich-1 80EC4) at 0.09 kg ai/ha | CTS | 400 m2 (3) | − 25.1 (− 75.4, + 127.7) |
| Rao et al. (1995) | India | An. subpictus | As above + 62.5 kg urea/ha | CTS | 400 m2 (3) | − 33.2 (− 83.5, + 171.2) |
| Rao et al. (1995) | India | An. subpictus | Neem-coated urea (Neemrich-1 80EC) at 0.12 kg ai/ha | CTS | 400 m2 (3) | − 27.0 (− 81.5, + 187.4) |
| Rao et al. (1995) | India | An. subpictus | As above + 62.5 kg urea/ha | CTS | 400 m2 (3) | − 32.6 (− 76.6, + 93.9) |
| RE model for all studies | − 30.7 (− 57.2, + 12.3) | |||||
| Azolla and neem | ||||||
| Rajendran & Reuben (1991) | India | An. subpictus | Azolla microphylla at 100 g/m2 on 5th DAT + neem cake powder 50 g/m2 on day of transplantation (TP) | CTS | 40 m2 (2) | − 53.9 (− 96.5, + 528.2) |
| Neem and water management technique | ||||||
| Rao et al. (1995) | India | An. subpictus | Neem (Nimin)-coated urea at 0.063 kg ai/ha + 62.5 kg urea/ha + water allowed to stand 2.5–3.5 cm in the week following TP + from the second week, plots were dried for 2–3 days before re-irrigation | CTS | 400 m2 (3) | − 27.5 (− 90.1, + 430.6) |
| Rao et al. (1995) | India | An. subpictus | Neem-coated urea (Neemrich-1 80EC) at 0.09 kg ai + 62.5 kg urea/ha + water allowed to stand 2.5–3.5 cm in the week following TP + from the second week, plots were dried for 2–3 days before re-irrigation | CTS | 400 m2 (3) | − 43.7 (− 93.3, + 370.7) |
| RE model for all studies | − 35.6 (− 84.9, + 175.2) | |||||
Significant values are in bold.
*The number of plots per treatment group.
1CTS: Controlled time series.
2CITS: Controlled interrupted time series.
3DAT: Days after transplanting.
4EC: Emulsifiable concentrate.