↓ Skip to main content

The importance of accounting for larval detectability in mosquito habitat-association studies

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The importance of accounting for larval detectability in mosquito habitat-association studies
Published in
Malaria Journal, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1308-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthew Low, Admasu Tassew Tsegaye, Rickard Ignell, Sharon Hill, Rasmus Elleby, Vilhelm Feltelius, Richard Hopkins

Abstract

Mosquito habitat-association studies are an important basis for disease control programmes and/or vector distribution models. However, studies do not explicitly account for incomplete detection during larval presence and abundance surveys, with potential for significant biases because of environmental influences on larval behaviour and sampling efficiency. Data were used from a dip-sampling study for Anopheles larvae in Ethiopia to evaluate the effect of six factors previously associated with larval sampling (riparian vegetation, direct sunshine, algae, water depth, pH and temperature) on larval presence and detectability. Comparisons were made between: (i) a presence-absence logistic regression where samples were pooled at the site level and detectability ignored, (ii) a success versus trials binomial model, and (iii) a presence-detection mixture model that separately estimated presence and detection, and fitted different explanatory variables to these estimations. Riparian vegetation was consistently highlighted as important, strongly suggesting it explains larval presence (-). However, depending on how larval detectability was estimated, the other factors showed large variations in their statistical importance. The presence-detection mixture model provided strong evidence that larval detectability was influenced by sunshine and water temperature (+), with weaker evidence for algae (+) and water depth (-). For larval presence, there was also some evidence that water depth (-) and pH (+) influenced site occupation. The number of dip-samples needed to determine if larvae were likely present at a site was condition dependent: with sunshine and warm water requiring only two dips, while cooler water and cloud cover required 11. Environmental factors influence true larval presence and larval detectability differentially when sampling in field conditions. Researchers need to be more aware of the limitations and possible biases in different analytical approaches used to associate larval presence or abundance with local environmental conditions. These effects can be disentangled using data that are routinely collected (i.e., multiple dip samples at each site) by employing a modelling approach that separates presence from detectability.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 57 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 24%
Student > Master 12 21%
Researcher 10 17%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Lecturer 2 3%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 9 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 25 43%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 16%
Environmental Science 4 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 9 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 September 2016.
All research outputs
#12,760,709
of 22,867,327 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#3,022
of 5,574 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#134,177
of 298,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#66
of 150 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,867,327 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,574 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 298,972 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 150 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.