Decreased proportions of indoor feeding and endophily in Anopheles gambiae s.l. populations following the indoor residual spraying and insecticide-treated net interventions in Benin( West Africa).

Background: In many parts of Africa as in Benin, the main strategies of vector control are based on the scaling-up of Long Lasting Insecticide Treated Nets (LLITNs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS). The need to understand the biological implications of IRS in large scale and full coverage of LLITNs is paramount. It is in this context that the present study was conducted. It aims to evaluate the effect of a large scale IRS using a non-pyrethroid insecticide and full coverage of deltamethrin treated nets on the behavior of An. gambiae s.l. in the intervention areas compared to untreated areas used as controls. Methods: Mosquitoes were collected using human landing catches, pyrethrum spray catches and window exit traps to assess reduction of entry rate, endophily rate, endophagy rate and overall mortality rate in natural populations of An. gambiae s.l. before IRS and LLITNs intervention (2007) and after in 2008 and 2010. Results: In the IRS arm, endophily rate was 67.13% before intervention and 4.5% after intervention, whereas in the control arm it was stable at 51.67% (P > 0 .05). In the LLITN arm endophily rates also decreased after intervention. After the IRS, no gravid mosquitoes were collected from all treated localities, but LLITN performance was not that spectacular. The proportion of mosquitoes biting indoors in the IRS arm decreased from 67.09% before intervention to 42.85% after intervention, compared to a low but significant decrease (71.31% to 57. 46%) in the LLITN arm. The use of vector control tools and behavior of the host would be the main factors that modify the behavior of taking a human blood meal observed on An. gambiae s.l. inside human dwellings. Conclusion: The impact on the behavior of An. gambiae s.l. observed with the bendiocarb used in IRS was highly effective compared with the free distribution of LLITNs in terms of mortality and the decrease of proportions of indoor feeding. Despite this efficacy, there is a need for complementary tools and research of alternative strategy oriented on effective health education, and the use of powerful tools such as IRS, LLITNs, larviciding and repellents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]