Fig 1.
Map of the sites where the mosquito collections were performed in the Department of Loreto, Amazonian Peru.
Fig 2.
Proportion of the domestic and wild animals in the study localities based on host censuses in 2013–2015.
Additional animals seen frequently by the inhabitants were rats, toads, snakes and wild rodents.
Table 1.
Number of each mosquito species collected in 2013 pilot survey in LUP and CAH (one barrier screen/locality twice monthly from March to May).
Table 2.
Percentage (N) of Anopheles darlingi collected above or below 1m on barrier screens in 3 localities by year.
Table 3.
Summary of proportion of An. darlingi visually blood-fed vs. blood-fed determined by molecular analysis, collected using barrier screens in 3 localities from 2013–2015.
Fig 3.
Proportion of An. darlingi collected on the in (facing house, blue) vs. out (facing forest/water, orange) side of barrier screen by time of collection in LUP, CAH, and SEM, 2013–2015.
*Significant difference in the distribution of mosquito collection location by time period (Kruskal-Wallis p < 0.0001).
Fig 4.
Correlation between density of An. darlingi on barrier screens and wind speed.
Mosquitoes were collected from 6pm-6am from January-June 2015 in CAH and LUP and May-September 2015 in SEM. Linear regression of mosquito density on wind speed shown for each location (CAH: Pearson’s r = 0.14, p = 0.34; LUP: Pearson’s r = -0.25, p = 0.1; SEM: Pearson’s r = -0.27, p = 0.09).
Table 4.
Parity rate, daily survival and age of An. darlingi collected by barrier screens from LUP and CAH, 2014–2015.
Fig 5.
Proportion of blood-meal source, Anopheles darlingi collected by barrier screens in LUP, CAH and SEM in 2013–2015.
Table 5.
Summary of variation of An. darlingi Human Blood Index (HBI) per year and locality.
Fig 6.
Quantitative interaction network of An. darlingi blood-meal sources in SEM, CAH, and LUP.
Network is based on the analysis of blood-meal source for 4,417 An. darlingi females collected from 2013–2015.
Table 6.
Forage ratio (wi) and host selection index (Bi) of Anopheles darlingi in LUP, CAH and SEM from 2013–2015.
Values of 1/n of the standardized wi or Bi indicate no preference, below relative avoidance and >1/n relative preference.
Table 7.
Summary of Plasmodium detection in An. darlingi collected in all localities by barrier screen 2014 and 2015.