The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Zooprophylaxis or zoopotentiation: the outcome of introducing animals on vector transmission is highly dependent on the mosquito mortality while searching
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Zooprophylaxis, the diversion of disease carrying insects from humans to animals, may reduce transmission of diseases such as malaria. However, as the number of animals increases, improved availability of blood meals may increase mosquito survival, thereby countering the impact of diverting feeds. METHODS: Computer simulation was used to examine the effects of animals on the transmission of human diseases by mosquitoes. Three scenarios were modelled: (1) endemic transmission, where the animals cannot be infected, eg. malaria; (2) epidemic transmission, where the animals cannot be infected but humans remain susceptible, e.g. malaria; (3) epidemic disease, where both humans and animals can be infected, but develop sterile immunity, eg. Japanese encephalitis B. For each, the passive impact of animals as well as the use of animals as bait to attract mosquitoes to insecticide was examined. The computer programmes are available from the author. A teaching model accompanies this article. RESULTS: For endemic and epidemic malaria with significant searching-associated vector mortality, changing animal numbers and accessibility had little impact. Changing the accessibility of the humans had a much greater effect. For diseases with an animal amplification cycle, the most critical factor was the proximity of the animals to the mosquito breeding sites. CONCLUSION: Estimates of searching-associated vector mortality are essential before the effects of changing animal husbandry practices can be predicted. With realistic values of searching-associated vector mortality rates, zooprophylaxis may be ineffective. However, use of animals as bait to attract mosquitoes to insecticide is predicted to be a promising strategy.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Impacts of biodiversity on the emergence and transmission of infectious diseases
Keesing, F., Belden, L. K., Daszak, P., Dobson, A., Harvell, C. D., Holt, R. D., Hudson, P., Jolles, A., Jones, K. E., Mitchell, C. E., et al. (2010) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature09575 · Cited by 2,043
Russell, T. L., Govella, N. J., Azizi, S., Drakeley, C. J., Kachur, S. P., & Killeen, G. F. (2011) · Malaria Journal · doi:10.1186/1475-2875-10-80 · Cited by 698
Griffin, J. T., Hollingsworth, T. D., Okell, L. C., Churcher, T. S., White, M., Hinsley, W., Bousema, T., Drakeley, C. J., Ferguson, N. M., Basáñez, M.-G., et al. (2010) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000324 · Cited by 595
Characterizing, controlling and eliminating residual malaria transmission
Killeen, G. F. (2014) · Malaria Journal · doi:10.1186/1475-2875-13-330 · Cited by 506
Ecology: A Prerequisite for Malaria Elimination and Eradication
Ferguson, H. M., Dornhaus, A., Beeche, A., Borgemeister, C., Gottlieb, M., Mulla, M. S., Gimnig, J. E., Fish, D., & Killeen, G. F. (2010) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000303 · Cited by 374
Metadata
- Authors
- Saul, A.
- Venue
- Malaria Journal
- Published
- 2003-09-19
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 32-32
- ISSN
- 1475-2875 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2159430880
- Cited by
- 200
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.62
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Zooprophylaxis or zoopotentiation: the outcome of introducing animals on vector transmission is highly dependent on the mosquito mortality while searching. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1475-2875-2-32
- The paper
- Saul, A. (2003). Zooprophylaxis or zoopotentiation: the outcome of introducing animals on vector transmission is highly dependent on the mosquito mortality while searching. Malaria Journal. https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-2-32
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.