For those interested in arboviruses, here is an interesting freshly-published paper on the history and causes of spread of Aedes albopictus and current distribution globally…very interesting read:

Swan, T., Russell, T.L., Staunton, K.M. et al. A literature review of dispersal pathways of Aedes albopictus across different spatial scales: implications for vector surveillance. Parasites Vectors 15, 303 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13071-022-05413-5

Is there a trapping method to replace Human Landing Catches? A recent publication reviews the available literature, and found that there still is no clear answer…unfortunately. Here is the reference:

Eckert J, Oladipupo S, Wang Y, Jiang S, Patil V, McKenzie BA, Lobo NF, Zohdy S. Which trap is best? Alternatives to outdoor human landing catches for malaria vector surveillance: a meta-analysis. Malaria Journal. 2022 Dec;21(1):1-7.

And here is the “Conclusions” section of the paper, which is more helpful than the abstract:

The results of the meta-regression show that a large percentage of the heterogeneity present in the analysis comes from variations of traps, locations, and species collected. There is not a consensus among publications in the field over whether a specific trap can be used as a “magic bullet” alternative to HLC. Even so, the high between-study heterogeneity and publication bias cannot be ignored. Instead, research on alternative traps should be conducted by performing question-driven studies to address which traps are best for which species. If programmes want to examine Anopheles spp. diversity in an area, different trapping tools may be necessary than for programmes that are just interested in a specific vector, such as An. gambiae s.l., or have a specific bionomic question. Rather than aiming to determine which alternative trap can replace HLC, the goal should instead be to identify the optimal trapping tool for question-driven collections needed to inform decisions about appropriate malaria control interventions or for basic research. A baseline assessment of mosquito collection tools relative to HLC in specific locations could be conducted to determine the best tools in specific contexts in response to indicator-driven questions by using the ESPT tool and evaluating results at regular intervals to determine representativeness [63]. In addition, very few studies evaluating collection tools when compared to HLC describe the vector control context and landscape in which the study is being conducted. For example, conducting a study in a context where a vector control tool such as mass distribution of ITNs is used is likely to influence mosquito biting and resting behaviour and the resulting entomological indicators compiled by mosquito collection tools. Under this framework, future meta-analyses could better characterize the landscape of malaria vector behaviour by reducing between-study heterogeneity, allowing for recommendations for malaria vector control interventions that are tailored to local vector ecology.