RESUMEN
Entomological evaluations of vector control tools often use human landing catches (HLCs) as a standard measure of a direct human-vector contact. However, some tools have additional characteristics, such as mortality, and HLCS are not sensitive for measuring other effects beyond landing inhibition. Therefore, additional measures may need to be considered when evaluating these tools for public health use. This study has two main aims (1) the evaluate the accuracy of HLCs as a proxy for feeding and (2) to compare the predicted reduction in vectorial capacity when we do and do not consider these additional characteristics. To achieve this, we analyse previously published semi-field data from an experiment which used HLCs and another where mosquitoes were allowed to feed in the presence of different dosages of the volatile pyrethroid spatial repellent, transfluthrin. We compare results for two mathematical models: one which only considers the reduction in feeding effect and one which also considers mortality before and after feeding (using data gathered by the aspiration of mosquitoes after the semi-field feeding/landing period and 24 h survival monitoring). These Bayesian hierarchical models are parameterised using Bayesian inference. We observe that, for susceptible mosquitoes, reduction in landing is underestimated by HLCs. For knockdown resistant mosquitoes the relationship is less clear; with HLCs sometimes appearing to overestimate this characteristic. We find HLCs tend to under-predict the relative reduction in vectorial capacity in susceptible mosquitoes while over-predicting this impact in knockdown-resistant mosquitoes. Models without secondary effects have lower predicted relative reductions in vectorial capacities. Overall, this study highlights the importance of considering additional characteristics to reduction in biting of volatile pyrethroid spatial repellents. We recommend that these are considered when evaluating novel vector control tools.