Development of a More Effective Mosquito Trapping Box for Vector Control

Table 2

Comparison of the mean number of mosquitoes caught by each type of trapping box in each step of development.

Step of development	Factors compared			Mean difference
1	P. kesiya wood	vs.	D. alatus wood	2.20	<0.001
			T. grandis wood	1.66	0.001
			Aluminum	2.40	<0.001
	D. alatus wood	vs.	P. kesiya wood	−2.20	<0.001
			T. grandis wood	−0.54	0.044
			Aluminum	0.20	1.000
	T. grandis wood	vs.	P. kesiya wood	−1.66	0.001
			D. alatus wood	0.54	0.044
			Aluminum	0.74	0.044
2	PW + BC	vs.	PW	10.00	0.013
			Aluminum	12.25	0.004
3	PW + BC + F	vs.	PW + BC	6.50	0.186
			PW	21.75	0.004
			Aluminum	26.00	0.001
4	PW + BC + F + CO2	vs.	PW + BC + F	13.60	0.001
			PW + BC	17.75	<0.001
			PW	35.50	<0.001
			Aluminum	40.75	<0.001
5	PW + BC + F + CO2 + H	vs.	PW + BC + F + CO^2	1.55	0.086
			PW + BC + F	10.35	<0.001
			PW + BC	15.75	<0.001
			PW	28.50	<0.001
			Aluminum	31.75	<0.001

Significant at the 0.05 level (one-way analysis of variance). PW, wooden trapping box constructed from P. kesiya wood; BC, black cotton; F, fan; CO₂, carbon dioxide; H, heat.