Skip to main content

Table 5 Percent reductions in abundance with LSM (applied in isolation): a comparison with GN-LSM [[10]]

From: Examining the impact of larval source management and insecticide-treated nets using a spatial agent-based model of Anopheles gambiae and a landscape generator tool

 

C1

T1

C2

T2

C3

T3

Reference

Diagonal

GN-LSM (Absorbing)

4.2

38.4

8

100

69.6

100

[10]

Absorbing

2.08

−21.63

3.56

43.82

31.74

85.32

This study

Non-absorbing

−1.82

−23.24

0.22

39.55

29.72

82.65

This study

Horizontal

GN-LSM (Absorbing)

8.9

−5.7

44

100

34.3

100

[10]

Absorbing

4.35

7.37

−3.96

29.03

29.3

78.82

This study

Non-absorbing

3.25

6.71

−3.27

22.29

34.16

54.01

This study

Vertical

GN-LSM (Absorbing)

2.8

30.6

16.67

100

33.14

100

[10]

Absorbing

5.21

15.45

24.17

55.54

43.21

91.79

This study

Non-absorbing

5.32

14.32

23

52.13

40.45

88.20

This study

  1. These results are obtained using LSM only (without ITNs). Rows labelled with Diagonal, Horizontal and Vertical refer to the different arrangements of houses in the landscapes (see Methods and Additional file 5). C1, C2, C3 and T1, T2, T3 refer to non-targeted and targeted removal scenarios, respectively. Each value (in the rows labelled as Absorbing and Non-absorbing) represents the average percent reduction of 50 simulation runs.