METHODS DIRECTED AGAINST ADULT MOS¬ 
QUITOES IN THE CONTROL AND 
ERADICATION OF MALARIA 
By DANIEL M. JOBBINS 
GORGAS MEMORIAL LABORATORY, PANAMA CITY, R. P. 
Destruction by Hand 
The systematic collection of mosquitoes 
in dwellings as a prophylactic measure 
against malaria originated in the Canal 
Zone according to LePrince and Orenstein 
(1916). There it was adopted as a stand¬ 
ard procedure following its successful use 
in a temporary camp at Cocoli in 1908. 
Universal application has been found for 
modifications in the technique of collecting 
mosquitoes with a cylindrical glass tube, 
about 4.5 inches long and one inch in diam¬ 
eter, in the closed end of which were lo¬ 
cated cut up rubber bands saturated with 
chloroform. The capture of live specimens 
has been facilitated by the use of glass 
tubes having an inward opening funnel 
fused in one end and a suction tube affixed 
in a cork at the other end. 
LePrince (1926) stressed the value of 
destroying anopheles in dwellings, particu¬ 
larly when permanent measures tempora¬ 
rily fail, and noted that their resting habits 
frequently make the fly-swatter and collect¬ 
ing tube effective in the reduction of ma¬ 
larial transmission even in unscreened 
buildings. 
Reitler estimated that malaria was re¬ 
duced to one-fifth on a construction project 
in Palestine largely through the collection 
of female A. superpictus Grassi and A. 
sergenti Theo. from resting places among 
dark woolen garments. Collections were 
made with test tubes wetted on the inside 
with kerosene. 
In Europe, Hackett (1937) remarked 
that programs for collection of adults were 
unsuccessful in groups of individuals not 
under rigid discipline because there was no 
way to compel villagers to capture mos¬ 
quitoes and a few recalcitrants might 
render the whole campaign ineffective. 
Mosquito collections in houses enabled 
Davey and Gordon (1933) to reduce to a 
mathematical formula the relationship be¬ 
tween infected anopheles densities and the 
possibility of inoculation with malaria 
from different species or in different local¬ 
ities. 
Nets 
Since ancient times protection has been 
obtained from the bites of mosquitoes by 
the use of nets. As an emergency measure 
they have been used as bed nets, head nets 
and as accessory parts of other devices. 
Russell and Nono (1934) considered it 
likely that nets are the most important de¬ 
fense against malaria in the Philippines 
where permanent screening is out of the 
question because of the loose construction 
of rural habitations. These authors found 
that the locally made sinamay netting of 
about 16 by 20 mesh per inch with fibers 
averaging 0.13 inch diameter would ex¬ 
clude all anopheles and most other mos¬ 
quitoes. Bed nets illustrated in this report 
were made completely of netting for maxi¬ 
mum circulation of air. Marzinovsky rec¬ 
ommended bed nets with cloth tops to keep 
dust from falling on the sleeper and cloth 
bottom edges to exclude scorpions and 
snakes. 
The use of nets for protection from A. 
gambiae was urged by Thomson in South¬ 
ern Rhodesia and by Thornton in Natal. 
Gater concluded that in Malaya, 22/23 
mesh cotton net was adequate to exclude 
anopheles. In Africa, netting of 25/26 
mesh cotton afforded protection from A. 
gambiae and A. funestus, according to J. Y. 
Brown (1934) and to Hargreaves (1936). 
Covell (1931a) pointed out that the mos¬ 
quito netting supplied to the British Army 
in India is 25/26 mesh woven cotton thread 
