ENVIRONMENTAL
HEALTH
PERSPECTIVES
National Institutes of Health
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Artificial Lighting as a Vector Attractant
and Cause of Disease Diffusion
Alessandro Barghini and Bruno A. S. de Medeiros
doi: 10.1289/ehp.1002115 (available at http://dx.doi.org/)
Online 1 August 2010
ehponline.org
ehp

1
1
Artificial Lighting as a Vector Attractant and Cause of
Disease Diffusion
Alessandro Barghini1 & Bruno A. S. de Medeiros2
1 Laboratorio de Estudos Evolutivos Humanos. Departamento de Genética e Biologia
Evolutiva, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade de São Paulo and Instituto de
Eletrotécnica e Energia, Universidade de São Paulo
2Departamento de Zoologia. Instituto de Biociências. Universidade de São Paulo

This study was carried out at the Instituto de Biociências – Universidade de São Paulo:
Address :Rua do Matão, travessa 14, 321
Cidade Universitária – São Paulo – SP – Brazil
05508-090

Page proofs should be sent to Alessandro Barghini
Instituto de Eletrotécnica e Energia
Avenida Professor Luciano Gualberto, 1289 - Cidade Universitária
CEP 05508-010 - Butantã - São Paulo SP
Phone (55-11) 30912549; Fax (55-11) 3812-3352
Page 1 of 21

2
2
Artificial Lighting as a Vector Attractant
Keywords: lighting, electricity, insect, vector, Chagas’ disease, leishmaniasis, malaria
Acknowledgements: We wish to thank Delcio Natal, Paulo Urbinatti and Sergio Vanin
who have encouraged the present study and also for reading a previous version of this
paper. We also thank an anonymous reviewer, whose criticisms have greatly improved
our manuscript. Figure 1, taken by Luiz Antonio Oliveira Ilha, was kindly provided by
Marcos Takashi Obara. Throughout the experiments which have resulted in the current
article, Bruno A. S. de Medeiros has received a scholarship from CNPq.
The authors hereby declare they have no competing interests.
Page 2 of 21

3
3
Abstract
Background Traditionally, epidemiologists have considered electrification to be a
positive factor. In fact, electrification as well as plumbing are typical initiatives that
represent the integration of an isolated population into modern society, ensuring the
control of pathogens and promoting public health. Nonetheless, electrification is always
accompanied by night lighting, which attracts insect vectors and changes people’s
behavior. Although this may lead to new modes of infection and increased transmission
of insect-borne diseases, the role of night lighting is rarely considered in
epidemiological surveys.
Objectives This paper reviews evidence concerning the role of lighting in the spread of
diseases as documented in epidemiological literature, in order to encourage other
researchers to consider this element in future studies.
Discussions We present three case studies of infectious vector-borne diseases (Chagas,
leishmaniasis, and malaria) and discuss evidence which suggests that use of artificial
lighting results in behavioral changes and changes in the prevalence of vector species
and modes of transmission.
Conclusion Despite a surprising lack of studies, we conclude that existing evidence
supports our hypothesis that artificial lighting leads to a higher risk of infection with
vector-borne diseases. We believe that this is not only related to the simple attraction of
traditional vectors to light sources, but also to changes in the behavior of both humans
and insects that result in new modes of disease transmission. Considering the ongoing
expansion of night lighting in developing countries, additional research on this subject
is urgently needed.
Page 3 of 21

4
4
The expansion of night lighting
The expansion of nocturnal lighting has raised many concerns, the most
prominent of which are the consumption of fossil fuels for electric power generation
and the obstruction of views of the night sky and astronomical observation. (Claudio
2009). At present, a rising concern is that light pollution is also related to human health,
as summarized by Chepesiuk (2009) and Holzman (2010), mainly on the basis of
chronobiological disorders. Calling attention to the fact that light pollution is also a
major source of alterations to ecosystems, Longcore and Rich (2004) and Rich and
Longcore (2006) coined the term “ecological light pollution”. It is thus that, by affecting
the trophic web, light pollution can also, indirectly, influence human health.
Alternative energy sources and the new techniques applied in the production of
artificial lighting, being more efficient than the traditional means, will increase less
privileged populations’ accessibility to them (Mills 2004). They will both decrease the
adverse effects of the generation of electricity on the environment and will allow the
electrification of more isolated areas (International Energy Agency 2002). From a social
point of view, these initiatives are beyond doubt positive. However, we should not
forget that the areas lacking electricity are mainly rural areas of the equatorial and
tropical regions, where there is, anyway, a greater presence of insect-transmitted
diseases (Jones et al. 2008). In view of the fact that artificial illumination is a great
attractor for insects, the diffusion of these social services could constitute a risk of
epidemic outbreaks both in terms of existing and of emerging diseases.
Traditional views on the role of electrification
Page 4 of 21

5
5
Electrification is doubtless important as a means to develop rural areas, and it also has
many beneficial effects. According to the IEG World Bank (2008), for example, it
operates through a number of channels:
“• Improvements to health facilities
• Better health from cleaner air as households reduce use of polluting fuels for
cooking, lighting, and heating (Hutton and others, 2006)
• Improved health knowledge through increased access to television
• Better nutrition from improved knowledge and storage facilities from
refrigeration.”
Most epidemiological reports cite both electrification and plumbing as positive
factors in the control of diseases. As an example, Noor (2008) used “remotely sensed
night-time light as a proxy for poverty in Africa”, indirectly assuming that artificial
lighting is a good social development index. However, electrification also means
artificial lighting and artificial lighting is a strong insect attractant.
Although entomologists and epidemiologists traditionally make use of light traps
to capture insects, the effect on disease diffusion caused by the expansion of artificial
lighting is generally not considered – sometimes it is even denied. Such positions are
longstanding: at the beginning of electrification, during the construction of the Panama
Canal (Le Prince and Orenstein 1916), Le Prince stated that it was man who attracted
insects and artificial lighting did not contribute to the diffusion of malaria. Carlos
Chagas, who discovered Chagas’ disease, warned that light is a good defense against the
diffusion of the disease since Triatoma, its vector, does not bite in lighted areas (Chagas
1909).
Page 5 of 21

6
6
Indeed, light may inhibit some insects from biting, but in order to understand its
role on the diffusion of diseases we need to take into account the behavioral changes
brought about in both human beings and insects. In other words, night lighting promotes
new lifestyles and this may lead to new modes of disease transmission. However, this
phenomenon is scarcely referred to in the literature.
Of course, we are not claiming that the introduction of modern lighting systems
increases the risk of emerging diseases immediately and directly. Their diffusion is
bound to produce changes in human lifestyles, which are brought about by lighting,
radio, television and other electrical equipment. As a result of electrification, activity
increases in the evening and in the early night people may stay outdoors longer, either
taking exercise or resting in hammocks or even doing other activities close to sources of
bright light.
Whereas people might be more exposed to vectors merely by staying outdoors in
the evening, lights also increase exposure by affecting vectors. In general, insect
attraction to lights is accepted as fact. However, a common misunderstanding is that this
attraction represents a positive phototaxis. Contrary to this belief, as noted by D’Arcy
Thompson (1917), Verheijen (1958), Mazokhin-Porshnyakov (1969), Janzen (1983) and
more recently summarized by Nowinszky (2003), insect attraction to lights is not a
positive phototaxis, but rather the result of a navigational confusion. Attraction results
from the fact that insects mistake light sources (especially those emitting UV radiation)
for the celestial points of reference they normally use for orientation, which may result
in a trajectory towards a light. In the vicinity of a light source, however, not all insects
are directly attracted to the lamp. While some may be, others may hide in dark places in
Page 6 of 21

7
7
the surroundings, keep flying in the illuminated area, or land somewhere near the lamp
(Nowinsky 2008). Despite all this variation, it is important to stress that even vectors
which usually bite only in the dark may be attracted to the surroundings of a light source
and thus near to humans. There, they may transmit diseases in non-conventional ways.
In order to demonstrate the potential of night lighting for augmenting people’s
exposure to vectors and for creating new modes of disease transmission, we give an
account of our findings after a comprehensive review of the literature. We have been
able to find circumstantial evidence that electrification and lighting may be the source
of new modes of transmission for three well-known infectious diseases.
The case of Chagas’ disease
Ironically, the first confirmation of the strong impact of artificial lighting on the
diffusion of diseases, validated by epidemiologists, came from the Chagas’ disease. This
is remarkable, considering that its vectors (triatomine bugs, also known as kissing bugs)
do not bite in lighted areas and artificial lighting has always been thought of as a good
defense against them. Chagas’ disease was the kind of illness typically found in people
living in adobe huts with straw thatched roofs, excellent hideouts for the bug. It was
widespread in pre-Columbian times in the Andean world where domesticated cui or
guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus) were the primary hosts(Coimbra 1988). The main vector
was Triatoma infestans – a bug well adapted to poor households. In colonial times, it
had spread to the South American lowlands and by 1955-1964 the spread of the disease
had reached central and northern Brazil, probably carried from place to place in the
baggage of immigrants. The main vectors were species well adapted to living in
Page 7 of 21

8
8
households: Triatoma infestans in Brazil, and Rhodnius prolixus in Venezuela,
Colombia and the Guyanas (Zeledon and Rabinovich 1981).
Large-scale household insecticide spraying campaigns undertaken in Brazil after
the 1970s and in most of Latin America after the 1980s, proved to be effective in
controlling Chagas´ disease in Brazil. “By the end of the last century it became clear
that continuous control in contiguous endemic areas could lead to the elimination of the
most highly domestic vector populations – especially Triatoma infestans and Rhodnius
prolixus – as well as substantial reductions of other widespread species such as T.
brasiliensis, T. sordida, and T. dimidiata, leading in turn to the interruption of disease
transmission to rural people” (Dias et al. 2002).
During the elimination of the most highly domestic vector populations, new
disease outbreaks arose, with a different pattern of diffusion involving a more diverse
group of insect vectors and a larger pool of wild and domestic animal hosts. At the same
time, a new mechanism of human transmission was discovered. Specifically, vectors are
attracted to artificial lighting in areas surrounding homes, instead of entering directly
into homes. There, they may rest on plants such as the açai palm (Euterpe oleracea),
and parasitize opossums or any other warm-blooded animals. Afterwards, fruits
contaminated with their faeces may be collected and consumed by people. This means
of transmission – oral transmission – is being increasingly observed, and may be a
consequence of the vector’s attraction to lighting, as illustrated by the example depicted
in Figure 1.
Page 8 of 21

9
9
The mechanism of oral transmission was originally proposed by Bertram (1971),
and was confirmed by Zeledon and Rabinovich (1981), who reviewed experiments on
triatomine bugs and reported that 20 species – including Rhodnius prolixus – were
attracted to lights. Many researchers have reiterated this hypothesis since then
(Feliciangeli et al. 2002; Cuba et al. 2002; Salomon et al. 1999; Teixeira et al. 2001;
Zeledon et al. 2001). Whereas in many cases they simply mention the possibility that
lighting may have facilitated disease transmission, Walter et al. (2005) explicitly
identified a strong association between the spread of Chagas’ disease and the use of
kerosene lamps and photovoltaic panels. These are modern high intensity lighting
systems to which most insects are attracted. Finally, two recent important reviews of
Chagas´ disease also concluded that artificial lighting may affect transmission of the
disease (Remme et al. 2006, Rojas et al. 2005).
Remme et al. (2006) describe three different transmission cycles, including a
domestic cycle involving domestic insect vectors and animal reservoirs that reside in
close contact with humans, a sylvatic cycle in which sylvatic insect vectors transmit the
disease to wild animal hosts, and a peridomestic cycle in which sylvatic vectors that are
attracted to lights in and around homes transmit infection by feeding on domestic
animals and humans or indirectly transmit infection by contaminating food consumed
by domestic animals and humans. In particular, they note that in the Amazon region,
humans have become infected with Chagas disease by eating sugarcane or fruit juice
contaminated with the feces of sylvatic Triatominae.
The case of leishmaniasis
Page 9 of 21

10
10
A second disease whose spread appears to be augmented by artificial lighting is
leishmaniasis. Sand flies (phlebotomines), the vectors of Leishmania, are poor flyers
(Dias-Lima et al. 2002) that are attracted to lighted surroundings but are usually not
found directly on lamps. In periurban areas, street lighting attracts sand flies to small
farms or kitchen gardens where dogs, chickens and other small animals become the
hosts. In the case of the phlebotomines, Campbell-Lendrum et al. (1999) showed that
both Lutzomyia intermedia and L. whitmani are attracted to light. Later, dos Santos et al.
(2003) argued that this attraction may increase the risk of Leishmania transmission “…
in houses where an external light source is situated close to a light-color wall that
reflects light, and that have adjacent bushes or trees and domestic animal shelters within
50 meters.”
Moreover, we cannot forget that sand flies are also the vectors of a large number
of arboviruses that are common in tropical and equatorial regions (Travassos da Rosa et
al. 1998), which are the cause of a large number of diseases, generally called “wild
fevers”. Sand flies are also vectors of infectious diseases in temperate region, including
West Nile encephalitis and equine encephalitis.
The case of malaria
The case of malaria is more problematic. Unlike Chagas and leishmaniasis, there
have as yet been no specific studies published on the relationship between night lighting
and vector attraction. Although mosquitoes are seldom found near lamps and almost
never captured by static light traps, they can be captured using CDC, New Jersey or
other kinds of suction light traps without heat or carbon dioxide bait (Govella et al.
2009, Jawara et al. 2008, Lee et al. 2009, Suárez-Mutis et al. 2009). Malaria vectors are,
therefore, probably just as attracted to lights as Chagas and leishmaniasis vectors are
Page 10 of 21

11
11
and we should then expect a corresponding change in modes of transmission with
increased use of artificial light.
We also know that electrification is changing lifestyles in all isolated areas. In
Amazonia, for example, electric lights allow people to spend more time outdoors when
vectors are active, particularly between sunset and the first hours of the night. For
example, sports and gymnastics are practiced outdoors in the evening under strong
artificial lights, and one may observe people resting in hammocks on their porches
along the banks of the Amazon River, their electric lights shining brightly. These are all
conditions that could affect vector attraction and also facilitate malaria transmission.
However, we have not been able to find any epidemiological studies on this matter
relating to the Amazon.
Brian Taylor (1997) proposed that increased time spent outdoors at night may
have contributed to a resurgence in malaria infections among Solomon Island residents
in the early 1980s, which followed substantial declines in infection rates resulting from
in-home use of DDT in the 1960s. As Taylor (1975) stressed, “Traditionally, the
Melanesian peoples retired indoors at sunset but in more ‘enlightened’ areas this habit
broke down (a combination of changed working hours and the money to buy artificial
lighting)…”. Malaria control was only regained in the Solomon Islands ten years later
when spraying was no longer limited to bed-nets and households (Over et al. 2003).
This suggests that night lighting augments human exposure to vectors by enabling
people to stay outdoors longer. It is not clear if the vectors themselves were also
attracted to lights or if lights affected their feeding behavior, but, given that Anopheles
Page 11 of 21

12
12
are indeed attracted to light traps, these possibilities could be tested with additional
research.
Other examples have come from two recent studies. Yamamoto et al. (2010),
working in Burkina Faso, found that living in a home less than10 years old and living in
a home with electricity were both associated with an increased risk of malaria, while a
measure of socioeconomic status was not. The authors suggested that vectors might be
more likely to bite residents of homes with electricity than residents of non-electrified
homes where greater use of biomass fuels would produce smoke that might prevent
insects from biting. However, a recent review concluded that smoke does not reduce
biting in homes (Biran et al. 2007). In South-Africa, Coleman et al. (2010) found that
opening windows at night-time increases the risk of malaria transmission, but the
authors did not evaluate electrification as an independent risk factor for disease
transmission. Researchers did not collect the necessary data to evaluate the role of
artificial light directly in either study, consistent with the lack of research on this topic
in epidemiological studies.
Conclusion
Although we have presented evidence that artificial light may increase the
transmission of only three diseases, we strongly believe that this is a consequence of a
lack of studies rather than a lack of an effect, and that the three diseases we have
discussed may reflect a general pattern. Artificial night lighting changes the behavior of
both people and insects, and thereby promotes contact between human beings and
vector species, including some that have not traditionally been involved in human
Page 12 of 21

13
13
disease transmission. This may lead to new and unpredictable ecological relationships
that need to be understood so that electrical energy can be offered to less privileged
populations without increasing their risk of acquiring insect-borne diseases.
In order to properly test this hypothesis, the presence of night lighting in or near
households must be recorded in epidemiological surveys, especially in recently
electrified rural areas. We trust that this contribution may shed light on this hitherto
neglected problem and encourage epidemiologists to carry out studies that take into
account changes in human and vector behavior related to artificial lighting.
Page 13 of 21

14
14
References
Bertram DS. 1971. Attraction of triatomine bug vectors of Chagas's disease to
betalights. Nature 231:268.
Biran A, Smith L, Lines J, Ensink J, Cameron M. 2007. Smoke and malaria: are
interventions to reduce exposure to indoor air pollution likely to increase exposure to
mosquitoes? Trans. R. Soc. Trop. Med. Hyg. 101:1065-1071.
Campbell-Lendrum D, Pinto MC, Davies C. 1999. Is Luzomyia intermédia (Lutz &
Neiva, 1912) more endophagic than Lutzomyia whitmani (Antunes & Coutinho, 1939)
because it is more attracted to light? Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 94:21-22.
Chagas C. 1909. Nova tripanozomiase humana: Estudos sobre a morfolojia e o ciclo
evolutivo do Schizotrypanum cruzi n. gen., n. sp., ajente etiolojico de nova entidade
morbida do homem [in Portuguese]. Mem. Inst. Oswaldo Cruz 1:159-218.
Chepesiuk R. 2009. Missing the Dark: Health Effects of Light Pollution, Environ Health
Perspect. 117:A20-A27.
Claudio L. 2009. Switch on the night: policies for smarter lighting. Environ Health
Perspect. 117:A28-A31.
Coimbra CEA Jr. 1988. Human settlements, demographic pattern, and epidemiology in
lowland Amazonia: the case of Chagas's disease. Am Anthropol 90:82-97.
Coleman M, Coleman M, Mabaso MLH, Mabuza AM, Kok G, Coetzee M, et al. 2010.
Household and microeconomic factors associated with malaria in Mpumalanga, South
Africa. Trans Roy Soc Trop Med Hyg 104:143-147.
Page 14 of 21

15
15
Cuba CA, Abad-Franch F, Rodríguez JR, Vasquez FV, Velásquez LP, Miles MA. 2002.
The triatomines of Northern Peru, with emphasis on the ecology and infection by
trypanosomes of Rhodnius ecuadoriensis (Triatominae). Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz
97:175-183.
Dias JC, Silveira AC, Schofield CJ. 2002. The impact of Chagas disease control in
Latin America: a review. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 97:603-612.
Dias-Lima A, Bermudez EC, Medeiros JF, Sherlock I. 2002. Vertical stratification of
phlebotomine sandfly fauna (Diptera, Psychodidae) in a primary non-flooded forest of
the Central Amazon, Amazonas State, Brazil. Cad Saúde Pública 18:823-832.
dos Santos TG, de Mello Gaia MC, Brazil RP. 2003. Attraction of sand flies (Diptera:
Psychodidae) to light traps in rural areas of Minas Gerais state, Brazil. J Am Mosq
Control Assoc 19:74-78.
Feliciangeli MD, Dujardin JP, Bastrenta B, Mazzarri M, Villegas J, Flores M, et al.
2002. Is Rhodnius robustus (Hemiptera:Reduviidae) responsible for Chagas disease
transmission in Western Venezuela? Trop Med Int Health 7:280-287.
Govella NJ, Chaki PP, Geissbuhler Y, Kannady K, Okumu F, Charlwood JD, et al.
2009. A new tent trap for sampling exophagic and endophagic members of the
Anopheles gambiae complex. Malar J 8:157; doi: 10.1186/1475-2875-8-157 [Online 14
July 2009].
Holzman DC. 2010. What’s in a color? The unique human health effect of blue light.
Environ Health Perspect 118:A22-A27.
Page 15 of 21

16
16
IEG (Independent Evaluation Group) World Bank. 2008. The Welfare Impact of Rural
Electrification. Available: http://go.worldbank.org/ZE4B692E10 [accessed 26 January
2010].
International Energy Agency. 2002. Chapter 13: Energy and poverty. In: Word Energy
Outlook 2002 edition. Paris: OCDE/IEA.
Janzen DH. 1983. Insects. In: Costa Rican Natural History (Janzen DH, ed.). Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Jawara M, Pinder M, Drakeley CJ, Nwakanma DC, Jallow E, Bogh C, et al. 2008. Dry
season ecology of Anopheles gambiae complex mosquitoes in the Gambia. Malar J
7:156; doi:10.1186/1475-2875-7-156 [Online 18 August 2008]
Jones KE, Patel KG, Levy MA, Stroreygard A, Balk D, Gittleman JL., et al. 2008.
Global trends in emerging infectious diseases. Nature 451:990-944.
Lee HI, Seo BY, Shin EH, Burkett DA, Lee JK, Shin YH. 2009. Efficacy evaluation of
Nozawa-style black light trap for control of anopheline mosquitoes. Korean J Parasitol
47:159-165.
Le Prince JA, Orenstein AJ. 1916. Mosquito control in Panama. New York: Putnam’s
Sons.
Longcore T, Rich C. 2004. Ecological light pollution. Front Ecol Environ 2:191-198.
Mazokhin-Porshnyakov GA. 1969. Insect vision. New York: Plenum Press.
Mills E. 2004. The $230-billion global lighting energy bill. In: Proceedings of the 5th
International Conference on Energy-Efficient Lighting. Nice, France: International
Association for Energy-Efficient Lighting. 368-385.
Page 16 of 21

17
17
Ministério da Saúde, Secretaria de Vigilância em Sáude. 2007. Nota técnica: doença de
chagas aguda por transmissão oral. [in Portuguese] Available:
http://portal.saude.gov.br/portal/saude/visualizar_texto.cfm?idtxt=27862. [Accessed 22
November 2009].
Noor AM, Alegana VA, Gething PW, Tatem AJ, Snow RW. 2008. Using remotely
sensed night-time light as a proxy for poverty in Africa, Popul Health Metr
doi:10.1186/1478-7954-6-5 [Online 21 October 2008].
Nowinszky L. 2003. The orientation of insects by light – major theories. In: The
handbook of light trapping (Nowinszky L ed.). Szombathely, Hungary: Savaria
University Press.
Nowinszky L. 2008.The behavior of insects in the vicinity of artificial light sources. In:
Light trapping and the moon (Nowinszky L ed.) Szombathely, Hungary: Savaria
University Press.
Over M, Bakote'e B, Velayudhan R, Wilikai P, Graves PM. 2003. Impregnated nets
cannot fully substitute for DDT: field effectiveness of malaria prevention in Solomon
Islands. Policy Research Working Paper 3044. New York: The World Bank
Development Research Group Public Services.
Remme JHF, Feenstra P, Lever PR, Médici A, Morel C, Noma M, et al. 2006. Tropical
diseases targeted for elimination: Chagas disease, lymphatic filariasis, onchocerciasis,
and leprosy. In: Jamison, D. T. et al. eds. World Bank. Disease Control Priorities in
Developing Countries 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.
Rich C, Longcore T, eds. 2006. Ecological Consequences of Artificial Night Lighting
Washington DC: Island Press
Page 17 of 21

18
18
Rojas A, Vinhães M, Rodríguez M, Monroy J, Persaud N, Aznar C, et al. 2005. Reunião
Internacional sobre Vigilância e Prevenção da Doença de Chagas na Amazônia.
Implementação da Iniciativa Intergovernamental de Vigilância e Prevenção da doença
de Chagas na Amazônia. [in Portuguese] Rev Soc Bras Med Trop 38:82-89.
Suárez-Mutis MC, Fé NF, Alecrim W, Coura JR. 2009. Night and crepuscular
mosquitoes and risk of vector-borne diseases in áreas of piassaba extraction in the
middle Negro River basin, state of Amazonas, Brazil. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 104:11-
17.
Travassos da Rosa APA, Vasconcelos PFC, Travassos da Rosa JFS, eds. 1998. An
overview of arbovirology in Brazil and neighbouring countries. Belém, PA, Brazil:
Instituto Evandro Chagas.
Salomon OD, Ripoll CM, Rivertti E, Carcavallo RU. 1999. Presence of Panstrongylus
rufotuberculatus (Champion, 1899) (Hemiptera: Reduviidae: Triatominae) in Argentina.
Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 94:285-288.
Stevens RG, Blask DE, Brainard GC, Hansen J, Lockley SW, Provencio I, et al. 2007.
Meeting Report: The Role of Environmental Lighting and Circadian Disruption in
Cancer and Other Diseases. Environ Health Perspect 115:1357–1362.
Taylor B. 1975. Changes in the feeding behaviour of a malaria vector, Anopheles farauti
Lav, following use of DDT as a residual spray in houses in the British Solomons Island
Protectorate. Trans Royal Ent Soc London 127:277-292.
Taylor B. 1997. Malaria transmission - mosquitoes, humans and their behaviour.
Antenna 18:18-22.
Page 18 of 21

19
19
Teixeira ARL, Monteiro PS, Rebelo JM, Argañaraz ER, Vieira D, Lauria-Pires L, et al.
2001. Emerging Chagas disease: trophic network and cycle of transmission of
Trypanosoma cruzi from palm trees in the Amazon. Emerg Infect Dis 7:100-112.
Thompson DW. 1917. On Growth and Form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
(Dover reprint edition, 1992).
Verheijen FJ. 1958. The mechanisms of the trapping effect of artificial light sources
upon animals. Neth J Zool 13:1-107.
Walter A, Rego IP, Ferreira AJ, Christophe R. 2005. Risk factors for reinvasion of
human dwellings by sylvatic triatomines in northern Bahia State, Brazil. Cad Saúde
Pública 21:974-978.
Yamamoto S, Louis V R, Sie A, Sauerborn R. 2010. Household risk factors for clinical
malaria in a semi-urban area of Burkina Faso: a case-control study. Trans Roy Soc Trop
Med Hyg 104:61:65.
Zeledon R, Rabinovich JE. 1981. Chagas disease: an ecological appraisal with special
emphasis on its insect vector. Annu Rev Entomol 26:101-133.
Zeledon R, Ugalde JA, Paniagua LA. 2001. Entomological and ecological aspects of six
sylvatic species of triatomines (Hemiptera, Reduviidae) from the collection of the
National Biodiversity Institute of Costa Rica, Central America. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz
96:757-764.

Page 19 of 21

20
20
Figure Legend
Figure 1. A single photograph may be more telling than many written examples. In
February-March 2005 the Department of Health of Santa Catarina (Brazil) identified an
epidemic of Chagas’ disease (Ministério da Saúde, 2007). After intensive research, it
was verified that sugar cane juice sold at a road-side kiosk was the source of infection
for all 12 confirmed cases. The vector of Chagas´ disease does not live in sugar cane
plantations and there was no reason for its being in stored sugar cane. The only positive
indication was the high intensity discharge lamp installed in the sugar cane juice kiosk.
The bugs (Triatoma tibiamaculata) were attracted by the strong artificial light source in
the sugar cane juice kiosk, and were crushed together with the sugar cane when the juice
was processed. The picture was taken by Luiz Antonio Oliveira Ilha.

Page 20 of 21

169x127mm (96 x 96 DPI)


Page 21 of 21