PMC

Frequency of catch basins with different ranges of pupae productivity. 108 catch basins with water were surveyed for pupae productivity in six comunas of Buga. Water samples were collected and pupae count was averaged in the specific ranges.

Timeline of reported inland catch statistics collected by FAO, shown alongside independent catch estimates with matching country colors and numbered by source (1, this study; for 2–7, see SI Appendix, Table S2). Catch estimates for water bodies with significant fisheries are depicted as black lines or points. (Left) The survey-estimated catch is lower than reported statistics in the three riparian countries of Lake Victoria and is interpreted as a combination of suitable monitoring in reported statistics and conservative survey estimates. (Center) Numerous estimates for countries of the Mekong River Basin provide the best available evidence historically underreported catch. (Right) Both Myanmar and Bangladesh have doubled in reported catch during the last decades. Myanmar has reported a systematic, possibly institutionalized, annual catch increase that has surpassed the catch estimates of ∼750 kT made between 2002 and 2006 ().

Evidence of catch basin larvicide flushing. A Natular™ XRT tablet is observed sitting within a catch basin’s outlet pipe after initially being placed within the basin’s sump water below.

Illustration of a storm water catch basin. Storm water carrying debris and organic material flows from above-ground into the grate. Debris settles and excess water is carried out. Water below the inlet/outlet pipe remains in the catch basin. Catch basins often retain water even during dry periods.