目的 掌握上海市静安区不同房屋类型白纹伊蚊的孳生特点，为科学监测和防制提供依据。方法 采用分层整群抽样的方法选择居民户，对不同房屋类型的居民户进行入户调查，分别采用Wilcoxon秩和检验、Pearson χ²检验等方法比较布雷图指数（BI）和容器指数（CI）、积水类型及室内外分布等的差异。结果 2018年8月对上海市静安区14个街道（镇）共计调查老旧公房678户，BI为19.91，CI为21.23%；新建住房166户，BI为4.82，CI为6.61%，BI两者差异无统计学意义（Z=0.975，P=0.329），老旧公房CI高于新建住房（χ²=14.172，P=0.000）；老旧公房室内、外积水数分别为56.92%和43.08%，新建住房室内、外分别为72.73%和27.27%，老旧公房室外积水数与新建住房比较，差异有统计学意义（χ²=10.539，P=0.001）；老旧公房室内CI为5.52%，新建住房为2.27%，差异无统计学意义（χ²=1.610，P=0.204）；老旧公房室外CI为41.97%，明显高于新建住房的18.18%（χ²=6.980，P=0.008）；老旧公房和新建住房室外CI均高于室内（χ²=123.892，P=0.000；χ²=9.838，P=0.000）；老旧公房室内、外积水数量大，种类多样，盆景水生植物、储水容器、花盆托等所占比例较高，而新建住房积水数量明显少于老旧公房，积水类型也比较单一，以盆景水生植物为主，且积水分布以室内为主。结论 老旧公房蚊虫孳生地数量、种类及阳性率均高于新建住房，是媒介监测及防控的重灾区，建议结合不同房屋类型，因地制宜开展蚊虫防制工作。

Objectve To investigate the breeding characteristics of Aedes albopictus in different housing types in Jing'an district, Shanghai, China, and to provide a basis for scientific surveillance and control. Methods Stratified cluster sampling was used to select residents. Household surveys of different housing types were carried out, and differences in Breteau index (BI) and container index (CI), types of accumulated water, and indoor and outdoor distribution were compared using the Wilcoxon rank sum test and Pearson χ² test. Results A total of 678 old public housing households were surveyed in 14 streets (towns) in Jing'an district of Shanghai in August 2018, with a BI of 19.91 and a CI of 21.23%. There were 166 new housing households, with a BI of 4.82 and a CI of 6.61%. There was no significant difference in BI between them (Z=0.975, P=0.329), and old public housing had a significantly higher CI than new housing (χ²=14.172, P=0.000). The indoor and outdoor accumulated water of old public housing accounted for 56.92% and 43.08%, respectively, and that of new housing accounted for 72.73% and 27.27%, respectively. The outdoor accumulated water of old public housing was significantly different from that of new housing (χ²=10.539, P=0.001); the indoor CI of old public housing was 5.52%, and that of new housing was 2.27%, with no significant difference between them (χ²=1.610, P=0.204). The outdoor CI of old public housing was 41.97%, which was significantly higher than that (18.18%) of new housing (χ²=6.980, P=0.008); the outdoor CIs of both old public housing and new housing were significantly higher than the indoor CIs (χ²=123.892, P=0.000; χ²=9.838, P=0.000). Old public housing had a large amount and diverse types of indoor and outdoor accumulated water, and high proportions of potted aquatic plants, water storage containers, and flowerpot supports, while new housing had an obviously smaller amount of water accumulation than old public housing, and had few types of accumulated water, predominantly bonsai aquatic plants or indoor water. Conclusion The number, types, and positive rate of mosquito breeding sites are significantly higher in old public housing than in new housing, so old public housing is a disaster-stricken area for vector monitoring and control. We suggest that prevention and control measures should be carried out according to local conditions in the future according to the humanistic characteristics of residents of different housing types.