Table 1 Classification of included articles by micro-environmental factors covered

Water environment (32^a, 24.1%)

 Water level (25, 18.8%)

–

Curve relationship

An optimal range exists

 Water quality (7, 5.3%)

Transparency (1)

Positive effects

Oncomelania hupensis were more likely to survive in water with high transparency

Chemical properties (6)

Need further research

Results from literatures conflict

Soil environment (37^a, 27.8%)

 Soil properties (31, 23.3%)

Soil humidity, temperature (18)

Curve relationship

An optimal range exists

Soil pH value (7)

Curve relationship

An optimal range exists

Soil fertility indexes (8^b) organic compounds, total N, total P, total K, etc

Need further research

Results from literatures conflict

 Soil microorganisms (6, 4.5%)

Aspergillus fumigatus SL-30, Streptomyces violaceoruber, Xanthobacter autotrophicus, etc

Negative effects

These microorganisms have molluscicidal activity

Vegetation (72^a, 54.1%)

 Plant extracts (34, 25.6%)

Root, stem, and leaf extracts

Negative effects

These plant extracts have molluscicidal activity

 Land cover vegetation characteristics (23, 17.3%)

Vegetation height, coverage (12)

Curve relationship

An optimal range exists

Plant species (11)

Cynodon dactylon, Alternanthera philoxeroides, Pterocarya stenoptera community and Nerium indicum community, Liquidambar formosana, Sapium sebiferum, etc

Negative effects

O. hupensis are less distributed in areas with these vegetation types

 Snail control and schistosomiasis prevention forest (14, 10.5%)

–

Negative effects

The implementation of snail control and schistosomiasis prevention forest reduces the density of O. hupensis

 Plant microorganisms (1, 0.8%)

Endophyte JJ18 of Pseudolarix amabilis

Negative effects

These microorganisms have molluscicidal activity

Predator (4^a, 3.0%)

 Procambarus clarkia, Ophiocephalus argus (4, 3.0%)

Negative effects

Predation reduces the density of O. hupensis