Literature DB >> 19432068

Evaluation of six mosquito traps for collection of Aedes albopictus and associated mosquito species in a suburban setting in north central Florida.

D F Hoel1, D L Kline, S A Allan.   

Abstract

We compared 6 adult mosquito traps for effectiveness in collecting Aedes albopictus from suburban backyards with the goal of finding a more suitable surveillance replacement for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) light trap. Trap selection included 2 commercial propane traps (Mosquito Magnet Professional trap and Mosquito Magnet Liberty trap), 2 Aedes-specific traps (Fay-Prince Omnidirectional trap and Wilton trap), 1 experimental trap (Mosquito Magnet-X trap), and a standard surveillance CDC light trap that served as a control. Traps that did not generate carbon dioxide were provided with bottled CO2 at a flow rate of 500 ml/min. Those traps designed for use with chemical attractants (Mosquito Magnet traps) were baited with Lurex (L-lactic acid) and octenol (1-octen-3-ol) commercial baits, known attractants to Ae. albopictus. Three repetitions of a 6 x 6 Latin square test yielded a total of 37,237 mosquitoes, of which 5,280 (14.2%) were Ae. albopictus. Significantly more (P < 0.05) Ae. albopictus were collected from the experimental and commercial traps (4,244/5,280; 80.3%) than from the CDC light trap and Aedes-specific traps. The Mosquito Magnet Liberty collected the most Ae. albopictus (1,591), accounting for 30.1% of the total take, followed closely by the Mosquito Magnet-X (1,468) and the Mosquito Magnet Pro (1,185). The omnidirectional Fay-Prince trap performed better than the CDC or Wilton trap. Twenty-seven mosquito species were collected during these trials, 9 species in large enough numbers for meaningful analysis. Aedes albopictus was the second most common mosquito trapped. The results of these trials indicate that propane-powered commercial traps would serve as useful substitutes in lieu of CDC traps in Ae. albopictus surveillance efforts. Trap features advantageous for collecting Ae. albopictus and other mosquito species are discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19432068     DOI: 10.2987/08-5800.1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Mosq Control Assoc        ISSN: 8756-971X            Impact factor:   0.917


  16 in total

1.  Design and testing of a novel, protective human-baited tent trap for the collection of anthropophilic disease vectors.

Authors:  Benjamin J Krajacich; Jeremiah R Slade; Robert T Mulligan; Brendan Labrecque; Kevin C Kobylinski; Meg Gray; Wojtek S Kuklinski; Timothy A Burton; Jonathan A Seaman; Massamba Sylla; Brian D Foy
Journal:  J Med Entomol       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 2.278

2.  Infrared light sensors permit rapid recording of wingbeat frequency and bioacoustic species identification of mosquitoes.

Authors:  Dongmin Kim; Terry J DeBriere; Satish Cherukumalli; Gregory S White; Nathan D Burkett-Cadena
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-05-11       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Nationwide inventory of mosquito biodiversity (Diptera: Culicidae) in Belgium, Europe.

Authors:  V Versteirt; S Boyer; D Damiens; E M De Clercq; W Dekoninck; E Ducheyne; P Grootaert; C Garros; T Hance; G Hendrickx; M Coosemans; W Van Bortel
Journal:  Bull Entomol Res       Date:  2012-09-13       Impact factor: 1.750

4.  Field evaluation of four widely used mosquito traps in Central Europe.

Authors:  Renke Lühken; Wolf Peter Pfitzner; Jessica Börstler; Rolf Garms; Katrin Huber; Nino Schork; Sonja Steinke; Ellen Kiel; Norbert Becker; Egbert Tannich; Andreas Krüger
Journal:  Parasit Vectors       Date:  2014-06-12       Impact factor: 3.876

5.  Comparison of automatic traps to capture mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae) in rural areas in the tropical Atlantic rainforest.

Authors:  Ivy Luizi Rodrigues de Sá; Maria Anice Mureb Sallum
Journal:  Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 2.743

6.  Implementation of surveillance of invasive mosquitoes in Belgium according to the ECDC guidelines.

Authors:  Isra Deblauwe; Charlotte Sohier; Francis Schaffner; Laurence Marrama Rakotoarivony; Marc Coosemans
Journal:  Parasit Vectors       Date:  2014-04-26       Impact factor: 3.876

7.  Mosquito magnet® liberty plus trap baited with octenol confirmed best candidate for Anopheles surveillance and proved promising in predicting risk of malaria transmission in French Guiana.

Authors:  Samuel B Vezenegho; Antoine Adde; Pascal Gaborit; Romuald Carinci; Jean Issaly; Vincent Pommier de Santi; Isabelle Dusfour; Sébastien Briolant; Romain Girod
Journal:  Malar J       Date:  2014-09-26       Impact factor: 2.979

Review 8.  The need for new vector control approaches targeting outdoor biting Anopheline malaria vector communities.

Authors:  Seynabou Sougoufara; Emmanuel Chinweuba Ottih; Frederic Tripet
Journal:  Parasit Vectors       Date:  2020-06-10       Impact factor: 3.876

Review 9.  Need for an efficient adult trap for the surveillance of dengue vectors.

Authors:  N Sivagnaname; K Gunasekaran
Journal:  Indian J Med Res       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 2.375

10.  Evaluation of CDC light traps for mosquito surveillance in a malaria endemic area on the Thai-Myanmar border.

Authors:  Patchara Sriwichai; Stephan Karl; Yudthana Samung; Suchada Sumruayphol; Kirakorn Kiattibutr; Anon Payakkapol; Ivo Mueller; Guiyun Yan; Liwang Cui; Jetsumon Sattabongkot
Journal:  Parasit Vectors       Date:  2015-12-15       Impact factor: 3.876

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.