Literature DB >> 20649128

Evaluation of ULV and thermal fog mosquito control applications in temperate and desert environments.

Seth C Britch1, Kenneth J Linthicum, Wayne W Wynn, Todd W Walker, Muhammad Farooq, Vincent L Smith, Cathy A Robinson, Branka B Lothrop, Melissa Snelling, Arturo Gutierrez, Hugh D Lothrop, Jerry D Kerce, James J Becnel, Ulrich R Bernier, Julia W Pridgeon.   

Abstract

Ultra-low-volume (ULV) and thermal fog aerosol dispersals of pesticides have been used against mosquitoes and other insects for half a century. Although each spray technology has advantages and disadvantages, only 7 studies have been identified that directly compare their performance in the field. US military personnel currently operating in hot-arid environments are impacted by perpetual nuisance and disease vector insect problems, despite adulticide operations using modern pesticide-delivery equipment such as ULV. None of the identified comparative studies has looked at the relative feasibility and efficacy of ULV and thermal fog equipment against mosquitoes in hot-arid environments. In this study we examine the impact of ULV and thermal fog applications of malathion against caged sentinel mosquitoes in the field in a warm temperate area of Florida, followed by a similar test in a hot-dry desert area of southern California. Patterns of mortality throughout 150 m x 150 m grids of sentinel mosquitoes indicate greater efficacy from the thermal fog application in both environments under suboptimal ambient weather conditions. We discuss the implications of these findings for future military preventive medicine activities and encourage further investigations into the relative merits of the 2 technologies for force health protection.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20649128     DOI: 10.2987/09-5948.1

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


  7 in total

1.  Evaluation of Cold and Thermal Fogging Spraying Methods for Mosquito Control.

Authors:  A S Al-Sarar; D Al-Shahrani; H I Hussein; A E Bayoumi; Y Abobakr
Journal:  Neotrop Entomol       Date:  2013-12-12       Impact factor: 1.434

Review 2.  A Review of the Control of Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) in the Continental United States.

Authors:  Bethany L McGregor; C Roxanne Connelly
Journal:  J Med Entomol       Date:  2021-01-12       Impact factor: 2.278

3.  Efficacy of ULV and thermal aerosols of deltamethrin for control of Aedes albopictus in nice, France.

Authors:  Saïd C Boubidi; David Roiz; Marie Rossignol; Fabrice Chandre; Romain Benoit; Marc Raselli; Charles Tizon; Bernard Cadiou; Reda Tounsi; Christophe Lagneau; Didier Fontenille; Paul Reiter
Journal:  Parasit Vectors       Date:  2016-11-23       Impact factor: 3.876

4.  Aerial ULV control of Aedes aegypti with naled (Dibrom) inside simulated rural village and urban cryptic habitats.

Authors:  Seth C Britch; Kenneth J Linthicum; Robert L Aldridge; Mark S Breidenbaugh; Mark D Latham; Peter H Connelly; Mattie J E Rush; Jennifer L Remmers; Jerry D Kerce; Charles A Silcox
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-01-19       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  An in vitro ULV olfactory bioassay method for testing the repellent activity of essential oils against moths.

Authors:  Petros T Damos
Journal:  MethodsX       Date:  2018-04-20

6.  Insecticide resistance in Aedes aegypti: An impact from human urbanization?

Authors:  Tri Baskoro Tunggul Satoto; Hary Satrisno; Lutfan Lazuardi; Ajib Diptyanusa
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-06-24       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Facilitating Wolbachia introductions into mosquito populations through insecticide-resistance selection.

Authors:  Ary A Hoffmann; Michael Turelli
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2013-04-10       Impact factor: 5.349

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.