This study reports the distribution, ecotopes and fauna diversity of sandflies captured in five training bases on a military reserve in Manaus, state of Amazonas (AM). A total of 10,762 specimens were collected, which were distributed among 58 species, with the highest number recorded at Base Instruction 1 (BI1). A higher rate of species richness was found at the Base Instruction Boina Rajada and low levels of diversity associated with a high abundance index with the clear dominance of Lutzomyia umbratilis, Lutzomyia ruii and Lutzomyia anduzei were found at BI1. The abundance of Lu. umbratilis raises the possibility of outbreaks of American cutaneous leishmaniasis by the main vector of the disease in AM.
This study reports the distribution, ecotopes and fauna diversity of sandflies captured in five training bases on a military reserve in Manaus, state of Amazonas (AM). A total of 10,762 specimens were collected, which were distributed among 58 species, with the highest number recorded at Base Instruction 1 (BI1). A higher rate of species richness was found at the Base Instruction Boina Rajada and low levels of diversity associated with a high abundance index with the clear dominance of Lutzomyia umbratilis, Lutzomyia ruii and Lutzomyia anduzei were found at BI1. The abundance of Lu. umbratilis raises the possibility of outbreaks of American cutaneous leishmaniasis by the main vector of the disease in AM.
The maintenance of endemic diseases in a given area, particularly those
transmitted by vectors such as leishmaniasis, depends on the presence of populations of
species involved in the transmission cycle (etiological agents, reservoir hosts and
vectors) and environmental conditions that are favourable to their development (Ximenes et al. 2007).American cutaneous leishmaniasis (ACL) is endemic in Brazil and has three
distinctive epidemiological patterns, colonising (i) sylvatic, (ii) occupational/leisure
and (iii) rural/periurban areas (MS/SVS 2010). Among the occupational patterns to
consider in the epidemiology of ACL is military training (MT) in the jungle, which
provides human contact with sandfly vectors of this disease (Paes 1991).MT in the Amazon jungle occurs throughout the year and cases of ACL have been
observed among the soldiers, most likely occurring when they are in the training area,
whether while sleeping or during night training, within the Amazon rainforest. In many
cases, the diagnosis of humaninfection is made in other states when these individuals
return to their hometowns, which difficult the location of the endemic foci of the
disease [Centre for Jungle Warfare Instruction (CIGS), Doctrine and Research Department,
unpublished observations].Outpatient visits conducted by the Institute of Tropical Medicine Manaus,
state of Amazonas (AM), Brazil in the period from 1990-2001 recorded 22,066 cases of
leishmaniasis in the municipality of Manaus, including 140 cases on military bases from
the base instruction (BI) for the CIGS and the 1st Jungle Infantry Battalion (1st BIS),
located on AM-010 Road (Manaus-Itacoatiara, AM, Brazil). Due to the occurrence of ACL in
military reserve (MR) training in the jungle and the lack of information regarding the
presence of vectors in these areas, the present study aimed to identify the diversity of
the sandflies and their distribution among five military BIS in Manaus and verify the
ecotopes (plateau, hillside and lowland) of the higher occurrence of these insects on
this MR.This study was conducted at the MR located between kilometres 55-70 on the
AM-010 highway, which contains approximately 150,000 ha and is 46 km long. The MR
contains five BIS: Boina Rajada (BIBR), Marechal Rondon (BI1), Lobo D'Almada (BI2),
Placido de Castro (BI3) and Pedro Teixeira (BI4) (Fig.
1).
Fig. 1
satellite image of military reserve area in the state of Amazonas,
Brazil, showing the distribution of the five bases of instruction (BI)
[Marechal Rondon (BI1), Lobo D'Almada (BI2), Placido de Castro (BI3), Pedro
Teixeira (BI4) and Boina Rajada (BIBR)]. Source: Instruction Centre Jungle
Warfare.
The vegetation of the area is primary upland forest with different
topographies that can be recognised as plateaus, hillsides and lowlands. BIBR, BI1 and
BI2 are located in the jungle plateau, which is characterised by high relief,
well-drained clay soil that is nutrient-poor and a canopy of 35-40 m. BI3 is located on
the forest hillside, with an area of transition in the lower parts similar to a
campinarana, but without the vegetative species that characterise
this region and similar to the plateau in the higher parts. The soil has a clayey
consistency in the higher parts and a sandy-clay consistency in the lower parts. The
canopy height is 25-35 m. BI4 is situated in the lowland vegetation, located on the
shores of Lake Puraquequara (Manaus), with a forest of campinarana
between the lowland areas and hillside. Some areas of BI4 have white sand soil with a
large accumulation of leaf litter. Due to the structure of this forest, with dense
understory trees and shrubs, greater light penetration is allowed. This area has a
canopy height of 15-25 m (Ribeiro et al. 1999
).The capture period was between March 2002-February 2003 for five consecutive
days each month and one day on each military base. The specimens were captured and
stored using 15 light traps of the “modified” CDC type, with pots attached to the bottom
of the trap containing 20 mL of 70% alcohol that were installed close to the tree 1 m
from the ground between 05:00 pm-07:00 am. The light traps were arranged in three
different directions, starting at a distance of 100 m from the military housing (AM) and
spaced 50 m apart.The sandflies caught were preserved in 70% alcohol, transported to the
laboratory and identified according to the classification of Young and Duncan (1994) . The data were analysed according to Roberts and His (1979) with the support of
Microsoft Excel 2010, which evaluated the standardised index of species abundance (SISA)
with respect to the military bases. Using the software DivEs - Species Diversity version
2.0 (Rodrigues 2007), tests were applied to
determine the Shannon-Wiener diversity index (H'), equitability index, Shannon-Wiener
index of species richness (J) and first-order jack-knife index of species richness of
each area analysed.A total of 10,762 sandflies (3,759 males and 7,003 females) were identified,
distributed among 58 species, with 57 belonging to the genus Lutzomyia
and one to Brumptomyia . The species Lutzomyia
umbratilis was the most abundant, accounting for 3,529 (32.8%) samples of
the total catch, followed by Lutzomyia ruii (1,046/9.7%),
Lutzomyia anduzei (887/8.2%), Lutzomyia olmeca
nociva (668/6.2%), Lutzomyia georgii (507/4.7%),
Lutzomyia squamiventris squamiventris (441/4.1%), Lutzomyia
mons-truosa (425/3.9%) and Lutzomyia flaviscutellata
(323/3%) (Table). The greatest number of sandflies were captured in BI1 (4,134/38.4%),
followed by BIBR (3,032/28.2%), BI2 (2,045/19%), BI3 (1,049/9.7%) and BI4
(502/4.7%).
TABLE
Sandflies fauna captured with CDC light traps distributed in five bases
of military reserve from the state of Amazonas, Brazil, during March
2002-February 2003
BIBR
BI1
BI2
BI3
BI4
Total
Species
♂
♀
ST
SISA
♂
♀
ST
SISA
♂
♀
ST
SISA
♂
♀
ST
SISA
♂
♀
ST
SISA
♂
♀
Total n (%)
Lutzomyia umbratilis
163
654
817
1.0
926
1.243
2.169
1.0
109
245
354
1.0
51
102
153
1.0
22
14
36
1.0
1,271
2,258
3,529 (32.79)
Lutzomyia ruii
232
69
301
1.0
283
100
383
1.0
142
55
197
1.0
125
36
161
1.0
3
1
4
1.0
785
261
1,046 (9.72)
Lutzomyia anduzei
31
252
283
1.0
61
248
309
1.0
20
187
207
1.0
5
77
82
1.0
2
4
6
0.9
119
768
887 (8.24)
Lutzomyia olmeca nociva
87
228
315
0.9
12
37
49
0.9
36
195
231
0.9
13
51
64
0.9
3
6
9
0.9
151
517
668 (6.21)
Lutzomyia georgii
0
31
31
0.9
0
31
31
0.9
1
103
104
0.9
2
147
149
0.9
22
170
192
0.9
25
482
507 (4.71)
Lutzomyia squamiventris squamiventris
87
124
211
0.9
52
91
143
0.9
18
32
50
0.9
13
23
36
0.9
1
0
1
0.8
171
270
441 (4.10)
Lutzomyia monstruosa
31
90
121
0.9
25
82
107
0.9
30
97
127
0.9
29
37
66
0.9
2
2
4
0.8
117
308
425 (3.95)
Lutzomyia flaviscutellata
35
46
81
0.9
9
37
46
0.9
40
67
107
0.8
24
43
67
0.8
5
17
22
0.8
113
210
323 (3)
Lutzomyia sordellii
32
85
117
0.8
24
111
135
0.8
9
26
35
0.8
2
17
19
0.8
3
5
8
0.8
70
244
314 (2.92)
Lutzomyia rorotaensis
6
9
15
0.8
27
61
88
0.8
52
77
129
0.8
13
31
44
0.8
12
24
36
0.7
110
202
312 (2.90)
Lutzomyia trichopyga
83
58
141
0.8
75
57
132
0.8
7
16
23
0.8
6
9
15
0.8
0
1
1
0.7
171
141
312 (2.90)
Lutzomyia davisi
16
47
63
0.8
25
87
112
0.8
20
31
51
0.8
8
14
22
0.7
33
26
59
0.7
102
205
307 (2.85)
Lutzomyia ayrozai
21
118
139
0.8
8
65
73
0.8
16
37
53
0.7
0
10
10
0.7
1
0
1
0.6
46
230
276 (2.56)
Lutzomyia ubiquitalis
4
1
5
0.7
6
5
11
0.7
64
24
88
0.7
30
12
42
0.7
2
0
2
0.6
106
42
148 (1.38)
Lutzomyia paraensis
17
52
69
0.7
2
13
15
0.7
8
16
24
0.7
5
24
29
0.7
0
2
2
0.6
32
107
139 (1.29)
Lutzomyia amazonensis
45
34
79
0.6
11
25
36
0.6
0
2
2
0.5
1
10
11
0.5
-
-
-
0.4
57
71
128 (1.19)
Lutzomyia nematoducta
4
10
14
0.7
25
37
62
0.7
18
13
31
0.7
1
1
2
0.6
2
3
5
0.5
50
64
114 (1.06)
Lutzomyia claustrei
15
17
32
0.5
14
19
33
0.5
24
15
39
0.5
3
5
8
0.5
-
-
-
0.4
56
56
112 (1.04)
Lutzomyia inpai
6
2
8
0.6
2
5
7
0.6
30
32
62
0.6
6
3
9
0.6
2
3
5
0.5
46
45
91 (0.85)
Lutzomyia walkeri
0
3
3
0.6
1
4
5
0.6
3
11
14
0.6
7
4
11
0.5
13
38
51
0.4
24
60
84 (0.78)
Lutzomyia trispinosa
9
16
25
0.5
6
16
22
0.5
0
5
5
0.5
0
4
4
0.4
-
-
-
0.3
15
41
56 (0.52)
Lutzomyia geniculata
0
19
19
0.6
0
15
15
0.6
0
8
8
0.6
0
2
2
0.5
0
3
3
0.4
0
47
47 (0.44)
Lutzomyia corossoniensis
0
11
11
0.3
0
11
11
0.3
0
22
22
0.3
-
-
-
0.3
-
-
-
0.2
0
44
44 (0.41)
Lutzomyia williamsi
1
6
7
0.4
0
12
12
0.4
1
15
16
0.4
0
5
5
0.3
-
-
-
0.2
2
38
40 (0.37)
Lutzomyia hirsuta
4
11
15
0.4
5
10
15
0.4
1
1
2
0.4
0
2
2
0.3
-
-
-
0.2
10
24
34 (0.32)
Lutzomyia tarapacaensis
2
3
5
0.5
1
13
14
0.5
1
4
5
0.5
0
4
4
0.4
0
2
2
0.3
4
26
30 (0.28)
Lutzomyia furcata
1
10
11
0.4
0
5
5
0.4
0
10
10
0.4
1
1
2
0.3
-
-
-
0.2
2
26
28 (0.26)
Lutzomyia pacae
2
3
5
0.4
0
8
8
0.4
1
9
10
0.3
1
3
4
0.3
-
-
-
0.2
4
23
27 (0.25)
Lutzomyia sericea
3
6
9
0.5
1
5
6
0.5
4
3
7
0.4
0
1
1
0.3
0
1
1
0.2
8
16
24 (0.22)
Lutzomyia spathotrichia
0
17
17
0.3
1
4
5
0.3
-
-
-
0.3
-
-
-
0.2
1
0
1
0.1
2
21
23 (0.21)
Lutzomyia migonei
0
8
8
0.2
1
12
13
0.2
-
-
-
0.1
-
-
-
0.1
-
-
-
0.0
1
20
21 (0.20)
Lutzomyia dendrophyla
3
7
10
0.3
2
4
6
0.3
1
0
1
0.3
1
1
2
0.2
-
-
-
0.1
7
12
19 (0.18)
Lutzomyia tuberculata
0
7
7
0.2
0
4
4
0.2
0
6
6
0.2
-
-
-
0.1
-
-
-
0.0
0
17
17 (0.16)
Lutzomyia shannoni
0
2
2
0.4
4
5
9
0.4
0
2
2
0.4
0
1
1
0.3
1
1
2
0.1
5
11
16 (0.15)
Lutzomyia aragaoi
0
1
1
0.4
0
2
2
0.4
0
1
1
0.3
0
4
4
0.2
5
2
7
0.1
5
10
15 (0.14)
Lutzomyia pilosa
0
2
2
0.4
0
1
1
0.4
0
2
2
0.3
0
5
5
0.2
0
5
5
0.0
0
15
15 (0.14)
Lutzomyia antunesi
-
-
-
0.2
1
0
1
0.2
-
-
-
0.1
-
-
-
0.1
6
7
13
0.0
7
7
14 (0.13)
Lutzomyia inflata
2
1
3
0.3
1
3
4
0.3
2
0
2
0.2
-
-
-
0.1
3
0
3
0.0
8
4
12 (0.11)
Lutzomyia ratcliffei
-
-
-
0.3
4
0
4
0.3
3
0
3
0.2
4
0
4
0.1
1
0
1
0.0
12
0
12 (0.11)
Lutzomyia dreisbachi
1
3
4
0.2
5
1
6
0.2
0
1
1
0.1
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
6
5
11 (0.10)
Lutzomyia damascenoi
0
6
6
0.1
0
3
3
0.1
1
0
1
0.1
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
1
9
10 (0.09)
Lutzomyia triacantha
2
1
3
0.1
4
2
6
0.1
-
-
-
0.1
1
0
1
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
7
3
10 (0.09)
Lutzomyia cuzquena
3
1
4
0.1
4
1
5
0.1
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
7
2
9 (0.08)
Lutzomyia saulensis
-
-
-
0.1
-
-
-
0.1
0
1
1
0.1
-
-
-
0.1
1
7
8
0.0
1
8
9 (0.08)
Lutzomyia abunaensis
1
0
1
0.1
2
0
2
0.1
-
-
-
0.1
-
-
-
0.0
3
0
3
0.0
6
0
6 (0.06)
Lutzomyia bispinosa
0
1
1
0.2
0
1
1
0.2
0
3
3
0.1
0
1
1
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
0
6
6 (0.06)
Lutzomyia bourrouli
-
-
-
0.1
-
-
-
0.1
0
4
4
0.1
0
2
2
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
0
6
6 (0.06)
Lutzomyia eurypyga
0
2
2
0.1
-
-
-
0.1
-
-
-
0.1
-
-
-
0.0
3
1
4
0.0
3
3
6 (0.06)
Lutzomyia pennyi
1
1
2
0.1
3
0
3
0.1
-
-
-
0.1
1
0
1
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
5
1
6 (0.06)
Lutzomyia sp. of Baduel
0
2
2
0.1
0
2
2
0.1
0
1
1
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
0
5
5 (0.05)
Lutzomyia cultellata
1
0
1
0.1
-
-
-
0.1
0
1
1
0.1
1
1
2
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
2
2
4 (0.04)
Lutzomyia scaffi
0
1
1
0.1
1
0
1
0.1
0
1
1
0.0
0
1
1
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
1
3
4 (0.04)
Brumptomyia pintoi
-
-
-
0.1
-
-
-
0.1
1
0
1
0.1
-
-
-
0.0
1
1
2
0.0
2
1
3 (0.03)
Lutzomyia bursiformis
-
-
-
0.1
0
1
1
0.1
0
1
1
0.0
0
1
1
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
0
3
3 (0.03)
Lutzomyia servulolimai
-
-
-
0.1
-
-
-
0.1
-
-
-
0.1
-
-
-
0.0
2
1
3
0.0
2
1
3 (0.03)
Lutzomyia barettoi barrettoi
1
1
2
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
1
1
2 (0.02)
Lutzomyia abonnenci
-
-
-
0.0
1
0
1
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
1
0
1 (0.01)
Lutzomyia lutziana
0
1
1
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
-
-
-
0.0
0
1
1 (0.01)
952
2,080
3,032
-
1,635
2,499
4,134
-
663
1,382
2,045
-
354
695
1,049
-
155
347
502
-
3,759
7,003
10,762 (100)
BI: base instruction; BI1: Marechal Rondon; BI2: Lobo D'Almada; BI3:
Placido de Castro; BI4: Pedro Teixeira; BIRB: BI Boina Rajada; SISA:
standardised index of species abundance; ST: subtotal.
BI: base instruction; BI1: Marechal Rondon; BI2: Lobo D'Almada; BI3:
Placido de Castro; BI4: Pedro Teixeira; BIRB: BI Boina Rajada; SISA:
standardised index of species abundance; ST: subtotal.The species Lu. umbratilis and Lu. ruii
were the most abundant in all the areas studied, with SISA = 1.0. The sandfly
Lu. anduzei obtained a similar rate in BIBR, BI1, BI2 and BI3 and
0.9 in BI4. The other species, including Lu. olmeca nociva,
Lu. georgii, Lu. squamiventris squamiventris,
Lu. monstruosa and Lu. flaviscutellata, exhibited
SISA values that ranged from 0.8-0.9 among the military bases.The sex ratio of the captured species was higher for females at all bases and
in all the ecotopes studied. The highest species richness, with an index of S = 50,
occurred in BIBR and BI1. However, the highest diversity index was observed at BI2 (H' =
1.239), followed by BI3 (H' = 1.199). The most significant index of equitability was
observed in BI3 (J = 0.748), followed by BI2 (J = 0.745) (Fig. 2). The sandfly distribution among the different ecotopes showed a
significant inclination towards the plateau area (9.211/85%) (Fig. 3) and a high richness index (S = 57) for this area. However,
the highest diversity index and equitability were recorded for the hillside (H‘ = 1.199;
J = 0.748, respectively) (Fig. 4).
Fig. 2
richness index (S), Shannon-Wiener diversity index (H') and
Shannon-Wiener index of species richness (J) of sandfly species captured at
five military bases of instruction (BI) [Marechal Rondon (BI1), Lobo
D'Almada (BI2), Placido de Castro (BI3), Pedro Teixeira (BI4) and Boina
Rajada (BIBR)] in the state of Amazonas, Brazil, during March 2002-February
2003.
Fig. 3
total number of specimens of sandflies captured in military reserve in
the state of Amazonas, Brazil, during March 2002-February 2003.
Fig. 4
richness index (S), Shannon-Wiener diversity index (H') and
Shannon-Wiener index of species richness (J) of sandfly species captured at
five bases of instruction (Marechal Rondon, Lobo D'Almada, Placido de
Castro, Pedro Teixeira and Boina Rajada] in the state of Amazonas, Brazil,
in different ecotopes, during March 2002-February 2003.
The most abundant species were Lu. umbratilis and
Lu. ruii (SISA = 1.0), which were recorded in all three ecotypes,
followed by Lu. anduzei (SISA = 1.0/plateau and hillside; 0.9 to
lowland), Lu. olmeca nociva and Lu. georgii (SISA =
0.9 in all analysed ecotypes), Lu. squamiventris squamiventris and
Lu. monstruosa (SISA = 0.9/plateau and hillside; 0.8 to lowland)
and Lu. fla-viscutellata (SISA = 0.9/plateau and hillside; 0.8 to
lowland). In the Brazilian Amazon Region, approximately 200 species of sandflies of the
genus Lutzomyia have been recorded (Camargo & Barcinski 2003), including the main species that transmit
leishmaniasis in the region (Young & Duncan
1994).A total of 57 species of the genus Lutzomyia were recorded
in the present study (Table). Four of these species are incriminated in the Amazon as
vectors of ACL, including Lu. umbratilis and Lu.
anduzei, which are the main vectors of Leishmania (Viannia)
guyanensis and Lu. olmeca nociva and Lu.
flaviscutellata, which are involved in the transmission of
Leishmania (Leishmania) amazonensis (Arias & Freitas 1977, 1978, Lainson & Shaw 1983, Freitas et al. 2002). Similar results with a
predominance of Lu. umbratilis in an area of primary forest land using
CDC light traps were obtained by Arias and Freitas
(1982), Lainson (1983), Dias-Lima et al. (2003), Feitosa and Castellón (2006), Gomes
et al. (2009, 2010), Nery et al. (2010) and Soares (2012) .Species such as Lu. squamiventris squamiventris,
Lutzomyia davisi, Lutzomyia ayrozai and
Lutzomyia paraensis, even though they have a restricted
distribution in wild areas and are rarely found in domestic environments (Carvalho et al. 2006), cannot be discarded as
potential sources of the emergence of leishmaniasis cases from human contact with these
species in the area study, as these species display zoophilic behaviour and bite humans
in the forest (Castellón 2009). This possibility
may be supported by the recent finding of Lu. davisi naturally infected
with Le. (V.) braziliensis in the Serra dos Carajás (state of Pará), a
place where this species may also be involved in the transmission of ACL in the
Brazilian Amazon (Souza et al. 2010 ).The number of captured specimens varied among the base areas, with a higher
incidence of individuals and species richness recorded in BI1 and BIBR and the lowest in
BI4 (Fig. 2, Table). This distribution can be
explained by the geographic location of the study areas (Fig. 1). BI1 and BIBR are located near the AM-010 highway (BI1) and are thus
closer to residences where waste accumulation caused by local residents was observed,
attracting large numbers of synanthropic animals, such as opossums and rodents. These
synanthropic animals have great epidemiologic importance because they are reservoirs of
Leishmania, with the opossum Didelphis
marsupialis regarded as a reservoir for Le. (V.)
guya-nensis and the rodents Oryzomys sp. and
Proechymis sp. as reservoir hosts of Le. (L.)
amazonensis (Arias & Naiff
1981, Lainson & Shaw 1983).The highest rates of species diversity were found in BI2, followed by BI3 and
the highest rates of equitability were found for BI3, followed by BI2 (Fig. 2). Despite having a lower richness index than
BI1, BI4 revealed higher levels of diversity and equitability. According to Young and Arias (1992), the greatest diversity of
species in the genus Lutzomyia is found in the forests in low-latitude
areas of Central America and South America, where 1 ha of forest can contain up to 50
species.These results can be associated with the topography of the BI4 area, which is
located in a lowland area. According to Waite
(2000), species richness is simply the number of species that are present.
Equitability refers to the relative abundance of each species. In a community with high
diversity and equitability, the majority of species that exist have similar levels of
abundance and therefore, a clearly dominant species does not occur.The results presented for BI1, with low diversity and equitability associated
with a high abundance index, showed a clear species dominance by Lu.
umbratilis, Lu. ruii and Lu. anduzei.The distribution of sandfly specimens in different ecotypes showed a higher
occurrence in the environment than in the plateau, hillside and lowland for the total
prevalence of Lu. umbratilis in the three ecotypes analysed. Ready et al. (1983, 1985) and Barrett et al. (1991)
showed that populations of Lu. umbratilis are more widely distributed
in areas with a high topographic elevation (plateau) that contain large trees with
diameters greater than 1 m. Sandflies can be seen resting on the bases of these trees
during the day.In the MR, these characteristics are compatible with the local vegetation of
BIBR, BI1 and BI2, which reinforces the suspicion that some outbreaks emerged in BI1 and
BIBR in the 1980s, where many trainees become infected with Leishmania
(CIGS, Department of Doctrine and Research, unpublished observations).Chaniotis et al. (1971) observed that in tropical
regions, the soil and tree canopy can be viewed as different habitats with different
physical and biological components. The canopy is the primary site of flowering and
fruiting, which attracts and harbours many vertebrates, such as primates and sloths,
which serve as food sources for the sandflies.The climate in the tree canopy is different from that at the ground level,
i.e., there are differences in the microclimate (e.g., temperature, relative humidity,
light intensity, air movement and CO2 levels). The lowland ecotope exhibited
a lower occurrence of captured individuals. This type of environment is found at BI4,
which has cycles of ebb and downstream, flooded areas, forests and understory. This type
of environment may not provide the largest gatherings of sandflies as their food sources
migrate to other areas during periods of flooding, helping to reduce the population of
sandflies.The constant presence and abundance of Lu. umbratilis (SISA
= 1.0) at all BIS is a reason for concern about the possibility of outbreaks of ACL in
these military areas, as this species is the main vector of the disease in AM.The sex ratio was higher for females than males in all areas of the bases for
the three ecotopes analysed. This difference is remarkable because the females are the
sex that bites, requiring blood to mature their eggs. Consequently, the females are
responsible for the transmission of the parasites to humans.On-going surveys of the sandfly insect fauna are important to increase our
knowledge of the areas where these insects occur, as the comprehension of the population
dynamics of this group might be an important factor for the implementation of policies
for the epidemiological control of leishmaniasis.
Authors: Gustavo Mayr Lima de Carvalho; Alda Lima Falcão; José Dilermando Andrade Filho Journal: Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 2.743
Authors: Maria de F F de M Ximenes; Virgínia P M E Silva; Paula V S de Queiroz; Maria M Rego; Analuísa M Cortez; Leopoldina M de M Batista; Arlinete S de Medeiros; Selma M B Jeronimio Journal: Neotrop Entomol Date: 2007 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.434
Authors: Erica Cristina da Silva Chagas; Arineia Soares Silva; Nelson Ferreira Fé; Lucas Silva Ferreira; Vanderson de Souza Sampaio; Wagner Cosme Morhy Terrazas; Jorge Augusto Oliveira Guerra; Rodrigo Augusto Ferreira de Souza; Henrique Silveira; Maria das Graças Vale Barbosa Guerra Journal: Parasit Vectors Date: 2018-03-13 Impact factor: 3.876
Authors: Maria Gabriella Nunes de Melo; Rayana Carla Silva de Morais; Tayná Correia de Goes; Rômulo Pessoa E Silva; Rômulo Freire de Morais; Jorge Augusto de Oliveira Guerra; Maria Edileuza Felinto de Brito; Sinval Pinto Brandão Filho; Milena de Paiva Cavalcanti Journal: Rev Soc Bras Med Trop Date: 2020-11-25 Impact factor: 1.581
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4