| Literature DB >> 24708673 |
Philippe Brémond, Renata Salas, Etienne Waleckx, Rosio Buitrago, Claudia Aliaga, Christian Barnabé, Stéphanie Depickère, Olivier Dangles, Simone Frédérique Brenière1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Wild populations of Triatoma infestans are now believed to be the source of reinfestation of dwellings in some Andean areas and could impede the full achievement of vector control campaigns in this region. Given the poor knowledge of these populations in natural conditions, their basic biology traits, such as monthly demographic variations and movements of individuals, were explored.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24708673 PMCID: PMC3992151 DOI: 10.1186/1756-3305-7-164
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Figure 1Area of capture. The red frame globally surrounds the area where the traps were placed. The small pictures are main ecotopes were the T. infestans were found: a) foot of prickly pear, b) small burrow, c) scree of small and median rocks.
Monthly captures of wild and climatic conditions over 1 year
| C1 | 11/08/2009 | 4.6 | 23.2 | 6.2 | Dry | 15 | 30.0 | 116 | 7.7 ± 9.1 |
| C6 | 15/09/2009 | 7.3 | 22.6 | 29.7 | Dry | 9 | 18.0 | 43 | 4.8 ± 2.4 |
| C9 | 13/10/2009 | 8.7 | 24.2 | 19.6 | Dry | 12 | 24.0 | 45 | 3.7 ± 3.3 |
| C11 | 10/11/2009 | 11.3 | 24.9 | 18.9 | Rainy | 16 | 32.0 | 63 | 3.9 ± 3.6 |
| C14 | 18/12/2009 | 10.6 | 23.7 | 69.7 | Rainy | 8 | 16.6 | 33 | 4.1 ± 3.2 |
| C16 | 18/01/2010 | 11.6 | 24 | 58.2 | Rainy | 12 | 24.0 | 30 | 2.5 ± 2.0 |
| C18 | 18/02/2010 | 11.8 | 24.7 | 91.4 | Rainy | 7 | 14.0 | 29 | 4.1 ± 3.3 |
| C20 | 30/03/2010 | 11.4 | 24.8 | 15.4 | Rainy | 11 | 22.0 | 52 | 4.7 ± 4.5 |
| C21 | 26/04/2010 | 9.2 | 24 | 1.5 | Rainy | 12 | 24.0 | 73 | 6.1 ± 10.7 |
| C22 | 25/05/2010 | 7.1 | 22.6 | 7.2 | Dry | 8 | 16.0 | 63 | 7.9 ± 8.3 |
| C23 | 29/06/2010 | 5.4 | 22.4 | 0.0 | Dry | 11 | 22.0 | 63 | 5.7 ± 6.5 |
| C24 | 03/08/2010 | 3.9 | 23.2 | 2.5 | Dry | 16 | 32.0 | 35 | 2.2 ± 1.6 |
| C25 | 31/08/2010 | 5.5 | 23.2 | 5.8 | Dry | 7 | 14.0 | 20 | 2.8 ± 1.9 |
| Total | 144 | 22.1 | 665 | 4.6 ± 5.7 |
aThe minimum and maximum temperatures corresponded to the average of the daily temperatures recorded during each month at the Mecapaca station; bTotal precipitation during the corresponding month (for C24 July recordings were used; cThe total number of traps per assay was 50.
Figure 2Total number of bugs (nymphs and adults) collected over the study period. Each point is the sum of bugs collected at the 50 study sites during each assay.
Figure 3Spatial distribution of the sites positive for wild (black circle) and negative sites (white circle) during the 13 monthly assays. The circled sites are those very close each other (less than 60 cm).
Figure 4Values of the nearest neighbor distance function G(r) calculated using the reduced sample estimator related to the distance between sampling sites with T. infestans nymphs (blue) and all explored sites (red) at the study area. Dashed lines represent the null model of spatial randomness for both curves.
Features of the sites associated with infestation
| Location of the trap | | | | |
| On the ground | 26 | 46.1 (12) | 5.9 ± 24.8 | 1.1 ± 2.0 |
| Underground | 24 | 75.0 (18) | 21.3 ± 29.3 | 4.8 ± 4.8 |
| | ||||
| Material where the trap was set | | | | |
| Rocks | 12 | 75.0 (9) | 28.9 ± 36.1 | 6.5 ± 5.2 |
| Earth | 15 | 60.0 (9) | 8.3 ± 15.4 | 2.1 ± 3.1 |
| Vegetation | 19 | 47.4 (9) | 7.7 ± 28.9 | 1.2 ± 2.2 |
| Mixed | 4 | 75.0 (3) | 11.5 ± 21.7 | 3.0 ± 4.7 |
| | 0.43 | 0.17 d | ||
| Burrow | | | | |
| Yes | 13 | 84.6 (11) | 24.6 ± 34.1 | 4.7 ± 5.0 |
| No | 37 | 51.3 (19) | 9.3 ± 24.7 | 2.2 ± 3.5 |
| | ||||
| Presence of animal feces at the site | | | | |
| Yes | 3 | 100 (3) | 67.7 ± 39.5 | 11.3 ± 2.1 |
| No | 47 | 57.4 (27) | 9.8 ± 23.5 | 2.3 ± 3.5 |
| | 0.26e | |||
| Presence of stones around the trap | | | | |
| Yes | 14 | 71.4 (10) | 27.8 ± 34.6 | 6.2 ± 5.2 |
| No | 36 | 55.5 (20) | 7.7 ± 23.0 | 1.6 ± 2.5 |
| | 0.30 | |||
| Presence of earth around the trap | | | | |
| Yes | 41 | 58.5 (22) | 10.8 ± 27.0 | 2.1 ± 3.4 |
| No | 9 | 100 (8) | 24.5 ± 30.7 | 6.3 ± 5.1 |
| | ||||
| Presence of vegetation around the trap | | | | |
| Yes | 24 | 54.2 (12) | 8.1 ± 26.8 | 1.5 ± 2.7 |
| No | 26 | 76.9 (18) | 18.1 ± 28.5 | 4.1 ± 4.7 |
| 0.16 | ||||
aThe P-value was evaluated with the Chi 2 test (significant P-value in bold); bThe crowding index is the average number of triatomines per site and the P-value was evaluated with the nonparametric Mann–Whitney test; cthe P-value was evaluated with the nonparametric Mann–Whitney test; dAMOVA variance analysis was applied; eBecause of the sample size, the Fisher exact test was applied; the significant values are in bold.
Capture-mark-recaptures of nymphs and adults of wild
| | | | | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. of marked specimens | 93 | 67 | 73 | 28 | 40 | 301 |
| No. of recaptures | 32 | 30 | 30 | 13 | 33 | 138 |
| No. of recaptures at the same site or sites very close (< 60 cm) | 31 | 27 | 27 | 11 | 22 | 118 |
| No. of recaptures at a different site | 1 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 11 | 20 |
Details of recaptures of adult specimens
| Female code | | | | | | |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | S24 | 7 | 0 |
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | S44 | 7 | 0 |
| 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | S24, S27 | 13 | 0 |
| 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | S34, S39 | 231 | 22 |
| 5 | 2 | 1 | 1 | S44, S43 | 14, 29 | 9 |
| 6 | 2 | 1 | 1 | S24, S28 | 55, 69 | 15 |
| 7 | 3 | 0 | 3 | S24, S23, S22, S21 | 7, 14, 28 | 35 |
| 8 | 3 | 3 | 0 | S21 | 21, 28, 35 | 0 |
| 9 | 3 | 3 | 0 | S26, S25, S27 | 53, 55, 69 | 0 |
| 10 | 4 | 4 | 0 | S24, S25, S27, S24 | 7, 14, 21, 34 | 0 |
| 11 | 5 | 3 | 2 | S21, S23, S24 | 13, 28, 56, 122, 140 | 36 |
| 12 | 7 | 4 | 3 | S21, S30, S29, S27, S07 | 7, 70, 84, 111, 125, 196, 318 | 159 |
| Male code | | | | | | |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | S13 | 7 | 0 |
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | S21 | 10 | 0 |
| 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | S26, S25 | 14 | 0 |
| 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | S21, S25 | 14 | 26 |
| 5 | 1 | 0 | 1 | S21, S02 | 21 | 64 |
| 6 | 1 | 1 | 0 | S21 | 22 | 0 |
| 7 | 1 | 1 | 0 | S43 | 59 | 0 |
| 8 | 2 | 2 | 0 | S25,S27 | 14, 28 | 0 |
| 9 | 2 | 2 | 0 | S43 | 31, 43 | 0 |
| 10 | 2 | 2 | 0 | S24, S25, S24 | 31, 43 | 0 |
aThe numbers of the sites referred to Figure 2; bThe distance covered was equated to zero between the following sites: S24 to S27 (same block of stone), S40 to S43 (burrows less than 60 cm away), and S18-S19 (foot of cactus less than 60 cm away).
Figure 5Detail of the observed displacements of six females during the 13 monthly assays (colored lines). The circled sites are those very close each other (less than 60 cm).