| Literature DB >> 25896343 |
Andrew Hope1, Simon Gubbins2, Christopher Sanders3, Eric Denison4, James Barber5, Francesca Stubbins6, Matthew Baylis7,8, Simon Carpenter9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The response of Culicoides biting midges (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) to artificial light sources has led to the use of light-suction traps in surveillance programmes. Recent integration of light emitting diodes (LED) in traps improves flexibility in trapping through reduced power requirements and also allows the wavelength of light used for trapping to be customized. This study investigates the responses of Culicoides to LED light-suction traps emitting different wavelengths of light to make recommendations for use in surveillance.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25896343 PMCID: PMC4415440 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-015-0846-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Figure 1Light emitting diode baits used during investigation of differential attraction of Culicoides to commercially produced light-suction traps. Colours used were: UV (390 nm), Blue (430 nm), Green (570 nm), Yellow (590 nm), Red (660 nm) and White (427-750 nm).
biting midges collected during a comparative study of commercially available light emitting diode baited suction traps. Studies were conducted over a total of 49 days at a farm holding in the United Kingdom
|
|
| |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 20,569 (429 ± 110) | 3,077 (65.5 ± 18.6) | 3,515 (76.4 ± 24.1) | 3,965 (80.9 ± 17.3) | 2,810 (58.5 ± 25.0) | 122 (2.7 ± 0.6) | 3,379 (73.5 ± 23.0) |
|
|
| 389 (8.1 ± 2.8) | 49 (1.0 ± 0.3) | 119 (2.6 ± 0.9) | 157 (3.2 ± 1.0) | 69 (1.4 ± 0.5) | 1 (0.02 ± 0.0) | 100 (2.2 ± 0.7) |
|
|
| 210 (4.4 ± 1.7) | 20 (0.4 ± 0.2) | 55 (1.2 ± 0.9) | 77 (1.6 ± 0.5) | 31 (0.6 ± 0.3) | 0 | 13 (0.3 ± 0.1) |
|
|
| 93 (1.9 ± 0.8) | 54 (1.1 ± 0.6) | 91 (2.0 ± 1.2) | 72 (1.5 ± 0.4) | 16 (0.3 ± 0.1) | 2 (0.04 ± 0.0) | 16 (0.3 ± 0.1) |
|
|
| 264 (12.6 ± 4.9) | 103 (4.9 ± 1.9) | 542 (25.8 ± 22.4) | 744 (35.3 ± 27.3) | 213 (10.1 ± 5.3) | 19 (1.0 ± 0.4) | 186 (10.3 ± 5.5) |
|
| Other Species | 527 | 154 | 319 | 357 | 164 | 3 | 100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated abundances of , and based on multiplex polymerase chain reaction identification of subsamples
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Unpigmented | 7,336 | 1,259 | 1,351 | 1,628 | 979 | 24 | 1,458 | 14,035 |
| Pigmented | 2,545 | 604 | 752 | 814 | 529 | 21 | 537 | 5,802 | |
| Blood-fed | 92 | 9 | 44 | 72 | 46 | 0 | 96 | 359 | |
| Gravid | 219 | 42 | 153 | 189 | 123 | 1 | 27 | 754 | |
| Male | 384 | 62 | 97 | 209 | 37 | 8 | 88 | 885 | |
| Total | 10,576 | 1,976 | 2,397 | 2,912 | 1,714 | 54 | 2,206 | 21,835 | |
|
| Unpigmented | 4,826 | 489 | 301 | 316 | 552 | 28 | 381 | 6,893 |
| Pigmented | 4,405 | 425 | 307 | 441 | 310 | 21 | 252 | 6,161 | |
| Blood-fed | 3 | 1 | 7 | 17 | 4 | 0 | 12 | 44 | |
| Gravid | 96 | 6 | 28 | 3 | 9 | 1 | 30 | 173 | |
| Male | 264 | 24 | 41 | 56 | 37 | 3 | 24 | 449 | |
| Total | 9,594 | 945 | 684 | 833 | 912 | 53 | 699 | 13,720 | |
|
| Unpigmented | 147 | 14 | 45 | 19 | 33 | 0 | 40 | 298 |
| Pigmented | 92 | 7 | 70 | 36 | 22 | 2 | 37 | 266 | |
| Blood-fed | 2 | 0 | 37 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 42 | |
| Gravid | 86 | 19 | 13 | 38 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 158 | |
| Male | 17 | 6 | 2 | 10 | 3 | 2 | 6 | 46 | |
| Total | 344 | 46 | 167 | 106 | 59 | 4 | 84 | 810 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Figure 2Seasonal occurrence of common Culicoides species from (A) May to June and (B) July to September. Collections are pooled across suction trap catches using light emitting diodes and a conventional ultraviolet light baited trap. Abundance for C. obsoletus, C. scoticus and C. dewulfi is calculated from a subsample of specimens identified to species level using a multiplex polymerase chain reaction assay while C. brunnicans were identified directly using their morphology.