1 / 26

Visual Attraction of Ovitraps for Surveying Field Populations of Aedes Mosquitoes

Visual Attraction of Ovitraps for Surveying Field Populations of Aedes Mosquitoes. LCDR P. J. Obenauer, MSC, USN. Aedes Ovitrap Applications. Surveillance Efficient and Economical Control Safe / non-toxic Insecticidal ovitrap (Perich et al. 2003)

foy
Download Presentation

Visual Attraction of Ovitraps for Surveying Field Populations of Aedes Mosquitoes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Visual Attraction of Ovitraps for Surveying Field Populations of Aedes Mosquitoes LCDR P. J. Obenauer, MSC, USN

  2. Aedes Ovitrap Applications • Surveillance • Efficient and Economical • Control • Safe / non-toxic • Insecticidal ovitrap (Perich et al. 2003) • Sticky ovitrap (Facchinelli et al. 2007, Zhang and Lei 2008) • Biodegradable lethal ovitrap(Richie et al. 2008)

  3. Host-Seeking Cues for Aedes Mosquitoes (Brown, A. W. A. 1956) • Moisture • Carbon Dioxide • Convective heat • Movement • Contour • Black and white interfaces = increased attraction by 60% • Reflectivity • Decreases attractiveness • Black surfaces attracted 5X as many Ae. aegypti compared to white

  4. Use of Visual Cues to Attract Host-Seeking Mosquitoes

  5. Factors Influencing Aedes aegypti Oviposition (Fay and Perry 1965) • Water Absorptive Properties • Roughness • Color of Test Materials

  6. Aedes aegypti(Fay and Perry 1965)

  7. Factors Influencing Aedes triseriatus Oviposition (Wilton 1968) • Orientation of container opening • Texture of wall • Optical density • Color of container wall • Presence of decaying organic matter • Color of container background

  8. Factors Influencing Oviposition in Aedes triseriatus(Beehler et al. 1992) * Factors in a Fractional Factorial Design Combination

  9. Aedes triseriatus(Williams 1962)

  10. Aedes triseriatus(Williams 1962)

  11. Effect of Color on Selection of Aedes Oviposition Sites (Gubler 1971)

  12. Effect of Color on the Selection of Aedes Oviposition Sites (Gubler 1971) • Ae. polynesiensis was more influenced by chemical factors in the water compared to visual factors • Ae. albopictus more influenced by visual stimuli than contact chemoreception • No specific color distinction, rather light & dark • Colors of a shorter wave length were not attractive

  13. Aedes albopictus Visual Attraction (Yap et al. 1995)

  14. Aedes albopictus Visual Attraction (Yap et al. 1995)

  15. Response of Host-Seeking Female Ae. aegypti(Sippell and Brown 1953) • Increasing contrast = increased attraction • Black and white interface through a checkerboard pattern • Glossy black was more attractive than flat black

  16. What about Oviposition?

  17. Site Selection • Residential / Suburban areas • Large numbers of Aedes albopictus • Shaded areas • Thick vegetation

  18. Materials & Methods • Ovitraps = 11 X 9 cm black plastic cups • Substrate = #76 Seed germination paper • 200 ml of 6 d-old Ae. albopictus larval water • Ovitraps secured w/ stakes • Ovitraps cleaned weekly / new water added

  19. Checkered Stripe Orange Blue White Black GO GATORS!!

  20. North Florida Field Sites

  21. Experimental Design • Conducted from July to September 2009 • 6 consecutive weeks (trials) • 54 ovitraps • 6 treatments / site • 3 sites / location (Gainesville, Jacksonville, NAS) • Traps set between 0800 and 1100 • Operated for 1 week = 1 trap period

  22. Statistical Analysis • Randomized block design • Response = # of eggs / ovitrap / week • Data transformed with log10 (n+1) prior to analysis • PROC GLM, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) • Multiple mean comparisons of mosquito egg recovered using Ryan-Einot-Gabriel-Walsh (REGW) Multiple Range Test ( α = 0.05)

  23. Results a ab abc abc bc c Mean # of Eggs / Ovitrap * Treatments marked with the same letter are not significantly different α = 0.05, (REGW). N = 54 (F = 4.18, df = 5, 249, P = 0.0012)

  24. Conclusions • Significant differences (α = 0.05) detected among sites and trial • 4 Species: Aedes albopictus, Ae. triseriatus, Orthopodomyia signifera, Toxorhynchites • 90% positive for Ae. albopictus • Black colored ovitraps were more attractive compared to stripe or white

  25. Acknowledgements • CDR D. F. Hoel • Jacksonville Mosquito Control District (Marah Clark) • Navy Entomology Center of Excellence • Dr. Matt Aubuchon • Dr. Sandra Allan • Dr. Gerry Hogsette • Dr. Don Hall • Dr. Faith & David Oi

More Related