Burkett D A, Lee W J, Lee K W, Kim H C, Lee H I, Lee J S, Shin E H, Wirtz R A, Cho H W, Claborn D M, Coleman R E, Klein T A
Detachment 3, U.S. Air Force Institute for Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health Risk Analysis, Okinawa, Japan, APO AP 96368.
J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 2001 Sep;17(3):196-205.
Two field trials for commercially available and experimental mosquito traps variously baited with light, carbon dioxide, octenol, or combinations of these were evaluated in a malarious area at Paekyeon-Ri near Tongil-Chon (village) and Camp Greaves, Paju County, Kyonggi Province, Republic of Korea. The host-seeking activity for common mosquito species was determined using hourly aspirator collections from a human- and propane lantern-baited Shannon trap. The total number of mosquitoes and number of each species captured during the test were compared using 8 x 8 and 5 x 5 Latin square designs based on trap location. Significant differences were observed for the total number of mosquitoes collected in the 8 x 8 test, such that counterflow geometry (CFG) with CO2 > or = CFG with CO2 and octenol > or = Shannon trap > or = Mosquito Magnet with octenol > American Biophysics Corporation (ABC) light trap with light, CO2 (500 ml/min), and octenol > or = ABC light trap with light and dry ice > or = ABC light trap with light and CO2 > ABC light trap with light only. A concurrent 5 x 5 test found significant differences in trap catch, where Mosquito Magnet with octenol > New Jersey light trap > or = EPAR Mosquito Killer with CO2 > or = ABC light trap with light and dry ice > Centers for Disease Control (CDC) light trap (manufactured by John W. Hock) with light and octenol. Significant differences in trap catch were noted for several species including: Aedes vexans, Anopheles sinensis, An. yatsushiroensis, An. lesteri, Culex pipiens, and Cx. orientalis. Traps baited with octenol captured significantly fewer Cx. pipiens than those not baited with octenol. Likewise, no Cx. orientalis were captured in octenol-baited traps. Host-seeking activity showed a similar bimodal pattern for all species captured. Results from these field trap evaluations can significantly enhance surveillance efforts. Significantly greater numbers of mosquitoes were captured with mosquito traps using counterflow technology (e.g., Mosquito Magnet and CFG traps) when compared to standard light and carbon dioxide-baited traps. Additionally, field evaluations demonstrate that various traps can be utilized for isolation and detection of arboviruses and other pathogens.
在韩国京畿道坡州市通一川附近的白岘里和格里夫斯营地的疟疾流行区,对两种市售和实验性捕蚊器进行了田间试验,这些捕蚊器分别用灯光、二氧化碳、辛醇或它们的组合作为诱饵。使用一个以人和丙烷灯为诱饵的香农诱捕器每小时进行吸气收集,来确定常见蚊虫的宿主寻找活动。根据诱捕器的位置,采用8×8和5×5拉丁方设计,比较了试验期间捕获的蚊子总数和每种蚊子的数量。在8×8试验中,观察到捕获的蚊子总数存在显著差异,即:带二氧化碳的逆流几何形状(CFG)诱捕器≥带二氧化碳和辛醇的CFG诱捕器≥香农诱捕器≥带辛醇的灭蚊磁场诱捕器≥带灯光、二氧化碳(500毫升/分钟)和辛醇的美国生物物理公司(ABC)灯光诱捕器≥带灯光和干冰的ABC灯光诱捕器≥带灯光和二氧化碳的ABC灯光诱捕器≥仅带灯光的ABC灯光诱捕器。同时进行的5×5试验发现诱捕器捕获量存在显著差异,即:带辛醇的灭蚊磁场诱捕器>新泽西灯光诱捕器≥带二氧化碳的EPAR灭蚊器≥带灯光和干冰的ABC灯光诱捕器>疾病控制中心(CDC)(由约翰·W·霍克制造)带灯光和辛醇的灯光诱捕器。几种蚊虫的诱捕量存在显著差异,包括:骚扰伊蚊、中华按蚊、八代按蚊、雷氏按蚊、致倦库蚊和东方库蚊。用辛醇作诱饵的诱捕器捕获的致倦库蚊明显少于未用辛醇作诱饵的诱捕器。同样,用辛醇作诱饵的诱捕器未捕获到东方库蚊。所有捕获的蚊虫种类的宿主寻找活动都呈现出类似的双峰模式。这些田间诱捕器评估的结果可以显著加强监测工作。与标准的灯光和二氧化碳诱饵诱捕器相比,使用逆流技术的蚊虫诱捕器(如灭蚊磁场诱捕器和CFG诱捕器)捕获的蚊子数量明显更多。此外,田间评估表明,各种诱捕器可用于分离和检测虫媒病毒及其他病原体。