Suppr超能文献

在美国东北部一项运行中的监测项目中,对库蚊和西尼罗河病毒的高架诱捕进行的为期两年的评估。

A two-year evaluation of elevated canopy trapping for Culex mosquitoes and West Nile virus in an operational surveillance program in the northeastern United States.

作者信息

Andreadis Theodore G, Armstrong Philip M

机构信息

The Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, 123 Huntington Street, PO Box 1106, New Haven, CT 06504, USA.

出版信息

J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 2007 Jun;23(2):137-48. doi: 10.2987/8756-971X(2007)23[137:ATEOEC]2.0.CO;2.

Abstract

The effectiveness of CO2-baited Centers for Disease Control and Prevention miniature light traps elevated in the tree canopy (approximately 7.6 m) was compared with light traps placed at ground level (approximately1.5 m) and grass-sod infused gravid traps for collecting Culex pipiens, Culex restuans, and Culex salinarius and detecting West Nile virus (WNV) activity in an operational surveillance program that encompassed 12 ecologically diverse sites in Connecticut in 2004 and 2005. More than twice as many Cx. pipiens were collected on average in light traps suspended in the tree canopy than in either light or gravid traps placed at ground level. This difference was generally restricted to those collection sites where markedly greater numbers of Cx. pipiens were collected with all trapping methods but was not associated with site-specific urbanization indices. Culex restuans was not preferentially attracted to light traps suspended in the tree canopy. No differences in the overall abundance of this species were recorded with either of the 2 trapping procedures, but both light traps were more effective than the gravid traps. Culex salinarius was significantly more attracted to ground-based light traps than traps suspended in the tree canopy, while gravid traps were ineffective at all sites regardless of the level of urbanization or any other specific land-use characteristic. CO2-baited light traps placed in the tree canopy were generally superior to ground-based light traps for detecting WNV in Cx. pipiens. West Nile virus-infected females were collected more regularly, and the frequency of infected pools was significantly greater. Twofold higher minimum field infection rates (maximum likelihood estimation [MLE] = 6.7 vs. 3.0 per 1,000 mosquitoes) were also recorded from canopy collections of this species, and virus was detected in canopy-collected females several weeks before it was detected in collections from light traps at ground level. We conclude that the use of CO2-baited light traps placed in the tree canopy for targeted trapping of Cx. pipiens and subsequent detection of WNV are likely to yield better overall results than light traps placed at ground level in this region of the northeastern United States. The virus isolation data obtained from Cx. pipiens collected in gravid traps compared favorably both temporally and spatially with results from canopy trap collections. There were no significant differences in the overall frequency of WNV-infected pools or MLEs for Cx. pipiens, but fewer total WNV isolations were made from Cx. pipiens collected in the gravid traps and virus was detected more infrequently. Results reaffirmed the utility of gravid traps as effective surveillance tools for detection of WNV in Cx. pipiens in the northeastern United States. However, findings also demonstrated that CO2-baited light traps placed in the tree canopy provided more consistent results where weekly detection of virus amplification is a critical objective. The comparative effectiveness of ground- and canopy-based light traps for detection of WNV-infected Cx. restuans and Cx. salinarius was inconclusive owing to the limited number of virus isolations that were made from these species during the 2 years of study. However, WNV virus isolations were made several weeks earlier and more frequently from Cx. restuans collected in traps placed in the canopy rather than at ground level in 2004. Results support the view that ground-based light traps are more effective for detection of WNV in Cx. salinarius.

摘要

在2004年和2005年一项涵盖康涅狄格州12个生态多样地点的实际监测项目中,对置于树冠层(约7.6米)的二氧化碳诱饵疾病控制与预防中心微型诱蚊灯的有效性,与置于地面(约1.5米)的诱蚊灯以及草皮浸渍孕蚊诱捕器进行了比较,以收集致倦库蚊、环跗库蚊和盐泽库蚊,并检测西尼罗河病毒(WNV)的活动情况。树冠层悬挂的诱蚊灯平均收集到的致倦库蚊数量是地面放置的诱蚊灯或孕蚊诱捕器所收集数量的两倍多。这种差异通常仅限于那些用所有诱捕方法都能收集到明显更多致倦库蚊的采集地点,但与特定地点的城市化指数无关。环跗库蚊不会优先被吸引到树冠层悬挂的诱蚊灯上。两种诱捕方法记录到的该物种总体丰度没有差异,但两种诱蚊灯都比孕蚊诱捕器更有效。盐泽库蚊被地面诱蚊灯吸引的程度明显高于树冠层悬挂的诱蚊灯,而孕蚊诱捕器在所有地点都无效,无论城市化水平或任何其他特定土地利用特征如何。置于树冠层的二氧化碳诱饵诱蚊灯在检测致倦库蚊中的WNV方面通常优于地面诱蚊灯。收集到的感染西尼罗河病毒的雌蚊更频繁,且感染样本的频率显著更高。从该物种的树冠层采集样本中记录到的最低野外感染率也高出两倍(最大似然估计[MLE]=每1000只蚊子中6.7只对3.0只),并且在树冠层采集的雌蚊中检测到病毒的时间比在地面诱蚊灯采集样本中检测到病毒的时间早几周。我们得出结论,在美国东北部这个地区,使用置于树冠层的二氧化碳诱饵诱蚊灯来有针对性地诱捕致倦库蚊并随后检测WNV,可能比置于地面的诱蚊灯产生更好的总体结果。从孕蚊诱捕器收集的致倦库蚊中获得的病毒分离数据在时间和空间上与树冠层诱捕器收集结果相比都较好。致倦库蚊中WNV感染样本的总体频率或MLEs没有显著差异,但从孕蚊诱捕器收集的致倦库蚊中分离到的WNV总数较少,且病毒检测频率较低。结果再次证实了孕蚊诱捕器作为在美国东北部检测致倦库蚊中WNV的有效监测工具的实用性。然而,研究结果也表明,在每周检测病毒扩增是关键目标的情况下,置于树冠层的二氧化碳诱饵诱蚊灯能提供更一致的结果。由于在两年研究期间从这些物种中分离到的病毒数量有限,基于地面和树冠层的诱蚊灯在检测感染WNV的环跗库蚊和盐泽库蚊方面的相对有效性尚无定论。然而,2004年从树冠层放置的诱蚊器收集的环跗库蚊中分离到WNV病毒的时间比从地面放置的诱蚊器早几周,且频率更高。结果支持这样一种观点,即地面诱蚊灯在检测盐泽库蚊中的WNV方面更有效。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验