Marina Carlos F, Liedo Pablo, Bond J Guillermo, R Osorio Adriana, Valle Javier, Angulo-Kladt Roberto, Gómez-Simuta Yeudiel, Fernández-Salas Ildefonso, Dor Ariane, Williams Trevor
Centro Regional de Investigación en Salud Pública-Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, Tapachula 30700, Chiapas, Mexico.
El Colegio de la Frontera Sur (ECOSUR), Unidad Tapachula, Tapachula 30700, Chiapas, Mexico.
Insects. 2022 Mar 31;13(4):347. doi: 10.3390/insects13040347.
Sterile males of Aedes aegypti were released once a week for 8 weeks to evaluate the dispersal efficiency of ground and aerial drone release methods in a rural village of 26 Ha in southern Mexico. Indoor and outdoor BG-Sentinel traps were placed in 13−16 houses distributed throughout the village. The BG traps were activated 48 h after the release of the sterile males and functioned for a 24 h period following each release. Over the 8-week period of simultaneous ground and aerial releases, an average of 85,117 ± 6457 sterile males/week were released at ground level and 86,724 ± 6474 sterile males/week were released using an aerial drone. The ground release method resulted in higher numbers of captured males (mean = 5.1 ± 1.4, range 1.1−15.7 sterile males/trap) compared with the aerial release method (mean = 2.6 ± 0.8, range 0.5−7.3 sterile males/trap) (p < 0.05). Similarly, the prevalence of traps that captured at least one sterile male was significantly higher for ground release compared to the aerial release method (p < 0.01). The lower numbers of sterile males captured in the aerial release method could be due to mortality or physical injury caused by the chilling process for immobilization, or the compaction of these insects during transport and release. However, aerial releases by a two-person team distributed insects over the entire village in just 20 min, compared to ~90 min of work for a five-person team during the ground release method. Ground release also resulted in higher aggregations of males and some villagers reported feeling discomfort from the presence of large numbers of mosquitoes in and around their houses. We conclude that modifications to the handling and transport of sterile males and the design of containers used to store males are required to avoid injury and to improve the efficiency of aerial releases for area-wide SIT-based population suppression programs targeted at mosquito vectors of human disease.
埃及伊蚊的不育雄蚊每周释放一次，持续8周，以评估在墨西哥南部一个面积为26公顷的乡村中，地面释放和空中无人机释放方法的扩散效率。室内和室外BG-哨兵诱捕器放置在全村分布的13 - 16所房屋中。在释放不育雄蚊48小时后激活BG诱捕器，每次释放后运行24小时。在地面和空中同时释放的8周期间，地面平均每周释放85,117 ± 6457只不育雄蚊，使用空中无人机平均每周释放86,724 ± 6474只不育雄蚊。与空中释放方法（平均 = 2.6 ± 0.8，范围0.5 - 7.3只不育雄蚊/诱捕器）相比，地面释放方法捕获的雄蚊数量更多（平均 = 5.1 ± 1.4，范围1.1 - 15.7只不育雄蚊/诱捕器）（p < 0.05）。同样，捕获至少一只不育雄蚊的诱捕器的患病率，地面释放方法显著高于空中释放方法（p < 0.01）。空中释放方法捕获的不育雄蚊数量较少，可能是由于固定时的冷却过程导致的死亡或身体损伤，或者是这些昆虫在运输和释放过程中的压实。然而，由两人团队进行的空中释放只需20分钟就能将昆虫分布到整个村庄，而地面释放方法中五人团队则需要约90分钟的工作时间。地面释放还导致雄蚊聚集程度更高，一些村民报告说，他们房屋内外大量蚊子的存在让他们感到不适。我们得出结论，需要对不育雄蚊的处理和运输以及用于储存雄蚊的容器设计进行改进，以避免伤害，并提高空中释放的效率，用于以人类疾病蚊媒为目标的基于昆虫不育技术的区域种群抑制计划。
