Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, Millbrook, New York, USA.
Department of Behavioral and Community Health, Dutchess County, Poughkeepsie, New York, USA.
Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2023 Mar;23(3):89-105. doi: 10.1089/vbz.2022.0094. Epub 2023 Feb 27.
Controlling populations of ticks with biological or chemical acaricides is often advocated as a means of reducing human exposure to tick-borne diseases. Reducing tick abundance is expected to decrease immediate risk of tick encounters and disrupt pathogen transmission cycles, potentially reducing future exposure risk. We designed a placebo-controlled, randomized multiyear study to assess whether two methods of controlling ticks-tick control system (TCS) bait boxes and Met52 spray-reduced tick abundance, tick encounters with people and outdoor pets, and reported cases of tick-borne diseases. The study was conducted in 24 residential neighborhoods in a Lyme disease endemic zone in New York State. We tested the hypotheses that TCS bait boxes and Met52, alone or together, would be associated with increasing reductions in tick abundance, tick encounters, and cases of tick-borne disease over the 4-5 years of the study. In neighborhoods with active TCS bait boxes, populations of blacklegged ticks () were not reduced over time in any of the three habitat types tested (forest, lawn, shrub/garden). There was no significant effect of Met52 on tick abundance overall, and there was no evidence for a compounding effect over time. Similarly, we observed no significant effect of either of the two tick control methods, used singly or together, on tick encounters or on reported cases of tick-borne diseases in humans overall, and there was no compounding effect over time. Thus, our hypothesis that effects of interventions would accumulate through time was not supported. The apparent inability of the selected tick control methods to reduce risk and incidence of tick-borne diseases after years of use requires further consideration.
用生物或化学杀蜱剂来控制蜱虫的数量通常被认为是减少人类接触蜱传疾病的一种方法。减少蜱虫的数量有望降低人们立即接触蜱虫的风险,并破坏病原体的传播周期,从而降低未来接触的风险。我们设计了一项安慰剂对照、随机的多年研究,以评估两种控制蜱虫的方法——蜱控制系统(TCS)诱饵盒和 Met52 喷雾——是否能减少蜱虫数量、人与户外宠物的蜱虫接触次数和报告的蜱传疾病病例。该研究在纽约州莱姆病流行区的 24 个居民区进行。我们检验了以下假设:TCS 诱饵盒和 Met52 单独或联合使用,将与在研究的 4-5 年内增加减少蜱虫数量、蜱虫接触和蜱传疾病病例相关。在有 TCS 诱饵盒的活跃社区中,在所测试的三种生境类型(森林、草坪、灌木/花园)中,黑腿蜱()的数量并没有随着时间的推移而减少。Met52 对蜱虫数量没有总体影响,也没有随着时间的推移而产生复合效应。同样,我们也没有观察到两种蜱虫控制方法(单独使用或联合使用)对蜱虫接触或总体上报告的人类蜱传疾病病例有显著影响,也没有随着时间的推移而产生复合效应。因此,我们关于干预效果会随着时间的推移而累积的假设没有得到支持。在多年使用后,所选的蜱虫控制方法显然无法降低蜱传疾病的风险和发病率,这需要进一步考虑。