Cargando…
Field evaluation of Mosq-ovitrap, Ovitrap and a CO(2)-light trap for Aedes albopictus sampling in Shanghai, China
BACKGROUND: The Mosq-ovitrap (MOT) is currently used for routine surveillance of container-breeding Aedes in China. However, the effectiveness of monitoring Aedes albopictus using the MOT and other mosquito monitoring methods, such as the Ovitrap (OT) and the CO(2)-light trap (CLT), have not been ex...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
PeerJ Inc.
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6884993/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31799071 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.8031 |
_version_ | 1783474666090790912 |
---|---|
author | Gao, Qiang Cao, Hui Fan, Jian Zhang, Zhendong Jin, Shuqing Su, Fei Leng, Peien Xiong, Chenglong |
author_facet | Gao, Qiang Cao, Hui Fan, Jian Zhang, Zhendong Jin, Shuqing Su, Fei Leng, Peien Xiong, Chenglong |
author_sort | Gao, Qiang |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The Mosq-ovitrap (MOT) is currently used for routine surveillance of container-breeding Aedes in China. However, the effectiveness of monitoring Aedes albopictus using the MOT and other mosquito monitoring methods, such as the Ovitrap (OT) and the CO(2)-light trap (CLT), have not been extensively compared. Moreover, little is known about the spatial-temporal correlations of eggs with adult Ae. albopictus abundance among these three types of traps. METHODS: Comparative field evaluation of MOT, OT and CLT for Ae. albopictus monitoring was conducted simultaneously at two city parks and three residential neighborhoods in downtown Shanghai for 8 months from April 21 to December 21, 2017. RESULTS: Significantly more Ae. albopictus eggs were collected from both MOTs and OTs when traps remained in the field for 10 d or 7 d compared with 3 d (MOT: 50.16, 34.15 vs. 12.38 per trap, P < 0.001; OT: 3.98, 2.92 vs. 0.63 per trap, P < 0.001). Egg collections of MOTs were significantly greater than OTs for all three exposure durations (Percent positive: X(2) = 72.251, 52.420 and 51.429, P value all < 0.001; egg collections: t = 8.068, 8.517 and 10.021, P value all <0.001). Significant temporal correlations were observed between yields of MOT and CLT in all sampling locations and 3 different MOT exposure durations (correlation coefficient r ranged from 0.439 to 0.850, P values all < 0.05). However, great variation was found in the spatial distributions of Ae. albopictus density between MOT and CLT. MOT considerably underestimated Ae. albopictus abundances in areas with high Ae. albopictus density (>25.56 per day ⋅ trap by CLT). CONCLUSION: The MOT was more efficient than the OT in percent positive scores and egg collections of Ae. albopictus. The minimum length of time that MOTs are deployed in the field should not be less than 7 d, as Ae. albopictus collections during this period were much greater than for 3 d of monitoring. MOT considerably underestimated Ae. albopictus abundance in areas with high Aedes albopictus density compared to CLT. In areas with moderate Aedes albopictus densities, MOT results were significantly correlated with CLT catches. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6884993 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | PeerJ Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68849932019-12-03 Field evaluation of Mosq-ovitrap, Ovitrap and a CO(2)-light trap for Aedes albopictus sampling in Shanghai, China Gao, Qiang Cao, Hui Fan, Jian Zhang, Zhendong Jin, Shuqing Su, Fei Leng, Peien Xiong, Chenglong PeerJ Entomology BACKGROUND: The Mosq-ovitrap (MOT) is currently used for routine surveillance of container-breeding Aedes in China. However, the effectiveness of monitoring Aedes albopictus using the MOT and other mosquito monitoring methods, such as the Ovitrap (OT) and the CO(2)-light trap (CLT), have not been extensively compared. Moreover, little is known about the spatial-temporal correlations of eggs with adult Ae. albopictus abundance among these three types of traps. METHODS: Comparative field evaluation of MOT, OT and CLT for Ae. albopictus monitoring was conducted simultaneously at two city parks and three residential neighborhoods in downtown Shanghai for 8 months from April 21 to December 21, 2017. RESULTS: Significantly more Ae. albopictus eggs were collected from both MOTs and OTs when traps remained in the field for 10 d or 7 d compared with 3 d (MOT: 50.16, 34.15 vs. 12.38 per trap, P < 0.001; OT: 3.98, 2.92 vs. 0.63 per trap, P < 0.001). Egg collections of MOTs were significantly greater than OTs for all three exposure durations (Percent positive: X(2) = 72.251, 52.420 and 51.429, P value all < 0.001; egg collections: t = 8.068, 8.517 and 10.021, P value all <0.001). Significant temporal correlations were observed between yields of MOT and CLT in all sampling locations and 3 different MOT exposure durations (correlation coefficient r ranged from 0.439 to 0.850, P values all < 0.05). However, great variation was found in the spatial distributions of Ae. albopictus density between MOT and CLT. MOT considerably underestimated Ae. albopictus abundances in areas with high Ae. albopictus density (>25.56 per day ⋅ trap by CLT). CONCLUSION: The MOT was more efficient than the OT in percent positive scores and egg collections of Ae. albopictus. The minimum length of time that MOTs are deployed in the field should not be less than 7 d, as Ae. albopictus collections during this period were much greater than for 3 d of monitoring. MOT considerably underestimated Ae. albopictus abundance in areas with high Aedes albopictus density compared to CLT. In areas with moderate Aedes albopictus densities, MOT results were significantly correlated with CLT catches. PeerJ Inc. 2019-11-27 /pmc/articles/PMC6884993/ /pubmed/31799071 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.8031 Text en ©2019 Gao et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited. |
spellingShingle | Entomology Gao, Qiang Cao, Hui Fan, Jian Zhang, Zhendong Jin, Shuqing Su, Fei Leng, Peien Xiong, Chenglong Field evaluation of Mosq-ovitrap, Ovitrap and a CO(2)-light trap for Aedes albopictus sampling in Shanghai, China |
title | Field evaluation of Mosq-ovitrap, Ovitrap and a CO(2)-light trap for Aedes albopictus sampling in Shanghai, China |
title_full | Field evaluation of Mosq-ovitrap, Ovitrap and a CO(2)-light trap for Aedes albopictus sampling in Shanghai, China |
title_fullStr | Field evaluation of Mosq-ovitrap, Ovitrap and a CO(2)-light trap for Aedes albopictus sampling in Shanghai, China |
title_full_unstemmed | Field evaluation of Mosq-ovitrap, Ovitrap and a CO(2)-light trap for Aedes albopictus sampling in Shanghai, China |
title_short | Field evaluation of Mosq-ovitrap, Ovitrap and a CO(2)-light trap for Aedes albopictus sampling in Shanghai, China |
title_sort | field evaluation of mosq-ovitrap, ovitrap and a co(2)-light trap for aedes albopictus sampling in shanghai, china |
topic | Entomology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6884993/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31799071 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.8031 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gaoqiang fieldevaluationofmosqovitrapovitrapandaco2lighttrapforaedesalbopictussamplinginshanghaichina AT caohui fieldevaluationofmosqovitrapovitrapandaco2lighttrapforaedesalbopictussamplinginshanghaichina AT fanjian fieldevaluationofmosqovitrapovitrapandaco2lighttrapforaedesalbopictussamplinginshanghaichina AT zhangzhendong fieldevaluationofmosqovitrapovitrapandaco2lighttrapforaedesalbopictussamplinginshanghaichina AT jinshuqing fieldevaluationofmosqovitrapovitrapandaco2lighttrapforaedesalbopictussamplinginshanghaichina AT sufei fieldevaluationofmosqovitrapovitrapandaco2lighttrapforaedesalbopictussamplinginshanghaichina AT lengpeien fieldevaluationofmosqovitrapovitrapandaco2lighttrapforaedesalbopictussamplinginshanghaichina AT xiongchenglong fieldevaluationofmosqovitrapovitrapandaco2lighttrapforaedesalbopictussamplinginshanghaichina |