Evaluation of five trapping systems for the surveillance of gravid mosquitoes in Prince Georges County, Maryland
- PMID: 15532923
Evaluation of five trapping systems for the surveillance of gravid mosquitoes in Prince Georges County, Maryland
Abstract
Five mosquito trapping systems were evaluated in a large wildlife research center containing extensive and diverse mosquito-breeding habitat. The systems evaluated included Centers for Disease Control (CDC) New Standard Miniature Light traps with and without CO2 (dry ice), CDC gravid traps, partially open 1.8-m3 cages, and Fay-Prince traps baited with CO2. The first 4 trap systems were evaluated for 17 periods, while the Fay-Prince trap was evaluated on 5 trapping dates. Parameters recorded for each species were total catch, percent males, total females, and whether blood-fed/gravid. Fourteen of the 23 species caught yielded over 50 individuals in the 5 trapping systems (range of 71-2,524 specimens per species). Both light and CO2 were powerful attractants for 12 of the 14 commonly caught species. However, for most species, the majority of captured females were nongravid. Gravid traps caught fewer mosquitoes than did light- or CO2-baited traps, but the catch consisted of a higher percentage of gravid females. The open cages caught substantial numbers (>100 individuals) of 5 species, and for 2 species, this was the most productive trap. While light- and CO2-baited traps tended to catch few males or gravid females, the open cages caught an eclectic mixture of males, gravid females, and nongravid females, perhaps representative of the true percentages of each in nature.
Similar articles
-
Light, carbon dioxide, and octenol-baited mosquito trap and host-seeking activity evaluations for mosquitoes in a malarious area of the Republic of Korea.J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 2001 Sep;17(3):196-205. J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 2001. PMID: 14529088
-
Effects of trap design and CO2 presentation on the measurement of adult mosquito abundance using Centers for Disease Control-style miniature light traps.J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 2000 Mar;16(1):13-8. J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 2000. PMID: 10757485
-
Comparison of several different trapping methods for Culicoides variipennis (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae).J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 1989 Sep;5(3):325-34. J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 1989. PMID: 2511272
-
Traps and trapping techniques for adult mosquito control.J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 2006 Sep;22(3):490-6. doi: 10.2987/8756-971X(2006)22[490:TATTFA]2.0.CO;2. J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 2006. PMID: 17067051 Review.
-
Olfactory attractants for mosquito surveillance and control: 1-octen-3-ol.J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 1994 Jun;10(2 Pt 2):280-7. J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 1994. PMID: 8965080 Review.
Cited by
-
Mosquito Surveillance for West Nile Virus.Methods Mol Biol. 2023;2585:145-156. doi: 10.1007/978-1-0716-2760-0_14. Methods Mol Biol. 2023. PMID: 36331772
-
Culex pipiens and Culex restuans mosquitoes harbor distinct microbiota dominated by few bacterial taxa.Parasit Vectors. 2016 Jan 13;9:18. doi: 10.1186/s13071-016-1299-6. Parasit Vectors. 2016. PMID: 26762514 Free PMC article.
-
Large-Scale Removal of Invasive Honeysuckle Decreases Mosquito and Avian Host Abundance.Ecohealth. 2017 Dec;14(4):750-761. doi: 10.1007/s10393-017-1265-6. Epub 2017 Aug 4. Ecohealth. 2017. PMID: 28779439