4.1 Article

Field comparison of novel and gold,standard traps for collecting Aedes albopictus in Northern Virginia

Journal

Publisher

AMER MOSQUITO CONTROL ASSOC
DOI: 10.2987/5676.1

Keywords

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention miniature light trap; BG-Sentinel (TM); CMT-20 (TM) (Zumba (TM)); Aedes albopictus; adult mosquito surveillance

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aedes albopictus is a potential West Nile virus bridge vector in Northern Virginia; however, information regarding its virus transmission dynamics is limited, as this species is not readily collected in existing traps. This study used 5 replicates of a 5 x 5 Latin square to evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of 2 novel host-seeking mosquito traps (the BG-Sentinel (TM) and the Collapsible Mosquito Trap (CMT-20 (TM)) in collecting Ae. albopictus, relative to a carbon dioxide (CO2)-baited Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) miniature light trap. When used with CO2, the BG-Sentinel (with BG-Lure) collected 33 times more female Ae. albopictus per 24-h trapping period than did the CO2-baited CDC light trap. Without CO2, the BG-Sentinel (with BG-Lure) still collected over 6 times as many female Ae. albopictus as the CO2-baited CDC trap. Both configurations of the BG-Sentinel were significantly more effective than the other traps. The BG-Sentinel was also significantly more efficient in collecting Ae. albopictus and collected a high proportion of this species, both with CO2 and without CO2. The CMT-20 (with Skin Lure (TM)) collected significantly more Ae. albopictus when used with CO2 than without CO2, but did not collect significantly more Ae. albopictus than the CO2-baited CDC light trap. The proportion of Ae. albopictus collected in the CMT-20 with CO2 and without CO2 did not differ significantly from the proportion of Ae. albopictus collected in the CDC trap.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available