4.2 Article

A spatial ecology study in a high-diversity host community to understand blood-feeding behaviour in Phlebotomus sandfly vectors of Leishmania

期刊

MEDICAL AND VETERINARY ENTOMOLOGY
卷 34, 期 2, 页码 164-174

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/mve.12427

关键词

Phlebotomus; familiar area map; feeding preferences; least-cost movement; site fidelity

资金

  1. Spanish Ministerios de Ciencia e Innovacion [AGL2013-46981-R]
  2. European Regional Development Fund (FEDER) [CGL2015-65055-P]
  3. Formacion de Profesorado Universitario grants from the University of Murcia
  4. 2017 Leonardo Grant for Researchers and Cultural Creators from the Fundacion BBVA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Molecular studies indicate that Phlebotomine sandflies (Diptera: Psychodidae) blood feed on many vertebrate species, of which only a few are proven parasite reservoirs. Investigating sandfly vector feeding preferences is therefore important and requires taking into account the availability and accessibility of host species. In terms of the latter, it is necessary to consider the metabolic cost to the insect of reaching the host and moving on to a suitable breeding site. The present study used statistical modelling to compare the feeding patterns of Phlebotomus perniciosus (n = 150), Phlebotomus papatasi (n = 35) and Phlebotomus ariasi (n = 7) on each of an average of 30 host species in a wildlife park in Murcia, Spain. Sandfly feeding movement costs were estimated as a function of the distance and altitude gradients saved by the insect, assuming that they displayed 'site fidelity'. Most (87%) engorged females were caught <100 m from the host on which they had fed. Although the percentage of bloodmeals was highest on fallow deer (Dama dama) (30%) and red deer (Cervus elaphus) (26%), the predicted feeding probability after considering movement cost was highest for red deer and common eland (Taurotragus oryx), and positively associated with host census. These results suggest that, under similar circumstances, sandflies prefer to feed on some host species more than on others.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据